The primary purpose of this study was to further the understanding of how people learn to teach. The central research question focused on differences in teaching knowledge that may be associated with training and experience. Eight teachers were selected to participate in this study. They represented a wide range of teaching experience, formal training, professional certification and sport participation. The common criterion for selection was previous experience in the teaching of volleyball. Data were collected from both questionnaires and transcribed interviews which followed the viewing of a twenty-minute videotaped volleyball lesson. Results indicated differences among the participating teachers in content knowledge (the skills of playing volleyball), pedagogical knowledge (general teaching principles), and pedagogical content knowledge (content-specific teaching knowledge). The comments of trained teachers displayed a greater awareness of and concern for general teaching principles. In contrast, untrained teachers devoted most of their comments to lesson content. Experienced teachers, whether trained or untrained, demonstrated a superior understanding of the relationship between the nature of content and the needs of learners at different levels of skill development. In that regard, they had a more elaborately developed sense of pedagogical content knowledge. Untrained teachers cited their experience as students and athletes as major sources of information about teaching, while trained teachers pointed to experiences associated with their formal training. Members from both group indicated that they had learned from role models and early teaching experiences. Among trained and untrained teachers the sources for the differences in knowledge, and how that knowledge was processed, included the following: varied teaching contexts such as public high schools and university classes, the extent of teaching experience which ranged from one to eighteen years, and views about teaching that were influenced by previous experience in either coaching or teaching roles. Implications for teacher education and staff development include a need for training experiences that will integrate various forms of teaching knowledge. In addition, it is clear that teacher preparation programs must deal much more explicitly with the differences between coaching and teaching contexts.

Misbehavior is a research topic that most researchers investigate from teachers' points of view. This study, in contrast, was designed to explore misbehavior from the students' and the teacher's perspectives, using Doyle's ecological approach. A male teacher, Mr. Softball, and 14 seventh and eighth graders (ten males and four females) volunteered to participate during a two-week basketball unit. Data were collected through shadowing the teacher, critical incidents, student and teacher interviews, videotaped class sessions, and audiotaped stimulated recall sessions with the videotapes. Data from all sources were analyzed using constant comparison to identify common themes. Findings indicated that Mr. Softball's classes included overlapping instructional, managerial, and social task systems (Doyle, 1986; Siedentop, 1991) and his overall program of action could be classified as casual. Misbehavior was situation specific and occurred throughout these overlapping task systems. Students and the teacher noticed few misbehaviors during the actual classes and the misbehaviors recognized did not interrupt the flow of his teaching. When they noticed misbehavior incidents, either during class or when reviewing videotapes, they reacted differently from case to case based on who misbehaved, when it happened, and how it affected them or the class. Misbehaviors were common events in Mr. Softball's classes and most students admitted that they misbehaved. Misbehaviors could be classified as verbal, physical, or rules, routines, and expectations (RRE)-related. These students defined misbehavior as doing something that they were not supposed to do or not doing something that they were supposed to do. Mr. Softball's (a) weak RREs, (b) lack of effectiveness in organizing and delivering instructional tasks, and (c) loose accountability and the lack of intervention, allowed many opportunities for students to misbehave. Further, he created a class environment in which students engaged more often in social agendas at the expense of completing instructional and managerial tasks. Finally, the norm of this workplace did not support Mr. Softball in helping students learn or in maintaining order to insure that students were on-task and well-behaved. In summary, less effective teaching appeared to be the major issue that encourages students to misbehave.