“Beyond Four Walls”: Qualities of Good Educators from the Students’ Perspective
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aims to explore the qualities that make a good criminal justice educator and what contributes to their likability among their students. The seven (7) participants responded to the rigorously validated set of open-ended questions to provide answers to the predetermined research questions. What are the perspectives on the qualities of good criminal justice educators, The participants identify that beyond transmitting information, a professor's ability to value students' emotional and learning needs, portray professionalism, competence, and responsibility for their welfare, and advocate for their personal and professional development are essential qualities. A professor's ability to relate to students on a personal level, present material in an interesting manner, communicate effectively, and manage students significantly influences their likability among students. Factors such as using humor, providing real-world examples, being receptive to students, understanding their problems, and inspiring them to become better individuals all contribute to increasing a professor's likability.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
B. Morrison and S. Evans, “University students’ conceptions of the good teacher: A Hong Kong perspective,” J. Furth. High. Educ., vol. 42, no. 3, 2018, doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2016.1261096.
C. K. S. Singh et al., “Teacher educators’ vision of an ‘ideal’ teacher,” Stud. English Lang. Educ., vol. 8, no. 3, 2021, doi: 10.24815/siele.v8i3.19355.
N. Burroughs et al., Teacher Quality and Mean Student Outcomes: A Multi-model Approach, vol. 6. 2019.
B. C. Hemmings, R. Kay, J. Sharp, and C. Taylor, “A transnational comparison of lecturer self-efficacy,” J. Furth. High. Educ., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 291–307, 2012, doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2011.614932.
S.- Joseph, “Effective Professors: An Insight into their Philosophy and Practice,” Adv. Soc. Sci. Res. J., vol. 5, no. 3, 2018, doi: 10.14738/assrj.53.4302.
L. Jons and J. Airey, “An Agreed Figured World–Conceptualizing Good Physics Teachers in a Finnish University,” J. Sci. Teacher Educ., 2023, doi: 10.1080/1046560X.2023.2169654.
S. Ahmady, N. Kohan, H. Namazi, A. Zarei, Z. S. Mirmoghtadaei, and H. Hamidi, “Outstanding qualities of a successful role model in medical education: Students and professors’ points of view,” Ann. Med. Surg., vol. 82, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104652.
L. E. Kim, L. Oxley, and K. Asbury, “What makes a great teacher during a pandemic?,” J. Educ. Teach., vol. 48, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.1080/02607476.2021.1988826.
J. Hughes, J. A. Robb, M. S. Hagerman, J. Laffier, and M. Cotnam-Kappel, “What makes a maker teacher? Examining key characteristics of two maker educators,” Int. J. Educ. Res. Open, vol. 3, no. December 2021, p. 100118, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100118.
M. Mohammaditabar, M. S. Bagheri, M. Yamini, and E. Rassaei, “Iranian EFL teachers’ perspectives of qualities of a good language teacher: Does educational context make a difference?,” Cogent Educ., vol. 6, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2019.1651442.
K. Akyeampong, “Teacher Educators’ Practice and Vision of Good Teaching in Teacher Education Reform Context in Ghana,” Educ. Res., vol. 46, no. 4, 2017, doi: 10.3102/0013189X17711907.
A. Ismail, R. Hassan, A. Abubakar, H. Hussin, M. A. Mat Hanafiah, and L. H. Asary, “The development of tvet educator competencies for quality Educator,” J. Tech. Educ. Train., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 38–48, 2018.
A. H. Wahid, C. Muali, and M. Mutmainnah, “MANAJEMEN KELAS DALAM MENCIPTAKAN SUASANA BELAJAR YANG KONDUSIF; UPAYA PENINGKATAN PRESTASI BELAJAR SISWA,” al-fikrah J. Manaj. Pendidik., vol. 5, no. 2, 2018, doi: 10.31958/jaf.v5i2.1106.
Y. Reyhing and S. Perren, “The Situation Matters! The Effects of Educator Self-Efficacy on Interaction Quality in Child Care,” J. Res. Child. Educ., vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 1–16, 2023, doi: 10.1080/02568543.2022.2161678.
W. Stroebe, “Student Evaluations of Teaching Encourages Poor Teaching and Contributes to Grade Inflation: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis,” Basic Appl. Soc. Psych., vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 276–294, 2020, doi: 10.1080/01973533.2020.1756817.
T. Gruber, A. Reppel, and R. Voss, “Understanding the characteristics of effective professors: The student’s perspective,” J. Mark. High. Educ., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 175–190, 2010, doi: 10.1080/08841241.2010.526356.
J. Murray, “Good teachers are always learning,” International Journal of Early Years Education, vol. 29, no. 3. 2021, doi: 10.1080/09669760.2021.1955478.
S. K. Wang, H. Y. Hsu, T. Campbell, D. C. Coster, and M. Longhurst, “An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 62, no. 6, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s11423-014-9355-4.
D. P. Kelly, “Overcoming Barriers to Classroom Technology Integration,” Educ. Technolgoy, no. January 2015, 2015.
N. Moiseeva, “THE USE OF INFORMATION AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF «DIGITAL SAVVY» OF THE TEACHER,” Actual Probl. Syst. Educ. Gen. Second. Educ. Inst. – Pre-University Train. – High. Educ. Inst., no. 2, 2022, doi: 10.18372/2786-5487.1.16590.
“Technology-integration experiences in ELT classrooms as an effective tool: a theoretical study,” J. Educ. Teach. Trainers, vol. 13, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.47750/jett.2022.13.01.006.
M. Zipke, “Preparing Teachers to Teach with Technology: Examining the Effectiveness of a Course in Educational Technology,” New Educ., vol. 14, no. 4, 2018, doi: 10.1080/1547688X.2017.1401191.
Y. Rashid, A. Rashid, M. A. Warraich, S. S. Sabir, and A. Waseem, “Case Study Method: A Step-by-Step Guide for Business Researchers,” Int. J. Qual. Methods, vol. 18, pp. 1–13, 2019, doi: 10.1177/1609406919862424.
R. Whittemore, S. K. Chase, and C. L. Mandle, “Validity in qualitative research,” Qual. Health Res., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 522–537, 2001, doi: 10.1177/104973201129119299.
Y. S. Lincoln and E. G. Guba, “Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging confluences,” Sage Handb. Qual. Res., no. 4, pp. 97–128, 2011, [Online]. Available: https://bit.ly/3537uuy.
M. O’Reilly and N. Parker, “‘Unsatisfactory Saturation’: A critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research,” Qual. Res., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 190–197, 2013, doi: 10.1177/1468794112446106.
M. Mason, “Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews,” Forum Qual. Sozialforsch., vol. 11, no. 3, 2010, doi: 10.17169/fqs-11.3.1428.