Research Discipline
This study is positioned within the field of Education and focuses on the sub-discipline of Teaching and
Learning Strategies. Specifically, it addresses the development of novice educators and the application
of innovative teaching strategies aimed at improving student engagement in contemporary classrooms.
The research will explore how novice teachers, with their initial training and classroom experience, can
implement modern pedagogical techniques to better engage students in learning.
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Alignment
This research directly supports SDG 4: Quality Education, which strives to “ensure inclusive and
equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” The study is particularly
aligned with Target 4.c, which calls for:
"By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international
cooperation for teacher training in developing countries."
By focusing on the role of novice educators and their use of innovative teaching strategies, this study
aims to enhance the competencies of new teachers, ensuring they are better equipped to engage
students in meaningful learning experiences. This contributes to the broader objective of improving the
quality of education and supporting teachers in their professional growth, thereby advancing the global
goal of equitable and inclusive education.
SCIENTIFIC /THEORETICAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Selected References (APA Style):
Armstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (3rd ed.). ASCD.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The
Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43.
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Harvard University Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to
strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013–1055.
Ingersoll, R., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for
beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 201–233.
Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for
technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20–23.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Prentice-Hall.
Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and
why their students benefit. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225–236.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Harvard University Press.
Zainuddin, Z., & Halili, S. H. (2016). Flipped classroom research and trends from
different fields of study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed
Learning, 17(3), 313–340.
KNOWLEDGE GAP TO BE FILLED
Sample References for RRL (APA Style):
Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in Teaching and Teacher Education
over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The
Clearing House, 83(2), 39–43.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn
from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291–309.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential
of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.
Ingersoll, R., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for
beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 201–233.
Zainuddin, Z., & Halili, S. H. (2016). Flipped classroom research and trends from
different fields of study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed
Learning, 17(3).
Novice Teacher Demographic Profile
The demographic profile of novice teachers in this study is described in terms of the following key
characteristics:
1. Age:
o The age range of novice teachers (e.g., 22–30 years old).
2. Gender:
o Male and Female teachers.
3. Educational Background:
o The highest level of education completed (e.g., Bachelor’s degree in Education, Master’s
degree in a specific teaching field).
4. Years of Teaching Experience:
o The number of years the teacher has been teaching (e.g., 1–3 years).
5. Subject Area Taught:
o The subject(s) the novice teacher specializes in (e.g., Mathematics, English, Science).
6. Training and Professional Development:
o The type and amount of training or professional development programs attended by the
novice teachers (e.g., workshops, seminars, online courses).
This section can be adjusted depending on what demographic factors you want to collect in your
research. Let me know if you need any more details!
4o mini
You said:
level of competencies
ChatGPT said:
Here’s a simple version of the Level of Competencies section for your thesis, describing the different
competencies of novice teachers:
Level of Competencies of Novice Teachers
This section describes the level of competencies of novice teachers in various areas, which are
important for their ability to implement innovative teaching strategies effectively. The competencies are
assessed in the following key areas:
1. Teaching Skills:
o Basic Competency: Ability to deliver lessons in a clear and organized manner.
o Intermediate Competency: Ability to adapt lessons based on student needs and manage
classroom dynamics.
o Advanced Competency: Ability to integrate various teaching methods and resources
(like technology) into lessons.
2. Classroom Management:
o Basic Competency: Ability to maintain discipline and create a structured environment.
o Intermediate Competency: Ability to handle disruptive behaviors and encourage
positive student interactions.
o Advanced Competency: Ability to create a positive, engaging, and inclusive classroom
environment.
3. Use of Technology in Teaching:
o Basic Competency: Familiarity with common educational tools (e.g., PowerPoint, Google
Classroom).
o Intermediate Competency: Ability to use technology to enhance learning experiences
(e.g., interactive apps, online resources).
o Advanced Competency: Ability to integrate advanced technology tools (e.g., virtual
reality, gamification) into lessons.
4. Student Engagement Techniques:
o Basic Competency: Ability to use simple methods to encourage student participation.
o Intermediate Competency: Ability to implement strategies that keep students actively
involved in the learning process.
o Advanced Competency: Ability to design and implement innovative strategies (like
project-based learning) that deeply engage students in the content.
5. Assessment and Feedback:
o Basic Competency: Ability to assess student performance through tests and quizzes.
o Intermediate Competency: Ability to provide constructive feedback and adjust teaching
based on assessments.
o Advanced Competency: Ability to use a variety of assessment methods (formative,
summative, peer assessments) and give timely, detailed feedback.
This section breaks down the competencies into basic, intermediate, and advanced levels for each skill
area. You can adapt this to your specific study, adding or adjusting areas as needed. Let me know if you
need further adjustments!
Relevant References with Links
1. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world:
What teachers should learn and be able to do. Jossey-Bass.
https://archive.org/details/preparingteacher0000unse
2. Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-
based strategies for increasing student achievement. ASCD.
https://www.ascd.org/books/classroom-instruction-that-works
3. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Harvard University Press.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Mind_in_Society/Uqs4AAAAIAAJ
4. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). Teachers College
Press.
https://www.tcpress.com/the-new-meaning-of-educational-change-9780807747650
5. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A
framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record,
108(6), 1017–1054.
https://www.learntechlib.org/p/99204
6. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential
of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
7. Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs
for beginning teachers: A critical review of the research. Review of Educational
Research, 81(2), 201–233.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311403323
