The document discusses teaching effectiveness and stimulus variation skills. It provides background on how variation skills help engage students and avoid boredom. It then reviews several studies that examined the importance of stimulus variation techniques for sustaining student attention and improving achievement. Specifically, it analyzed survey results from 70 students rating their lecturers' use of 9 variation skills, including movement, gestures, voice, and eye contact. The results showed that lecturers were dominant in using voice skills, while physical contact skills were used the least. Overall, the findings highlighted the need for lecturers to employ diverse stimulus variation skills to effectively engage students.

1. INTRODUCTION
Teaching effectiveness has been associated with variation skills of the teacher. Variation
skills refer to the teacher’ skills to stimulate the students, increase their active participation,
enthusiasm and spirit of study to avoid boredom. It has been generally observed that children are
not able to attend to one thing for a very long period especially children. The teacher has to focus
on stimulus variation such as teacher movement, teacher gesture, changes in speech pattern and
changes in posture (Tafesse, 2003).
The teaching skill is a specific activity or behavior of a teacher through which he makes
his teaching effective. Allen and Ryan (1969) have suggested the 14 teaching skills or stimulus
variation of teaching which are set induction, closure, silence and non-verbal ones, re-enforcing
pupil participation, fluency in making questions, probing questions, higher order questions,
divergent questions, recognizing attending behavior, illustrations and use of examples, lecturing,
planned repetition and completeness.
The teacher uses hand gesture, body movement, facial expression, pause etc. in order to
draw students’ attention and to sustain it. The behavior of the teacher is a stimulus to the
students. However, continued use and over used of it may lead to students’ inattention and
disinterest. The teachers must be skilled in sustaining the attention of their students. According to
K. Nath (2009), continuous stimulation to a particular stimulus causes fatigue and leads to
boredom. Hence varying stimulus accordingly is the only remedy to relieve boredom and sustain
attention.
Stimulus variation deals with a change or variation in the stimuli available in the learners’
environment. The teachers should know when, how and what to change so that their students are
attentive into the lessons. Thus the skills of stimulus variation may be defined as a set of
behavior for bringing about a desirable change in variation in the stimuli which can be used to
sustain the students’ attention towards classroom activities (Abraham, 2012).
1

2. All the teaching skills that have been suggested by experienced persons are believed can
stimulate students’ spirit and interest in teaching and learning process in the classroom. Teachers
are highly encouraged to have that skills and practice stimulus variation in their teaching so that
they can deliver the lessons effectively. Regardless what kind of school or learning institution it
is, teacher or lecturer must have awareness on stimulus variation because the main mission is to
give knowledge to the students. In order to give knowledge to students, teachers or lecturers
must use effective ways to attract students’ attention. One of the effective ways is stimulus
variation that cannot be ignored by teachers and lecturers.
Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate variation skills that practiced by IIUM
lecturers in their classroom. This study also investigates the dominant variation skills which have
been employed by lecturers. The variation skills that we are going to investigate are eye contact,
movement, voice, facial expression, gesture, physical contact, pause, interaction style and
focusing. These skills are the most common and necessary skills needed during delivery session
in the classroom.
CASE PROBLEM
The changing characteristics of students entering university today have raised concerns
about teaching in higher learning institutions. Conventional teaching approaches that have been
successfully used in the past are no longer adequate for present day students. Being traditionally
unprepared in the art and science of teaching, some of lecturers in university may not be able to
adequately address the learning needs of their students.
Thus, there has been increase concern over the effectiveness of teaching in higher
learning institutions either in private or government sector. This study however investigated what
goes on in the classroom by looking at the lecturer’s variation skills in university. This study also
2

3. measured the dominant variation skills of the lecturers. Hence, by identifying variation skills that
has been employed by lecturers; it can help educators to improve their variation skills to best
meet the needs of their students.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Throughout this case study, I have reviewed several literatures related to the variation
skills in teaching. Stimulus variation is defined as the change in teacher behavior to attract pupil
attention. The teacher uses various stimuli in the class room so that they may produce maximum
responses. Sinha Johsi writes, “What to change, when to change and how to change requires a
skill on the part of the teacher for securing and sustaining attention at high level, such a skill is
named as stimulus variation. “For securing the attention of the students, we have to create
stimulating learning strategies. Variation in stimulus secures more attention among the students.
It includes movement, gestures, change in voice, focusing, change in interaction style, change in
oral- visual switching, pause and physical movement (Malik & Pandith, 2011).
Remesh (2013), in his work mentioned about stimulus variation. It stated that securing
and sustaining the attention of the learner is imperative for a good teacher. The effective
components of the skills are gestures, change in speech pattern, and change in interaction style.
John Dallat (2009) in his article underlined the meaning of stimulus variation. It means
changing from one form of instructional media to another, so as to stimulate, motivate and
maintain or increase attention. A contemporary term for stimulus variation is multi-sensory
teaching (MST). When MST is used effectively, it is more likely that all types of learners,
including those who are visual, auditory or kinesthetic learners, will be engaged. Teacher voice
usage, teacher movement, teacher interaction with students, as well as student movement and the
use of stimulating visuals, are all practical forms of stimulus variation.
3

4. Dallat quoted the idea of Perrot (1988) saying that, the purpose of variation skills is to
arouse attention while the most effective way of doing this is to make the content itself
interesting, this is not sufficient by itself. An interesting subject can be made tedious by the
manner in which it is presented. Stimulus variation is necessary, if attention to learning is to be
sustained for as long as possible. Without it, interest may quickly diminish and then prove
impossible to retrieve.
M. Parimala & R. Saravanakumar (2012) in their article “Effect of stimulus variation
techniques on enhancing students’ achievement was aimed to highlights the stimulus variation
techniques in classroom teaching and to find the effectiveness of stimulus variation techniques in
classroom teaching and to find the effectiveness of stimulus variation techniques on students’
attention and their achievement. They were talk about the importance of stimulus variation in
teaching and learning. They claimed that stimulus variation is normally a variation and
application of systematic techniques in the three main areas which are personal teaching styles,
media and materials of instructions and teacher- student interaction. They also stated that the
main objectives of stimulus variation are to make teaching skills more professional and
demanding. The impact of stimulus variation is concerned basically with arousing students’
attention and further sustains it, motivating learning through new exploration and investigation,
building positive feelings towards teacher and school and also catering to individual sensory
preferences and facilitating learning.
The authors elucidated to the readers that enhancing attention through stimulus variation
provides greater opportunity to the learner to take part in the process of learning activity in all
the stages. Instead of making the learner simply reproduce the textual materials with or without
understanding, the effect of stimulus variation on enhancing attention will encourage learner to
think and understand the subject matter. This technique may increase interest and involvement in
the learner.
4

5. Based on the findings of the study, it can be shown clearly that the use of effectiveness of
stimulus variation technique on enhancing students’ attention in the teaching process positively
influence and improve the students’ achievement. The table of finding result in the article
confirmed that there is significant difference between pre- test and post- test performance of the
students in the experimental group. Students who had been taught through effective stimulus
variation on enhancing attention technique perform better in their achievement. In the last part of
this article, the authors concluded that stimulus variation techniques have produced tangible
effect. Furthermore, stimulus variation provides better opportunity to the learners to take part in
the learning activity. They also claimed that stimulus variation offers greater opportunity for
active participation in teaching and learning for both the teacher and students.
Another article is ‘Applying the Theory of Variation in Teaching Reading’, written by
Siu Yin Annie Tong (2012). Interestingly, this article presents a model of collaborative and
reflective professional development for teachers that focuses on student learning. It was focused
on a specific reading skill that had been identifies as problematic for students which is the
inferring of characters’ traits from the events of a story. The learning activities that were
incorporated in the lessons were underpinned by the Theory of Variation proposed by Marton
and Booth (1997) which allows teachers and students to understand the particular skill to be
learnt in which it may enhance both student learning and teacher professional development. In
this theory, it requires teachers to engage closely with their students to grasp the variations in
understandings and knowledge so that they can take an account of this diversity in structuring the
learning activities in a lesson.
Stimulus variation, in the Stanford sense, focuses mainly on the latter. Some of the things
the student teacher is trained in are the use of movement in a systematic way and the avoidance
of teaching from one spot, the use of gestures, and the development of verbal and non-verbal
methods of focusing children’s attention, the development of teaching methods other than the
teacher monologue by encouraging students participation, the systematic use of pauses, and the
5

6. controlled use of different sensory channels by switching primary modes of communication (K.
Maheswari, 2011).
K.Nath (2009) in his work asserted that stimulus variation is a vital skill which helps to
keep students remains attentive in the class and to sustain their motivation. The skill involves
using various attention producing behavior patterns from the part of the teacher, in order to
sustain the interest and attention of the students. The significance of stimulus variation is directly
proportional to attention span of students. The change in stimulus variation is necessary to keep
the learners consistently on track.
POPULATION AND SETTING
The population of this study was carried out in International Islamic University Malaysia
which located in Gombak, Selangor. It is aimed at undergraduate Malaysian students since they
have high expectation on lecturers when entering to university. They were seventy survey sheets
distributed to the students asking them to rate their lecturers’ stimulus variation in the classroom.
The sheets were given randomly to the students regardless their course and students’ gender but
concerned on the lecturers’ gender and exemption for practical course such as architecture and
engineering because most of their time in studio doing practical subjects.
6

7. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Findings 1
7
Frequencies
Statistics
70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Valid
Missing
N
body
movement gesture voice
silence/
pause
facial
expression
interaction
style eye contact focusing
physical
contact
Frequency Table
body movement
2 2.9 2.9 2.9
11 15.7 15.7 18.6
33 47.1 47.1 65.7
24 34.3 34.3 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
weak
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent

8. 8
gesture
13 18.6 18.6 18.6
31 44.3 44.3 62.9
26 37.1 37.1 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
voice
1 1.4 1.4 1.4
11 15.7 15.7 17.1
22 31.4 31.4 48.6
36 51.4 51.4 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
weak
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
silence/ pause
1 1.4 1.4 1.4
3 4.3 4.3 5.7
23 32.9 32.9 38.6
25 35.7 35.7 74.3
18 25.7 25.7 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
very weak
weak
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
facial expression
9 12.9 12.9 12.9
29 41.4 41.4 54.3
32 45.7 45.7 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent

9. 9
interaction style
7 10.0 10.0 10.0
31 44.3 44.3 54.3
32 45.7 45.7 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
eye contact
10 14.3 14.3 14.3
28 40.0 40.0 54.3
32 45.7 45.7 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
focusing
2 2.9 2.9 2.9
35 50.0 50.0 52.9
33 47.1 47.1 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent

10. 10
physical contact
3 4.3 4.3 4.3
6 8.6 8.6 12.9
14 20.0 20.0 32.9
28 40.0 40.0 72.9
19 27.1 27.1 100.0
70 100.0 100.0
very weak
weak
average
good
very good
Total
Valid
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
The variation skills were measured using Likert- scale ranging from very weak (1), weak
(2), average (3), good (4), and very good (5). The students only need to rate nine items of
variation skills provided that has been used by their lecturers in the classroom which are body
movement, gesture, voice, pause, facial expression, interaction style, eye contact, focusing and
physical contact.
The tables of findings 1 have shown the frequency of each skill that has been used by
IIUM lecturers rated by students. For body movement, the highest rate is ‘good’ which is 33
(43.8%), followed by ‘very good’ which is 24 (34.2%) and the lowest rate is ‘weak’ which is 2
(2.7%). The highest rating for gesture is ‘good’ which is 31 (41.1%), followed by ‘very good’
which 26 (37.0%) and the lowest is average which is 13(17.8%). While for voice, the highest is
‘very good which is 36 (50.7%), followed by ‘good’ which is 22 (28.8%) and the lowest is weak
which is only 1(1.4%). The highest rate for pause is ‘good’ which is 25 (32.9%), followed by
average which is 23 (30.1%) and the lowest frequency is very weak which is 1(1.4%).
For facial expression, the highest frequency is 32 (43.8%) represents scale of ‘very good’,
followed by 29 (39.7%) which is for ‘good’ and the lowest is 9 (12.3%) which is for average.
The ‘very good’ is the highest scale rated for interaction style which is 32 (45.2%), followed by
‘good’ which is 31 (41.1%) and the lowest is ‘average’ which is 7 (9.6%). The highest rate for

11. eye contact is ‘very good’ which is 32 (43.5%), followed by ‘good’ which is 28 (38.4%) and the
lowest is ‘average’ which is 10 (13.7%). For focusing skill, 35 (47.9%) is the highest rate for
‘good’, followed by 33 (45.2%) which is for ‘very good’ and the lowest is 2 (2.7%) which is for
‘average’. While for physical contact, ‘good’ is the highest scale rated by students which is 28
(37.0%), followed by 19 (28.8%) which is ‘very good’ and the lowest is 3 (4.1%) which is ‘very
weak’.
Based on the result above, it shows that the dominant variation skill which has been
employed by lecturers is voice skill while the lowest variation skill is physical contact. The
frequency for voice is 36 compared to physical contacts are only 19. The average usage of
variation skills included gesture, facial expression, interaction style, eye contact and focusing.
Since this research was conducted on university students, the physical contact skill is
seems unnecessary. This is because the contact between male and female has its own limit. There
is impossible to male lecturer to make physical contact to female students and vice versa. This is
the possible reason that lead physical contact is less practiced in IIUM, otherwise the students
and the lecturer have the same gender.
Findings 2
lecturer's gender
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
11
Cumulative
Percent
Valid male 35 50.0 50.0 50.0
female 35 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 70 100.0 100.0

12. lecturer's gender * body movement Crosstabulation
12
Count
body movement
weak average good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 2 11 22 0 35
female 0 0 11 24 35
Total 2 11 33 24 70
lecturer's gender * gesture Crosstabulation
Count
Gesture
average good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 13 22 0 35
female 0 9 26 35
Total 13 31 26 70
lecturer's gender * voice Crosstabulation
Count
Voice
weak average good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 1 11 22 1 35
female 0 0 0 35 35
Total 1 11 22 36 70
lecturer's gender * silence/ pause Crosstabulation
Count
silence/ pause
very weak weak average good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 1 3 23 8 0 35
female 0 0 0 17 18 35
Total 1 3 23 25 18 70

13. lecturer's gender * facial expression Crosstabulation
13
Count
facial expression
average good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 9 26 0 35
female 0 3 32 35
Total 9 29 32 70
lecturer's gender * interaction style Crosstabulation
Count
interaction style
average Good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 7 28 0 35
female 0 3 32 35
Total 7 31 32 70
lecturer's gender * eye contact Crosstabulation
Count
eye contact
average Good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 10 25 0 35
female 0 3 32 35
Total 10 28 32 70
lecturer's gender * focusing Crosstabulation
Count
focusing
average Good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 2 33 0 35
female 0 2 33 35
Total 2 35 33 70

14. lecturer's gender * physical contact Crosstabulation
14
Count
physical contact
very weak weak average good very good Total
lecturer's
gender
male 3 6 14 12 0 35
female 0 0 0 16 19 35
Total 3 6 14 28 19 70
A total of seventy lecturers were evaluated by the students which thirty five are male and
the remaining lecturers are the female. The equal division has been made which is thirty five of
female lecturers and thirty five of male lecturers are to facilitate the researcher to compare the
stimulus variation skills between male and female lecturers in the classroom.
Findings 2 show that female lecturers are more dominant than male lecturers in term of
body movement where the ‘very good’ frequency is 24 for female and 0 for male. The highest
rating for male lecturer for body movement is in the ‘good’ level which is 22. For gesture, it
seems that female lecturers are more dominant where the frequency for ‘very good’ level is 26
for female and 0 for male. Male lecturers only reached the level of ‘good’ which is 22. In term of
voice, the highest frequency of ‘very good’ also conquered by female lecturers which is 18 and 0
for male. Male lecturers obtained the highest frequency for ‘average’ level.

15. Conclusion
For the success of any lesson, it is essential to secure and sustain the attention of the
students-learning is optimum when the students are fully attentive to the teaching-learning
process. How to secure and sustain the attention is main theme of this stimulus variation skill. It
is known on the basis of psychological experiments that attention of the individual tends to shift
from one stimulus to other very quickly. It is very difficult for an individual to attend to the same
stimulus for more than a few seconds. Therefore, for securing and sustaining the attention of the
students to the lesson, it is imperative to make variations in the stimulus. This is because
attention is the necessary pre-requisite for learning.
From the result obtained, the dominant variation skill which has been employed by
lecturers is voice skill while the lowest variation skill is physical contact. In average, most
lecturers did not fail to apply these variation skills which are gesture, facial expression,
interaction style, eye contact and focusing. Therefore, it can be understood that most lecturers in
IIUM are actively applying the variation skills in the classroom.
15

16. References
16
http://www.vkmaheshwari.com/WP/?p=212
John Dallat (2009) entitled ‘Learning and Teaching’
M. Parimala & R. Saravanakumar (2012) in their article “Effect of stimulus variation techniques
on enhancing students’ achievement
‘Applying the Theory of Variation in Teaching Reading’, written by Siu Yin Annie Tong from
The Hong Kong Institute of Education
Pratheesh Abraham, 2012. The skills of stimulus variation.
http://etefmgu.blogspot.com/2012/05/achievement-test-record.html
Ramesh. A. (2013). Microteaching: an efficient technique for learning effective teaching. Journal
Research in Medical Sciences. www. mui.ac.ir
K.Nath. (2009). Revising Teaching Skills for Professional Empowerment.