1. Introduction

Teacher is the backbone of any nation. The progress and development of a nation largely depends on its teachers’ community because of their noble and massive contributions in nation building. They have remarkable contributions in making and shaping each and every person of the society. The quality of education is determined by the quality of teachers ^[1]. That’s why teachers are considered very essential and indispensible factor of any education system. They are referred to as the people who instruct to provide the teaching learning process. Teachers are the mainstay of the educational system ^{[2, 3]}. The academic success or failure of a learner largely depends on this factor of education. That’s why Kothari Education Commission (1964-66) has very aptly remarked that “of all the different factors which influence the quality of education and its contribution to nation development, the quality, competence and character of teachers are undoubtedly the most significant” ^[4].

Actually, it is strongly true that there is a significant relationship between teacher’s factors and student’s achievement ^{[3, 5, 6]}. There are so many factors which affects students’ academic achievement. According to Postlethwaite (2007) students’ academic achievement is dependent on Teacher-related Variables, Environment or Family-related Variables and School-related Variables. Among these variables, one of the most vital Teacher-related Variables or factors which contribute immensely to enhance students’ academic achievement is ‘Teaching Effectiveness’ ^[7]. In the same way, the role of teacher training institutions is not merely important in the field of education. Now teacher training institutions are treated as a teacher production hub or centre. A huge number of teachers are produced every year in these teacher training institutions and after that they come into teach in various schools. In this case, the role of Teacher-Educators is undoubtedly remarkable. As the quality of education depends on the quality of teachers, in the similar ways the quality of these teachers largely depends on the quality of Teacher-Educators. Because of the Teacher-Educators are directly engaged to teach the future teachers and in-service teachers. Therefore, how future teachers will be made depends on the quality of teaching delivered by the Teacher-Educators. That’s why recently a huge emphasize has been given to the teacher training institutions and Teacher-Educators also to improve the quality of teacher education as well as education throughout the country.

Before going to define Teaching Effectiveness, we have to know clearly what is ‘Teaching’. Actually, “Teaching is complex, and great practice takes time, passion, high-quality materials, and tailored feedback designed to help each teacher continuously grow and improve” (Vicki Phillips, 2013) ^[8]. According to Oyedeji (1998) - Teaching is a process of imparting knowledge, skills and attitude in order to bring about a desirable change in learners. ^[3] The primary goal of teaching is to ensure that meaningful learning occurs (Ogunyemi, 2000) ^[3]. When such kind of teaching took place by a teacher then we called the teaching delivered by the teacher has become effective i.e. effective teaching or teaching effectiveness.

Teaching effectiveness is a very important aspect of education because effective teaching helps student learning as well as enhancing the students’ academic performance or achievement. It has become even more important as the emphasis on quality in higher education has increased. Effective teaching does not occur by chance by a teacher. Actually “Effective teaching is dependent on the coordination of several components: the objectives, the student, the content, and the teacher” (McKeachie, 1997) ^[9]. That’s why Richard Elmore (2009) said that “To improve student learning, you do not change the structure. You change the instructional practices of teachers. The schools that seem to do best are those that have a clear idea of what kind of instructional practice they wish to produce, and then design a structure to go with it” ^[10].

Tom Kane (2013) also said on this matter that “If we want students to learn more, teachers must become students of their own teaching. They need to see their own teaching in a new light. Public school systems across the country have been re-thinking how they describe instructional excellence and let teachers know when they’ve achieved it” ^[8]. Therefore, it can be said that teaching is effective when it enables student learning ^[8].

Good teaching is nothing to do with making things hard. It is nothing to do with frightening students. It is everything to do with benevolence and humility; it always tries to help students feel that a subject can be mastered; it encourages them to try things out for themselves and succeed at something quickly ^{[11, 12]}. “Good teaching fosters [a] sense of student control over learning and interest in the subject matter” ^{[11, 12]}. “Effective teaching refuses to take its effect on students for granted. It sees the relation between teaching and learning as problematic, uncertain and relative. Good teaching is open to change: it involves constantly trying to find out what the effects of instruction are on learning, and modifying the instruction in the light of the evidence collected” ^{[11, 12]}.

However, Teaching Effectiveness or Effectiveness of Teaching or Effective Teaching is an established field of study. Many scholars and researchers have tried to define the term ‘Teaching Effectiveness’ in numerous ways through their study. But it is very difficult to give a precise definition of Teaching Effectiveness. Kullbert (1989) and Baker (1990) have tried to give a definition of Effective Teaching that is “Effective Teaching should stimulate student curiosity and active learning, encourage student analytical, logical, and creative thinking, and increase both their desire and capacity for future learning” ^[13]. Bastick (1995) defines Effective Teaching as maximizing student academic attainment, and teacher and student course satisfaction. He also stated that effective teaching can be measured by using the Three-Ability Framework (3AF) which consists of Technical Skills, Professional Competence and Professional Attitude ^[14].

Olatoye (2006) said that Teaching Effectiveness is the extent that student’s performance improves after a period of instruction in a manner consistent with the goals of instruction ^[6]. Omoniyi (2005) asserted that effective teaching is those activities which bring about the most productive and beneficial learning experience for students and promotes their development as learners ^[3].

Ogunyemi (2000) argued that effective teaching goes beyond just imparting knowledge but it is a purposeful activity carried out by someone with a specialized knowledge in a skilful way to enhance the cognitive, affective and psychomotor development of a person or group of persons ^[3].

J. A. Centra (1993) emphasizes on cognitive theory approach to define Teaching Effectiveness. According to him, Effective Teaching is demonstrated when instructors use classroom procedures that are compatible with a student’s cognitive characteristics, can organize and present information to promote problem solving and original thinking on issues, and can show that students are able to become more productive thinkers and problem solvers ^[15].

Palmer (1998) has defined Teaching Effectiveness in a different angle. According to him, Reduce teaching to intellect and it becomes a cold abstraction; reduce it to emotions, and it becomes narcissistic; reduce it to the spiritual, and it loses its anchor to the world. … Good teaching cannot be reduced to technique; good teaching comes from the identity and integrity of the teacher ^[16].

According to Stringer and Irwing (1998), Teaching Effectiveness could be figured out through the extent that students’ performance improves after a period of instruction, in a manner consistent with the objectives of the instruction and in accordance with prior set goal(s). Thus, the effectiveness of teaching can be measured through the changes which have occurred in the students’ knowledge (declarative and procedural), their level of motivation, ability to cope with constant changes in life, and effective management of stress after they had been given the instruction ^[17]. Due to this uniqueness of effective teaching, many post-secondary institutions adopted students’ rating of instruction as one measure of instructional effectiveness (d’Apollonia & Abrami, 1997; Griffin, 2004) ^[18].

Evans (2006) argued that Effective Teaching is synonymous with Teaching Effectiveness and has been defined in three basic ways. These include definitions in terms of (i) Teachers’ personalities (ii) Teacher-pupil interactions and (iii) Teachers’ impact on pupil’s behaviour ^[19]. The presage, process and product aspects of teaching are represented in these definitions very well. The presage and process aspects of teaching bear direct relationship to teachers’ personalities and teacher-pupil interactions. Similarly, the product aspect bears direct relationship to teacher impact on pupil’s behaviour ^[19]. Evans (2006) also defined that Teaching Effectiveness as a manifestation of knowledge of content, skills in lesson presentation and creating desirable atmosphere for learning. Along teacher-pupil interaction line, Evans (2006) also defined Teaching Effectiveness as a kind of classroom transactions that occur between teachers and students resulting to increase in students’ knowledge. This refers to communication skills, use of praises, rewards, motivation, etc during teaching process ^[19].

Afe (2003) defined Teaching Effectiveness as the type of teaching characterized by the exhibition of intellectual, social and emotional stability, love for children and positive disposition towards the teaching profession and ability to inspire good qualities in students ^[20].

Oyekan (2000) investigated the attributes of Teaching Effectiveness among the secondary school teachers. Findings revealed that Teaching Effectiveness in classroom practices include; Broad based knowledge of the subject matter, effective use of chalkboard, good language and communication skills; well organized learning environment; formulation of clear objective ^[3]. According to Ferdinand (2007) effective teaching entails a clearly formulated objective illustrated instruction and effective evaluation technique ^[21].

Nonis and Hudson (2004) stated five important dimensions of students’ perceptions of Teaching Effectiveness which include rapport, classroom interaction, enthusiasm, clarity and learning ^[22]. Berk (2005) derived twelve strategies to measure effective teaching which include student ratings, pear ratings, alumni ratings, employer ratings, administrator ratings, self evaluation, student interviews, videos of practice, teaching scholarship, teaching awards, learning outcome measures and teaching portfolios ^[23]. Miron and Segal (2004) stated that the university student rated their lecturer by their ability to transmit knowledge rather than according to the university’s criteria of research and publication. They added that good teacher and effective instruction were used interchangeably although they are not identical ^[24].

On the basis of study conducted by eminent scholar Paul Ramsden, Maryellen Weimer (2009) identified six important strategies which make teaching effective. These are Interest and Explanation, Concern and respect for students and student learning, appropriate assessment and feedback, Clear goals and intellectual challenge, Independence, control and active engagement, and Learning from students ^{[11, 12]}.

According to Marsh (1987) and Ramsden (1991) Teaching Effectiveness depends on some teacher related characteristics such as empathy, facilitation, personal attention, teacher support, student involvement, negative effect, enthusiasm and rapport and interaction as more conducive to teaching effectiveness ^{[11, 25, 26]}. On the other side Harrison et al. (2004) have emphasized on teacher’s academic competence, communication competence, professional maturity, presentation, and organization and clarity as indicative of teaching effectiveness ^[27].

Mahfooz Ansari and Mustafa Achoui Ansari (2000) have indicated that, the delivery of information, meaningful interaction, feedback and fair treatment etc. are the most responsible factors in Teaching Effectiveness. They suggested that Teaching Effectiveness is a multi-trait and multi-dimensional phenomenon in which many characteristics of the instructor are involved ^[28].

In this connection, Els Heijnen-Maathuis (2003) said that, the Classroom Management is an integral part of Effective Teaching, as it helps to prevent behavior problems through improved planning, organizing and managing of classroom activities, better presentation of instructional material and better teacher-student interaction, aiming at maximizing students’ involvement and cooperation in learning ^[29].

Eble (1971) pointed out that there are five components of effective teaching as perceived by the students. They include teacher must use an analytic/synthetic approach, well organized, teacher-group interaction, teacher-individual students interaction and dynamism/enthusiasm manner ^[30]. Smith (1980) contributed a checklist for good teaching by including test prerequisite skills, provides feedback to the teacher, adopts to individual differences, provide feedback to the students, flexible, promotes active student learning, motivates students and clear and well-organized ^[31].

Charlotte Danielson’s book, Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching, outlines measures relating to effective teaching organized into four domains, each with several observable teacher behaviors: Planning and Preparation, The Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities ^[32].

Robert Marzano’s model of Teaching Effectiveness, The Art and Science of Teaching: A Comprehensive Framework for Effective Instruction, articulates his framework in the form of 10 questions that represent a logical planning sequence for successful instructional design including: establishing learning goals, students interaction with new knowledge, student practice to deepen understanding, engaging students, effective classroom management, effective student teacher relationships, communicating high expectation for students, and effective, standards-based, formative and summative assessment practices which use multiple measures of students’ proficiency ^[33].

Colker (2008) reported that teachers claimed there were four characteristics of an effective teacher which include having a sound knowledge of subject matter, take personal interest in each student, establish a caring or loving or warm atmosphere and finally to show enthusiasm with students ^[34]. Colker (2008) also identified the twelve characteristics of teachers that children believe are integral factors to effective teaching. There are passion, perseverance willingness to take risks, pragmatism, patience, flexibility, respect creativity, authenticity, love of learning, high energy and sense of humour ^[34].

Check (2006) found out from a study on the teachers that the following traits to be essential for effective teaching: proper dress and grooming, extensive use of examples, employment of humour, effective communication in teaching, valid testing techniques and availability for extra help ^[35].

Simon and Boyer (2010, p.85) through their study have identified some important factors or variables that affect Teaching Effectiveness as well as students’ achievement to a great extend. They categorized them into four broad dimensions or variables ^[36]:

Download as

• PPT
  PowerPoint Slide
• PNG
  Larger image(png format)

Veiw figureFigures index

•  NEW
  View larger figure in new window

View next figure

Figure 1. Source-Simon and Boyer (2010, p.85)

Effective teaching is an art and no easy endeavour. Hence, to make teaching of a teacher more effective, evaluation of that teacher’s teaching performance is very necessary. Evaluating the performance of teachers in any educational institutions is tantamount to evaluating the learning of students (David & Macayanan, 2010) ^[37]. That’s why Evaluations are considered important at any stage of education because through evaluations, performance and effectiveness of a teacher can be determined (David & Macayanan, 2010) ^[37]. Therefore, “Specific measures are necessary to identify particular strengths and behaviors upon which individual teachers can improve” (Pagani & Seghieri, 2002, p. 207) ^[38].

Ronald A. Berk (2005) through his study has identified 12 potential sources of evidence of teaching effectiveness: (a) student ratings, (b) peer ratings, (c) self-evaluation, (d) videos, (e) student interviews, (f) alumni ratings, (g) employer ratings, (h) administrator ratings, (i) teaching scholarship, (j) teaching awards, (k) learning outcome measures, and (l) teaching portfolio ^[23].

Among these sources, Student ratings have dominated as the primary measure of teaching effectiveness for the past 30 years (Seldin, 1999a) ^[39]. Student ratings are one of the most frequently used methods for evaluating teacher effectiveness in colleges and universities ^{[40, 41]}. Recent estimates indicate 88% of all liberal arts colleges use student ratings for summative decisions (Seldin, 1999a) ^[39]. A survey of 40,000 department chairs (US Department of Education, 1991) indicated that 97% used “student evaluations” to assess teaching performance ^[42].

Student rating is the most influential measure of performance used in promotion and tenure decisions at institutions that emphasize teaching effectiveness (Emery, Kramer, & Tian, 2003) ^[43]. McKeachie (1997) noted that “student ratings are the single most valid source of data on teaching effectiveness” (p. 1219) ^[9]. Goe, Bell, and Little (2008) recognized that “student ratings be included as part of the teachers evaluation process” (p. 41) ^[44]. Ajoy Kumar (2006) conducted a study on “Evaluation of Teacher Effectiveness through Student Rating” and suggests that there is a need for implementing student rating as a policy indicator for evaluation of teacher effectiveness ^[45]. “Student ratings is a necessary source of evidence of teaching effectiveness for both formative and summative decisions” (Berk, 2005, p. 50) and evaluations given by students are an essential component of any evaluation system for teachers (Berk, 2005) ^[23].

Teacher education has become a very important and indispensable part of the total education system in India today. Teacher education plays a vital role in making a person as a teacher for any levels of education by providing proper education and training. There are such kind of so many colleges which are engaged in providing training to the student-teachers in India, are called Teachers Training Colleges/Institutions. These teacher training institutions can be treated as the ‘Teacher Making Industries’, which produce a large number of teachers for an indefinite period ^[46]. The main purpose of these colleges is to provide training to the future teachers and in-service teachers for their professionalization and who are engaged in these types of colleges to teach the student-teachers are called ‘Teacher Educators’. The Teacher Educators transform their ideas, knowledge and habits and try to rectify the wild instructional behaviours of student-teachers and in-service teachers.

In India, now teacher training programmes are being provided for four different levels of education, i.e. DPSE (Diploma in Preschool Education) for Preprimary School Teachers; D.El.Ed. (Diploma in Elementary Education) for Elementary School Teachers; B.Ed. (Bachelor of Education) for Secondary School Teachers and M.Ed. (Masters of Education) for B.Ed. College Teacher Educators (NCTE Regulations, 2014) ^[47].

B.Ed. colleges are playing a vital role in providing training to the secondary school teachers for their professionalization. Not only this, but also they are playing an important role for preparing teachers of secondary level schools. There are mainly three types of B.Ed. colleges which are engaged in preparation of secondary level school teachers in West Bengal. These colleges are basically classified into three categories: (i) Government B.Ed. colleges, (ii) Government-aided B.Ed. colleges and (iii) Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed. colleges. Along with these three types of B.Ed Colleges, the Department of Education of few Universities is also offering B.Ed degree in this state ^[48].

As per National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) 190^th ERC Meeting held on 31^st May, 2015, total 325 B.Ed Colleges are providing their teacher training programmes across the whole state of West Bengal. Out of 325 B.Ed Colleges, 9(nine) Colleges are under the University Department of Education, 8(Eight) Colleges are Government, 31 Colleges are Government-aided and rest 277 colleges are Private unaided or Self Financed. Along with these, one B.Ed programme is offering through distance mode by the University of Burdwan ^{[48, 49]}. Near about 30,000 student-teachers are getting their B.Ed degree every year from these teacher training institutions and near about 3500 Teacher Educators are engaged to teach them in these institutions ^[49].

The Teacher Educators are expected to face the new emerging demands of society. Teacher Educator’s behaviour has a vital impact upon the development of child’s personality. It also seems that the behaviour of Teacher Educator is a function of his/her acceptance of self. Efforts have been made to find out criteria for defining a successful Teacher Educator in terms of different characteristics. The successful and competent Teacher Educators are understanding, warm, friendly, responsible, systematic, stimulating, imaginative and enthusiastic than less successful Teacher Educators. Thus, a good Teacher Educator or an effective Teacher Educator is a relative term and requires many qualities.

NCTE (1998) was justified when it stated-“if teachers acquire professional competencies and commitment and if they are enabled and empowered to perform their multiple tasks in the classroom as well as in the school and community in the genuinely professional manner, then a chain reaction can be brought about with a sound teacher performance culminating in a high quality learning among increasingly more students in cognitive, affective and psychomotor areas of human development” ^[50]. As a teacher, the Teacher Educator is empowered enough to concentrate certain mechanism of teaching among the student-teachers. Teaching of a Teacher Educator has a number of multifarious reactions, which are genuinely reflected at the level of student-teachers.

Thus, a Teacher Educator has perform many roles like teaching, research, extension activities, training, development of instructional materials, administration, counselling to student-teachers and acquisition of expertise in his/her own area of specialization. Every institution expects a good performance by the Teacher Educator as it is linked with the tasks of maintaining and co-ordinating the standard of training. The various factors which influence the quality of education/training and its contribution to the national development are the quality of successful teaching and character of Teacher Educators ^[51].

Through the meta-analysis of review of related studies, it can be generalized the concept of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators in the following pictorial manner;

Download as

• PPT
  PowerPoint Slide
• PNG
  Larger image(png format)

Veiw figureFigures index

•  NEW
  View larger figure in new window
• PREV
  View previous figure

View next figure

Figure 2. Conceptual Model of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators

2. Review of Related Literature

Kamalpreet Kaur Toor (2014) has conducted a study on “Teacher Effectiveness, General Intelligence and Creativity of Secondary School Teachers” to study teacher effectiveness, general intelligence and creativity of secondary school teachers in relation to type of school. The result of the study reveals that there is a significant difference in the teacher effectiveness of government and private secondary school teachers. The government school teachers are more effective than private school teachers ^[52].

Ajoy Babu & Mandakini Kumari (2013) have conducted a study on “Organizational Climate as a Predictor of Teacher Effectiveness” to study the Teacher Effectiveness of Elementary School Teachers. The finding of the study was that maximum number of effective teachers is in Government Schools where Open Climate exists compared to Private Schools where Closed Climate exists ^[53].

M. Chandramma (2013) has conducted a study on “Job Satisfaction and Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators”. The findings of the study revealed that the Teacher Educators have better Teaching Effectiveness in the profession. It is also found that the management of the institution has no significant influence on the overall Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators. But on the basis of obtained mean score, Teaching Effectiveness of Government B.Ed College Teacher Educators is comparatively better than that of the Private B.Ed College Teacher Educators ^[54].

R. Renjith Kumar & Fezeena Khadir (2013) have conducted a study on “Teaching Effectiveness of Self-Financing Engineering College Teachers in Kerala”. The findings of the study revealed that the teaching effectiveness of the engineering college teachers is proved to be medium ^[41].

Sharadha and Paremeswaram (2008) in their study on “Teacher Characteristics and Learning in the Classroom”, make an attempt to examine the role of some behavioural variations among teachers and their possible implications for effective classroom teaching and learning. The findings of the study revealed that the management of the institutions had significant impact on the behaviour variations in the level of their teaching effectiveness ^[55].

Arockia Doss (2007) conducted a study on “Teacher Effectiveness of College Teachers”. The findings of the study revealed that majority of college teachers are effective only at moderate level. It is also found that management or nature of the institutions have significant influence on various dimensions of teacher effectiveness ^[56].

Newa, Dilliraj (2007) conducted a study on “Teaching Effectiveness and Job Satisfaction among Government and Private College Teachers of Nepal”. The findings of this study showed that- (i) the teachers belonging to Government showed better Teaching Effectiveness than Private college teachers. (ii) Govt. Secondary school teachers were more satisfied than Private school teachers ^[57].

Vijayalakshmi, A. (2005) conducted a study on “Teacher Effectiveness and Job Satisfaction of Women Teachers” to find out the effect of locality, management and subject of teaching on teacher effectiveness and job satisfaction. The findings of the study revealed that the management of school has significant impact on both teacher effectiveness and job satisfaction ^[58].

3. Need and Significance of the Study:

Teacher education today is an integral part of any educational system. But Teacher education in our country has to face the challenge of producing teachers for a new society. That’s why in order to meet the challenges successfully, it is very necessary to improve the quality of Teacher Educators.

The number of Teacher Educators is increasing rapidly in this state and fresh postgraduates are entering into the system of teacher preparation to meet the demands of huge number of Teacher Educators. Besides this, majority of the private or self financing institutions entered and are being entered year by year into the field of Teacher Education. As a result, the quality of teaching-learning process is not being properly maintained in most of the B.Ed colleges especially in the self-financing B.Ed colleges in this state. Due to this reason, the quality of preparation of student-teachers has become a big question in the field of education.

But it is very true that the quality of Teacher Educators is very important for bringing about functional improvement in teacher education institutions and consequently, in school education. In this connection, Adiseshaiah (1978) has rightly remarked that “those that are entrusted with responsibility of teaching the teachers have, naturally, to be men and women of high calibre whose influence would prove to be the greatest asset for prospective teachers” ^[59].

Hence, through the present study, it has been tried to find out the level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators and what are the factors responsible for Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators. Along with this, it has been also tried to find out the difference between Govt.-aided and Self Financing B.Ed college Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Teaching Effectiveness. That’s why the present study is very relevant and significant as it helps to know the Teacher Educators and their Teaching Effectiveness in different Govt.-aided and Self Financed B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

4. Objectives of the Study:

The researchers have conducted their study on the basis of the following objectives:

1. To find out the level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in different types of B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

2. To find out the level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in Government-aided B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

3. To find out the level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

4. To find out the differences between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed college Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Teaching Effectiveness.

5. Hypotheses of the Study

H0_1: There would not have high level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in different types of B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

H0_2: There would not have high level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in Government-aided B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

H0_3: There would not have high level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

H0_4: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Teaching Effectiveness.

H0_5: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Subject Mastery.

H0_6: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Preparation and Organization.

H0_7: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their Presentation Style.

H0_8: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Classroom Management.

H0_9: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Motivational Strategy.

H0_10: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Effective Communication.

H0_11: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Student-Teacher Interaction.

H0_12: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Evaluation and Feedback.

H0_13: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Informal Academic Support.

H0_14: There is no significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Personal Attribute.

6. Operational Definition of the Terms

The term ‘Teaching Effectiveness’ means the collections of characteristics, competencies and behaviors of teachers at all educational levels that enable students to reach desired outcomes. Here in this study the researchers have used the term ‘Teaching Effectiveness’ to mean that the effectiveness of teaching delivered by the Teacher-Educators in the following dimensions-(i) Subject Matter Knowledge, (ii) Preparation and Organization (iii) Presentation Style, (iv) Classroom Management, (v) Motivational Strategy, (vi) Effective Communication, (vii) Student-Teacher Interaction, (viii) Evaluation and Feedback, (ix) Informal Academic Support and (x) Personal Attribute.

Here in this study the term ‘Teacher Educators’ refers to those teachers who are engaged to teach student-teachers in different Govt.-aided and Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal.

Here in this study, ‘B.Ed Colleges’ refers to those Colleges/Institutions which are engaged to offer B.Ed degree (Bachelor of Education) to the Student-Teachers. Here only two types of B.Ed Colleges are considered for the study i.e. Govt.-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed Colleges.

7. Methodology of the Study:

The present study is descriptive type in nature. The researchers have used the descriptive type survey method in the present study. Therefore, naturally the investigators have used different tools, techniques, strategies and method of descriptive survey research to collect, analyze and interpret the data ^[60].

All the Student-Teachers who were pursuing their B.Ed degree from different Govt.-aided and Self Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in the academic session 2014-2015 have been treated as population for the present study.

The sample consists of 151 B.Ed College Student-Teachers out of which 57 Student-Teachers taken from three Govt.-aided B.Ed colleges and 94 Student-Teachers taken from four Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed colleges.

The Simple Random sampling technique has been applied in the selection of the sample.

The investigators have used a self made Teaching Effectiveness Scale as a tool for collecting the data in the present study. The Scale consists of 92 items with the combination of positive (61) and negative (31) items. The Scale has been constructed on the basis of 10 (Ten) important dimensions, namely-Subject Mastery, Preparation & Organization, Presentation Style, Classroom Management, Effective Communication, Motivational Strategy, Student-Teacher Interaction, Evaluation & Feedback, Informal Academic Support and Personal Attribute. The Scale has been constructed followed by Likert’s five point scale i.e. Strongly Agree (S.A), Agree (A), Neutral (N), Disagree (D) and Strongly Disagree (S.D). The test-retest method is employed to measure the reliability of the Teaching Effectiveness Scale and the value of reliability is to be 0.89 ^[60].

The present investigators have used Mean, S.D. t-Test and Graph for analyzing the data.

As per previous planning the tool was administered upon the 151 Student-Teachers of 3 (three) Govt.-aided and 4 (four) Self Financed B.Ed Colleges. The authorities of the concerned Colleges were informed well in advance by the investigators for the purpose of collection of data. The investigators clearly explained the instructions to the Student-Teachers in the classroom regarding what to do and how to rating the items of the Scale. There was no time limit to rate the items of the Scale. The Student-Teachers were instructed to rate the all items of the Scale to evaluate the overall Effectiveness of Teaching delivered by their Teachers. After completion of the rating by all the Student-Teachers, the filled in copies of the Scale were collected from all the Student-Teachers carefully.

After collecting the all Questionnaires (151) from the 7 (Seven) selected B.Ed colleges, the investigators have calculated the total score on a Questionnaire by computing the score against the each and every item. In computing the score of each items of the Questionnaire, the investigators have used a preselected method. In case of positive item, direct scoring method that was 5-4-3-2-1 has been used and in case of negative items, reverse scoring method that was 1-2-3-4-5 has been used by the investigator in computing the score of each and every items of the Questionnaire. This total process of computing of the Questionnaire has been done by the investigators very carefully and sensitively.

Here in this study the researcher has tried to measure the level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators on the basis of their concerned students’ evaluation. Because of the students are one of the best sources in case of evaluation of teachers’ performance ^{[9, 22, 23, 38, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45]}. To measure the level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators, the total score obtained by the students on Teaching Effectiveness Scale has been divided into three categories on the basis of normal distribution and by applying a Formula (M ± σ). Here a score of above 335.86 denotes ‘Highly Effective’, a score of 219.22 to 335.86 denotes ‘Moderately Effective’ and a score of below 219.22 denotes ‘Low Effective’.

Table 1. Showing the Criteria of Measuring the Level/Degree of Teaching Effectiveness of B.Ed College Teacher Educators

Download as

PowerPoint Slide

Larger image(png format)

• Tables index

Veiw figure

View current table in a new window

View next table

Table 2. Total Number of Students who evaluated Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators of B.Ed Colleges

Download as

PowerPoint Slide

Larger image(png format)

• Tables index

Veiw figure

View current table in a new window

View previous table

View next table

8. Results and Interpretation

H0_1: There would not have high level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in different types of B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

Table 3. Showing the Level/Degree of Teaching Effectiveness of B.Ed College Teacher Educators evaluated by their concerned Students

Download as

PowerPoint Slide

Larger image(png format)

• Tables index

Veiw figure

View current table in a new window

View previous table

View next table

On the basis of Cut off Point, from the Table 3 and Figure 3, we can see that out of the total 151 Students, 15.89% Students have scored above 335.86, 69.54% Students have scored between 219.22 to 335.86 and 14.57% Students have scored below 219.22 on the evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators who are working in different Govt.-aided and Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges across the State of West Bengal. Therefore, it can be said that 15.89% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is highly effective. 69.54% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is moderately effective and 14.57% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is low effective. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted and it can be said that the overall level of Teaching Effectiveness of B.Ed College Teacher Educators is being Moderate in the State of West Bengal.

Download as

• PPT
  PowerPoint Slide
• PNG
  Larger image(png format)

Veiw figureFigures index

•  NEW
  View larger figure in new window
• PREV
  View previous figure

View next figure

Figure 3. Showing the Graphical Representation of Level/Degree of Teaching Effectiveness of B.Ed College Teacher Educators evaluated by their concerned Students

H0_2: There would not have high level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in Government Aided B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

Table 4. Showing the Level/Degree of Teaching Effectiveness of Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators evaluated by their concerned Students

Download as

PowerPoint Slide

Larger image(png format)

• Tables index

Veiw figure

View current table in a new window

View previous table

View next table

Download as

• PPT
  PowerPoint Slide
• PNG
  Larger image(png format)

Veiw figureFigures index

•  NEW
  View larger figure in new window
• PREV
  View previous figure

View next figure

Figure 4. Showing the Graphical Representation of Level/Degree of Teaching Effectiveness of Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators evaluated by their concerned Students

On the basis of Cut off Point, from the above table and figure, we can see that out of the total 57 Students, 21.05% Students have scored above 335.86, 73.69% Students have scored between 219.22 to 335.86 and 5.26% Students have scored below 219.22 on the evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators who are working in different Govt.-aided B.Ed Colleges across the State of West Bengal. Therefore, it can be said that 21.05% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is highly effective. 73.69% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is moderately effective and only 5.26% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is low effective. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted and it can be said that the overall level of Teaching Effectiveness of Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators is being Moderate in the State of West Bengal.

H0_3: There would not have high level of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed colleges in West Bengal.

Table 5. Showing the Level/Degree of Teaching Effectiveness of Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators evaluated by their concerned Students

Download as

PowerPoint Slide

Larger image(png format)

• Tables index

Veiw figure

View current table in a new window

View previous table

View next table

Download as

• PPT
  PowerPoint Slide
• PNG
  Larger image(png format)

Veiw figureFigures index

•  NEW
  View larger figure in new window
• PREV
  View previous figure

Figure 5. Showing the Graphical Representation of Level/Degree of Teaching Effectiveness of Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators evaluated by their concerned Students

On the basis of Cut off Point, from the above table and figure, we can see that out of the total 94 Students, 12.77% Students have scored above 335.86, 67.02% Students have scored between 219.22 to 335.86 and 20.21% Students have scored below 219.22 on the evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed Colleges across the State of West Bengal. Therefore, it can be said that 12.77% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is highly effective. 67.02% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is moderately effective and 20.21% students think that the teaching delivered by their teachers is low effective. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted and it can be said that the overall level of Teaching Effectiveness of Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators is being Moderate in the State of West Bengal.

Table 6. t-Test on Different Dimensions of Teaching Effectiveness of B.Ed College Teacher Educators

Download as

PowerPoint Slide

Larger image(png format)

• Tables index

Veiw figure

View current table in a new window

View previous table

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (2.86) is greater than the table value at the both level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 and 2.61 at 0.01 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Teaching Effectiveness. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. And on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that teaching delivered by the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively more effective than that of the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (3.36) is greater than the table value at the both level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 and 2.61 at 0.01 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Subject Mastery. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. And on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their level of Subject Mastery.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (0.74) is less than the table value at 0.05 level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 level of significance). Therefore, the result is not significant and it indicates that there is no statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Preparation and Organization. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted. But on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their level of Preparation and Organization.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (3.09) is greater than the table value at the both level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 and 2.61 at 0.01 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their Presentation Style. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. But on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their Presentation Style.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (1.97) is less than the table value at 0.05 level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 level of significance). Therefore, the result is not significant and it indicates that there is no statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Classroom Management. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted. But on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their Classroom Management.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (2.33) is greater than the table value at 0.05 level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Motivational Strategy. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. And on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their level of Motivational Strategy.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (4.31) is greater than the table value at the both level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 and 2.61 at 0.01 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Effective Communication. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. And on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their level of Effective Communication.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (2.21) is greater than the table value at 0.05 level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Student-Teacher Interaction. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. On the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their level of Student-Teacher Interaction.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (0.11) is less than the table value at 0.05 level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 level of significance). Therefore, the result is not significant and it indicates that there is no statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Evaluation and Feedback. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (2.24) is greater than the table value at 0.05 level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Informal Academic Support. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. And on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their level of Informal Academic Support.

From the Table 5, it is observed that the calculated ‘t’-value (3.48) is greater than the table value at the both level of significance (1.98 at 0.05 and 2.61 at 0.01 level of significance). Therefore, the result is significant and it indicates that there is statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of Personal Attribute. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. And on the basis of obtained Mean Score, it can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively better than the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal in respect to their level of Personal Attribute.

9. Major Findings and Discussion of the Results:

In the present study it is found that there exists Moderate level of Teaching Effectiveness among the Teacher Educators who are working in different Govt.-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal. This finding has similarity with the studies conducted by Arockia Doss (2007), R. Renjith Kumar & Fezeena Khadir (2013) and M. Chandramma (2013) ^{[41, 54, 56]}.

The second finding of the study is that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are Moderately Effective which is also supported by the study of M. Chandramma (2013) ^[54].

The third finding of the study is that the Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators are Moderately Effective which is also supported by the studies of M. Chandramma (2013) and R. Renjith Kumar & Fezeena Khadir (2013) ^{[41, 54]}. R. Renjith Kumar & Fezeena Khadir (2013) revealed that the Teaching Effectiveness of the Self-Financing Engineering college teachers is proved to be medium ^[41].

The fourth finding of the study is that there is a statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of overall Teaching Effectiveness. It is found that teaching delivered by the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively more effective than that of the Teacher Educators who are working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal. These findings of the present study are supported by the studies of Kamalpreet Kaur Toor (2014), Ajoy Babu & Mandakini Kumari (2013), M. Chandramma (2013), Sharadha and Paremeswaram (2008), Arockia Doss (2007), Newa, Dilliraj (2007) and Vijaya Lakshmi (2005) [52-58]^[52].

Through the present study it is also revealed that there is a statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level on the most of the dimensions of Teaching Effectiveness. The Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively more effective than the Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their Subject Mastery, Presentation Style, Motivational Strategy, Effective Communication, Student-Teacher Interaction, Informal Academic Support and Personal Attribute.

10. Conclusion

From the above findings the following conclusions are drawn:

1. The Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in different Govt.-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal is to be Moderate. Its mean that Teaching delivered by the Teacher Educators is Moderately Effective.

2. The Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in different Govt.-aided B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal is to be Moderate. Its mean that Teaching delivered by the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators is Moderately Effective.

3. The Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators working in different Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed Colleges in West Bengal is also to be Moderate. Its mean that Teaching delivered by the Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators is Moderately Effective.

4. It is concluded that there is a statistically significant difference between Government-aided and Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their level of overall Teaching Effectiveness and most of the dimensions of Teaching Effectiveness. It can be said that the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively more effective than the Private-unaided/Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their overall Teaching Effectiveness and its different dimensions i.e. Subject Mastery, Presentation Style, Motivational Strategy, Effective Communication, Student-Teacher Interaction, Informal Academic Support and Personal Attribute.

Lastly, it should be remembered that the Teacher Educators occupy a very important place in the entire education system. Actually Teacher Educators are the architectors of Teachers. They play a vital role in the teacher making process throughout the country. On the other hand, teachers are playing a very important role in making the future citizens of our nation by proving proper education to their students. Therefore, it is very clear that the quality of education as well as the future of our nation largely depends on the quality of Teacher Educators of the nation. That’s why much emphasis should be given to the various concerns of Teacher Educators. To meet the tremendous demands of teacher training programmes of the future teachers, a huge number of B.Ed training colleges have been established and are being established year by year throughout the country as well as in the state of West Bengal. And most of them are private-unaided or self-financed B.Ed colleges. They are suffering from so many problems like, lack of infrastructure, inadequate number of Teacher-Educators, poor quality of Teacher-Educators, problems of management and so on. As a consequence, a big question is arising regarding the quality of teacher training programmes and also the quality of Teacher Educators working in different types of B.Ed colleges in West Bengal. Through the present study it has been proved that the Private-unaided or Self-Financed B.Ed College Teacher Educators are comparatively less effective than the Govt.-aided B.Ed College Teacher Educators in respect to their Teaching Performance. Therefore, if we want to improve and maintain the quality of education, the quality of Teacher Educators has to be ensured at first by appointing good quality Teacher Educators in different types of B.Ed colleges especially in the Private-unaided or Self-Financed B.Ed colleges across the whole state.

References

[1]	Kareem, J., and Ravirot, B. (2014). A Study on the Self-Concept of Teachers Working in Government, Aided and Unaided Colleges in Bangalore. The IUP Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. XIII, No. 1, 61-70.
	In article
[2]	Afe, J.O. (2002). Reflection on Becoming a Teacher and the Challenges of Teacher Education. Inaugural Lecture, Series 64, University of Benin.
	In article
[3]	Kiadese, A. L. (2011). An Assessment of the Teaching Effectiveness of Prevocational Subjects Teachers in Ogun State, Nigeria. International Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, Vol. 3(1), 5-8.
	In article
[4]	Report of the Kothari Education Commission (1964-66). Ministry of Education, Government of India. New Delhi.
	In article
[5]	Adekola, BO. (2006). Influence of Teachers’ Qualification, Age, and Gender on Effective Teaching of English Language. Journal of Educational Focus, 6, 97-99.
	In article
[6]	Olatoye, R.A. (2006). Science Teacher Effectiveness as a Predict Students Performance in the Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination. Journal of Educational Studies, 6, 104-110.
	In article
[7]	Postlethwaite, T. N. (2007). Evaluating Teacher Competence through the Use of Performance Assessment Task: An Overview. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 5(1), 121-132.
	In article
[8]	Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (2013). Ensuring Fair and Reliable Measures of Effective Teaching, Culminating Findings from the MET Project’s Three-Year Study.
	In article
[9]	McKeachie, W. J. (1997). Student Ratings: the Validity of Use. American Psychologist, 52 (11), 1218-1225.
	In article		View Article
[10]	Elmore, R., & Wong, H. (2009). Teachers are the Greatest Assets. Teachers Net Gazette.
	In article
[11]	Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. New York: Routledge.
	In article		View Article
[12]	Weimer, M. (2009). Effective Teaching Strategies: Six Keys to Classroom Excellence. Faculty Focus-Higher Education Teaching Strategies from Magna Publications.
	In article
[13]	Ariffin, W. N. N. B. (2010). Effective Teaching: Perception TESL Teacher Trainees on Teaching Preparation in ESL Classroom. Unpublished Dissertation Work, University Teknology Malaysia.
	In article
[14]	Bastick, T. (1995). 3AF: The Three-Ability Framework for Assessment in Tertiary Education. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Assessing Quality in Higher Education, Finland.
	In article
[15]	Centra, J.A. (1993). Reflective Faculty Evaluation: Enhancing Teaching and Determining Faculty Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
	In article
[16]	Palmer, P. J. (1998). The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher's Life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
	In article
[17]	Stringer, M., & Irwing, P. (1998). Students’ Evaluations of Teaching Effectiveness: a Structural Equation Modeling. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 409-426.
	In article		View Article
[18]	d’Apollonia, S., & Abrami, P. C. (1997). Navigating Student Rating of Instruction. American Psychologist, 52(11), 1198-1208.
	In article		View Article
[19]	Evans, E. D. (2006). Transition to Teaching. New York. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
	In article
[20]	Afe, J. O. (2003). Teacher Effectiveness: Imperative for Implementing Universal Basic Education in Nigeria. Journal of Nigeria Academy of Education, 1(1), 1-9.
	In article
[21]	Ferdinand, J. B. (2007). Teachers’ Effectiveness and Internal Efficiency in Primary Education. Res. Curr. Stud., 2(1), 2-6.
	In article
[22]	Nonis, S.A., and Hudson, G.I. (2004). Measuring Student Perception of Teaching Effectiveness [WWW] www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/1988/SMA/98sMA064.txt.
	In article
[23]	Berk, R.A. (2005). Survey of 12 Strategies to Measure Teaching Effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 48-62.
	In article
[24]	Miron, M., & Segal, E. (1978). The Good University Teacher as Perceived by the Students. Journal of Higher Education, 7(1), 27-34.
	In article		View Article
[25]	Marsh, H. W. (1987). Students’ Evaluation of University Teaching, Research Findings, Methodological Issues, and Directions for Future Research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 253-388.
	In article		View Article
[26]	Ramsden, P. (1991). A Performance Indicator of Teaching Quality in Higher Education: The Course Experience Questionnaire. Studies in Higher Education, 16, 127-150.
	In article		View Article
[27]	Harrison, P. D., & Douglas, D. K. (2004). The Relative Merits of Different Types of Overall Evaluations of Teaching Effectiveness. Research in Higher Education, 45(3), 311-323.
	In article		View Article
[28]	Ansari, Mahroof A. & Ansari, Mustapha A. Z. A. (2000). Development of a Measure of Teacher Effectiveness for IIUM. Intellectual Discourse, 8(2), 199-220.
	In article
[29]	Els Heijnen-Maathuis, Regional Education Advisor, Save the Children Sweden. Effective Teaching and Classroom Management is about Whole Child and Whole School Development for Knowledge, Skills and Human Values.
	In article
[30]	Eble, K.E. (1971). The Recognition and Evaluation of Teaching. Salt Lake City.
	In article		PubMed
[31]	Smith, R.A., & Cranton, P.A. (1992). Students’ Perceptions of Teaching Skills and Overall Effectiveness Across Instructional Settings. Journal of Research in Higher Education, 33(6), 747-764.
	In article		View Article
[32]	Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching. Alexandria: ASCD.
	In article
[33]	Marzano, R. (2007). The Art and Science of Teaching: A Comprehensive Framework for Effective Instruction. Alexandria: ASCD.
	In article
[34]	Colker, L.J. (2008). Twelve Characteristics of Effective Early Childhood Teachers. Journal of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, 63(3), 96-106.
	In article
[35]	Check, R.C. (2006). Professional Persons in Public Organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol.8, No.3, 1-11.
	In article
[36]	Simon, O. I., & Boyer, T. L. (2010). Teaching Effectiveness: From the Perspectives of Educators. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
	In article
[37]	David, A. P., & Macayanan, J. V. (2010). Assessment of Teacher Performance. The Assessment Handbook, 3, 65-76.
	In article
[38]	Pagani, L., & Seghieri, C. (2002). A Statistical Analysis of Teaching Effectiveness from Students’ Point of View. Developments in Statistics, 17, 197-208.
	In article
[39]	Seldin, P. (1999a). Current Practices – Good and Bad –Nationally. In P. Seldin & Associates (Eds.), Changing Practices in Evaluating Teaching: A Practical Guide to Improved Faculty Performance and Promotion/Tenure Decisions (pp. 1–24). Bolton, MA: Anker.
	In article
[40]	John, T.P. (1975). A Description of Teaching Effectiveness as Measured by Student Ratings. Journal of Educational Measurement, 12(1), 49-54.
	In article		View Article
[41]	Kumar, R. R. & Khadir, F. (2013). A Study on Teaching Effectiveness of Self-Financing Engineering College Teachers in Kerala. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 3(1), 1-9.
	In article
[42]	US Department of Education (1991, Winter). Assessing Teaching Performance. The Department Chair: A Newsletter for Academic Administrators, 2(3), 2.
	In article
[43]	Emery, C. R., Kramer, T. R., & Tian, R. G. (2003). Return to Academic Standards: A Critique of Students’ Evaluations of Teaching Effectiveness. Quality Assurance in Education: An International Perspective, 11(1), 37-47.
	In article		View Article
[44]	Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness: A Research Synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved March 3, 2009.
	In article
[45]	Mahanty, A. K. (2006). Evaluation of Teacher Effectiveness through Students’ Rating. Edutracks, 7(3), 5-8.
	In article
[46]	Chandramma, M. (2013). Job Satisfaction and Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, p. 17.
	In article
[47]	NCTE Regulations (2014). National Council for Teacher Education, Government of India, New Delhi.
	In article
[48]	Annual Report (2012-13). Department of Higher Education, Government of West Bengal, Bikash Bhavan, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 091, Saraswati Press. 198.
	In article
[49]	The 190th ERC Meeting (31st May, 2015). National Council for Teacher Education, Government of India, New Delhi.
	In article
[50]	National Council for Teacher Education (1998). NCTE Manual on Teacher Education and Teacher Training, New Delhi.
	In article
[51]	Chandramma, M. (2013). Job Satisfaction and Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, p. 20.
	In article
[52]	Toor, K. K. (2014). A Study of Teacher Effectiveness, General Intelligence and Creativity of Secondary School Teachers. MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends & Practices, Vol. 4, No. 1, 51-65.
	In article
[53]	Babu, A., & Kumari, M. (2013). Organizational Climate as a Predictor of Teacher Effectiveness. European Academic Research, Vol. I, Issue 5, 553-568.
	In article
[54]	Chandramma, M. (2013). Job Satisfaction and Teaching Effectiveness of Teacher Educators. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 1-365.
	In article
[55]	Sharadha, D.G., and Parameswaram, E.G. (2008). Teacher Characteristics and Learning in the Classroom, Edutracks, Vol.11, No.3, p.18.
	In article
[56]	Arockia, D. (2007). Teacher Effectiveness of College Teachers. Journal of Research Extension, Vol.3, No.11, 21-22.
	In article
[57]	Dogra, B. (2015). Teachers in Higher Education: An Analytical Study. Laxmi Book Publication, Solapur, Maharashtra, India.
	In article
[58]	Vijayalakshmi, A. (2005). Teacher Effectiveness and Job Satisfaction of Women Teachers. Edutracks, Vol.4, No.7, 7-9.
	In article
[59]	Adiseshaiah, M.S. (1978). Report of the Plus 2, National Review Committee.
	In article
[60]	Singh, A.K. (2009). Tests, Measurements and Research Methods in Behavioural Sciences. Bharati Bhawan, New Delhi.
	In article