Myrna Colon, Ph.D.Professor of Education

Ruth WilliamsMorris, Ph.D.Professor of Psychology

Presented November 16, 2009

In 2003, a transformed curriculum, Journey to Excellence,was established for the North American Division Seventh-day Adventist SchoolsIn agreement with the educational initiative of the

NAD, in 2004, the Southern Union decided to continue the modification with their own project called the AdventistEDGE for which 4MAT is a critical component of this comprehensive school reform. The focus of Adventist EDGE is to use ideal practices that aid in the learning process to assist students in obtaining their highest ability of learning. Adventist EDGE has proved successful and has grown to be a viable foundation for educators in the Southern Union. Each year Adventist EDGE educators express satisfaction with the program .

Since the implementation of 4MAT as part of Adventist Edge initiative, there has been no systematic, empirical inquiry into what teachers think and feel about 4MAT.

To measure and describe quantitatively and qualitatively the perceptions of teachers currently working in the Southern Union of Seventh-day Adventists about 4MAT.

This cross-sectional descriptive, mixed methods design using survey methodology was guided by seven research questions.

1. How effective do teachers perceive 4MAT to be?

2. How much are teachers using 4MAT?3. What types of strategies are teachers using to

enhance learning?4. What types of assessments are teachers using

to measure student learning?5. How do teachers feel about 4MAT?6. How much support from school

administrators do teachers perceive?7. How much do teachers know about 4MAT?

Participants:• 152 teachers, elementary, secondary, from 8

conferences in the Southern Union• 38 men, 109 women (5 not indicated)• Average Teaching experience = 18 years

(SD = 10.8 years)

The 4MAT Indicator Survey (4MATIS)• 34 items• 4 sections (3 Quantitative, 1 Qualitative)

• Section 1 Beliefs and Actions (27) Likert scale• Section 2 Assessment and Strategies Checklist• Section 3 Feelings About 4MAT Open-ended• Section 4 Demographic (4)• Cronbach’s alpha (reliability measure) = .86

◦ Multiple choice questions◦ Demonstrations◦ Matching questions◦ Presentations◦ True/false questions◦ Portfolios◦ Short answers

questions◦ Peer Assessments◦ Essay questions

Which of these forms of assessments do you use during a school year? Check as many as apply.

For each checked, also check how often you use them.◦ Daily◦ Frequent◦ Seldom◦ Never

Sample items (qualitative):1. How have your thoughts and feelings

about curriculum and instruction changed as a result of using 4MAT?

2. What do you see as the potential weaknesses of 4MAT?

3. Please give us any suggestions that you have about 4MAT.

Southern Union 2007↓

Superintendents /Principals 2008↓

All Schools in Southern Union 2008↓

899 surveys 2008↓

152 Received November 2008

Descriptive and inferential statisticsSPSS 17.0 software◦ Means, Standard deviations (SDs), percentages◦ Independent samples t-tests◦ One-Way ANOVA◦ Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficients

Content analysis of Section 3 items◦ Positive comments◦ Negative comments◦ Emotional climate◦ Weaknesses of 4MAT

How effective do teachers perceive 4MAT to be?

• 4MAT contributes to increased student achievement

• M = 14, SD = 3.6, n = 152• Range of effectiveness =5-25

How much are teachers using 4MAT?• I pose essential questions in the 4MAT unit

• M = 32.86, SD 6.97• Use scores range = 11-55

What types of strategies are teachers using to enhance learning?

• Which strategies do you use? Check as many as apply, amount and frequency. (e.g. case studies, problem-based learning, daily, frequently, seldom, never)

• M = 105, SD = 31, n = 151• Range = 21 -200

What types of assessments are teachers using to measure student learning?

Amount and frequency:• The higher the number the more and more

frequent is the assessment being used• Median = 19.00, SD = 3.10, n = 152• Range = 3-20

How do teachers feel about 4MAT?• M = 17.62, SD = 4.62, n = 150• Range 5-27• Higher values = more positive feelings

How much support from school administrators do teachers perceive?

• M = 3.77, Median = 4.00, SD = 1.79, n = 147

• Range = 1-5• Higher values = more perceived support

How much do teachers know about 4MAT?

• I have had in-depth format training; I know my 4MAT type

• M = 14.84 SD = 3.86, n = 150• Range of knowledge scores = 4 - 20

• The more experienced the teacher the greater perceived effectiveness of 4MAT reported◦ r(126) = .30, p = .001, r squared = 9%

• The more experienced the teacher the greater the use of different assessments used ◦ r(128) = .31, p < .01, r squared ~9%

• “I’m more aware of the needs of the different types of learners and how to reach them.”

• “I think more about how each one learns.”• “I am more aware of learning styles in daily

lessons.”• “I think more about the fact that the learner

may not learn in the same way I do – that affects the strategies I choose.”

• “I love to include 4MAT in (my) curriculum and instruction. It takes more time to prepare but I know my students are connected and learning.”

• “Student can learn more through 4MAT.”• “When I do teach a 4MAT lesson, I feel good

about it and my students enjoy the lessons.”

• “My feelings are ambivalent. In our conference it has poor implementation and relevance. Is extremely impractical.”

• “I don’t enjoy 4MAT.”• “There’s got to be a simpler way to improve

the quality of education!”

• “I’ve been told to use it, but have had zero exposure or training.”

• “For 4MAT training I have few materials. It would take more time to prep a 4MAT unit. I don’t use it in my classroom.”

• “I need more training.”• “I don’t use 4MAT. I have 8 students in 6

grades!”• “I’m not using 4MAT at this time.”

• “The necessity of assessment has heightened.”• “I am able to use a variety of assessments for

my students. They also have the choice to show what they have learned.”

• “Increased the variety of assessment.”• “I use far less testing & more authentic

assessment.”• “Using different methods.”

• “Very little.”• ‘No, not at all.”• “No ,still the same.”• “Still assess basically the same.”• “Somewhat. It leads itself to more forms of

assessment.”

• “Students look forward to learning new things.”• “It has been good because most of the time the

students are connected and want to learn what is being taught.”

• “Kids enjoy the lessons more.”• “Students are happy.”• “Kids love the 4MAT units. They tend to work

together better.”

• “None noticed”• ‘I don’t use it enough to sense a difference.

4MAT is similar to my ‘regular’ way of teaching so really no change.”

• ‘No difference.”• “No change. I already plan around multiple

intelligences.”• “It seems that the class gets disruptive and

disorganized.”• “Students feel the lessons are disjointed-‘What’s

the point?’ They have very little patience with traveling the wheel.”

• “It meets all types of learners – is very engaging for students.”

• “Seeing how different children thrive in different learning environments.”

• “It meets the needs of all learning styles. It helps organize teaching and objectives.”

• “Brain-based, connects with all types of learners, more variety.”

• “Helping all students learn in various ways.”• “4MAT reaches every child’s learning abilities and

implements success for every child.”

• “Easy to spend too much time and not covering enough of the standards.”

• “Time consuming.”• “Time in planning and carrying out.”• “Too much time to develop lessons.”• “It takes a lot of time to make. It also takes

time to go through the wheel.”• “It is terribly time consuming – especially when

you are planning for 5 different grades. It is very hard for students to make-up classwork when doing connect, etc.”

• “Not relevant in multi-grade classes; the complications arising from various implementations not covered during training.”

• “NOT ENOUGH PLANNING TIME! Cumbersome and unrealistic for multigrade teachers to use

consistently.”• “If 4MAT has to be drastically implemented, it

will be so difficult for teachers teaching multigrade.”

• “Consideration of clear objectives makes for more effective yearly planning.”

• “Yes, it holds me more accountable, and has raised the bar on what & how I teach.”

• “Yes, more so because it gives a sense of being responsible to make sure you do deliver great education and doing so you seek the necessary skills and tools to do so.”

• “Yes. I expect more of myself & feel like I am better at reaching my philosophy of helping each student everyday!”

• “I now understand a lot more about how we learn. I can do things in my class and for my students that not just anybody can do.”

• “NO – It’s just so much verbage! Please quit treating us like we haven’t been applying these principles for years – too much condescension regarding EDGE. AND we may come across to public school teachers as thinking we offer overall better programs. Our ONLY ‘edge’ is our freedom to teach Jesus!”

• “No, it has not. Due to the behavioral issues of students (EDGE is) becoming a roadblock to conventional education. The EDGE initiative is reduced in efficacy because of the lack of relevance.”

• “Not really. It has frustrated me more. When I don’t have the time to create all the 4MAT lessons I need to, I feel inadequate as a professional. I just don’t think it is a practical approach for a teacher in a small school.”

• “No. I always tried to be creative, on the cutting edge. Now I am frustrated.”

• “More training in actually making it usable and what our plan books should look like. More time to allow collaboration with others in writing good 4MAT units.”

• “Provide coaching!”• “We need continuous training. Not a week

of it because it’s overload. Break information into sessions so we are able to absorb it, just as you would a student. We would not give a student a bunch of work and then tell them to go do it.”

• “Please train new teachers in the use of it.”

• “More Webinairs [sic] with Bernice, but after school hours. Most of us are still teaching at 2:30 when they were scheduled.”

• Yes: 115• No: 17

• Yes: 78• No: 63

J. Would you like to collaborate with others to

develop 4MAT units?

• Yes: 84• No: 53

• “Dear Ones, Thank you for doing this. We do need to stress the development of student-focused lesson plans in our organization. It aleviates [sic] boredom and disruptive behavior and enhances inquiry, and a love of learning. The days of mindless reading and writing should really soon become only a distant memory. I am guilty of not planning my units using the 4MAT structure. But the recent webinars have helped me to refocus. I appreciate the large data base and will try hard to make use of it in the future.”

• “I do not formally use 4MAT in all of my units. I believe that 4MAT is excellent, however, and I make every effort to reach all of the learning styles in my classroom, through use of all of the intelligences. I am still learning 4MAT and find it very time consuming so I analyze all my plans to make sure I am including the different styles and intelligences. Teaching in the lower grades has enabled me to do all the varieties and follow the 4MAT wheel, but not formally write it up as such.”

• “I have not been trained with 4MAT yet.”• “I’m willing [to teach 4MAT units that have

been developed by others] but would have to modify / adapt to my class / curriculum.”

• Some teachers need 4MAT training.• Multigrade teachers need training on how to make

4MAT work for them.• Teacher’s need training on how to make 4MAT less

time consuming.• Teachers want available/prepared 4MAT units.• Trainers should use 4MAT when training.• Provide opportunities for teachers to plan 4MAT

units together at a time convenient for them.

• Some teachers are using similar components of the 4MAT model and are also successful in the teaching learning process.

• Some teachers perceive 4MAT as mandatory for all unit planning and this makes them uncomfortable.

• Strength of study: • first empirical study of its kind in the Southern

Union evaluating 4MAT• Weakness of study:

• low response rate (17%); larger sample needed• limitations of instrumentation and design

• Agenda for future inquiry: • larger sample• varied research design (focus groups, in-depth

interviews)• examine perceptions of principals, parents, and

students

Emily BaldwinBrandon PierceGabriella PerezDaniel OlsonEdely Yepez

Nadia Garmon

Southern Union for initial and continuing support of the project

Southern Adventist Universityfor funding a small research grant

Contact: mcolon@southern.edu

Southern Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventist Office of Education (2006) Adventist EDGE handbook. Decatur, GA: Southern Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventist.North American Division Office of Education (2003). Journey to excellence. Silver Spring, MD: North American Division Office of Education.