10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
One Concept of Teaching Quality? On the Transferability of Teaching Quality in Schools to the Context of Adult Education
Jessica Fischer1, Dörthe Herbrechter2
1German Institute for Adult Education, Germany; 2Heidelberg University
Presenting Author: Fischer, Jessica
Introduction
Recently the participation in formal and non-formal teaching-learning settings has increased around the world (OECD, 2021). Organised teaching and learning also is a central issue in international adult education (AE) research (Rubenson & Elfert, 2014). Hence, it is astonishing that the quality of organised AE-courses has hardly been studied so far (for quality dimensions of Web-based AE see Harroff & Valentine, 2010). The Adult Education Survey, for instance, accounts for the quality of AE-courses via the participants’ subjective satisfaction. However, a more differentiated analysis of various quality aspects, which also includes the teachers’ perspective, has hardly been carried out so far.
This contrasts with classroom-research in schools, which is characterized by a large body of research on teaching quality. Various studies and theoretical frameworks consistently point towards three generic dimensions of teaching quality, namely classroom management, supportive climate, and cognitive activation (e.g., Klieme, Pauli, & Reusser, 2009). The three dimensions have been positively linked to student outcomes (e.g., Fauth et al., 2014) and measures have been administered in multiple assessments (e.g., the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS), OECD, 2019 or the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), OECD, 2014).
Thus, this proposal aims to provide first evidence regarding the transferability of the teaching quality dimensions to the context of organised AE-courses with a focus on measurement and influencing factors. This is particularly relevant as initial studies investigate the quality of AE-Courses by drawing upon the three teaching quality dimensions (e.g., The German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), Blossfeld, Roßbach, & von Maurice, 2011). Considering the lack of validated measures, our first research question (RQ1) is: Can scales that have been developed to measure teaching quality in school classrooms be used to validly measure the quality of AE-courses?
To investigate the quality dimensions of AE-Courses one cannot disregard the teachers’ educational and occupational background. The teachers’ background is expected to influence the competence development, which in turn is expected to impact the teaching quality (Terhart, 2012). In Germany, for instance, AE is mainly characterized by a low regulation with hardly any systematic and institutionalized influence on the development of teachers’ competencies (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2022). Furthermore, teacher education research shows that a simple increase in experience does not necessarily go hand in hand with improved teaching quality. Rather, it is important to link the experience gained with existing knowledge and, above all, to reflect on it systematically (Hascher, 2005; Schön, 1983). Against this background, the course quality dimensions are expected to vary, which we address by the second research question (RQ2): Which characteristics of teachers’ background predict high quality of AE-courses?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedInstruments and Sample
These questions are answered with statistical analysis, which for RQ1, are combined with the analysis of cognitive probing interviews. The quantitative and qualitative analysis are based on different samples (quantitative analysis: N=191, qualitative analysis: N=12 german AE teachers).
In both samples, the teaching quality dimensions are measured using scales from two of the most frequently cited educational large-scale assessments, namely PISA (2012) and TALIS (2013, 2018). The teachers’ background measures include age, a university degree in pedagogy, teaching experience, preparation and teaching hours, pedagogical training, type (e.g., self-employed) and organizations of employment (e.g., publicly funded), and reflective behavior.
Analysis Methods
To answer RQ1, we first checked scale reliability to investigate the psychometric quality of the teaching quality items for data of AE-Teachers. Afterwards, we applied confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test if the theoretically expected three dimensions and their subdimensions are supported empirically. Finally, we analysed the interview data with Qualitative Content Analysis (Kuckartz, 2018) to gain first insights on how to adapt potential problematic teaching quality items to fit the context of AE more adequately. The data-driven coding system was iteratively developed by three independent coders.
To answer RQ2, we estimated three separate multilevel regression models one each with classroom management, supportive climate, and cognitive activation as dependent variable and the teachers’ background characteristics and reflective behaviour as predictors.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsResults/Expected outcomes
RQ1. Values of Cronbach’s alpha indicate good scale reliability for all teaching quality dimensions (α = .79 for classroom management, α = .89 for supportive climate, and α = .77 for cognitive activation). For cognitive activation, CFA supported the theoretically expected subdimensions. For the other dimensions, however, the number of subdimensions and the pattern of indicators vary.
The ratings of the interviewed teachers indicate a medium fit for specific teaching quality items to adequately measure course quality. The medium fit, however, can be mitigated with small adaptations in item wording. For instance, according to the interviewees, disruptions (a subdimension of classroom management) only take a short amount of time in AE-Courses. The original items, however, refer to “quite a lot of time”. Moreover, they highlight that there is hardly any “disruptive noise” in adult education, disruptions are rather caused by inattentive participants.
RQ2. Based on results of Marx and colleagues (2018), we expect a) a positive effect of the teachers’ participation in AE-Courses, b) a negative effect of age and an interaction between teaching experience and hours of participation in AE-Courses, and c) no effects of teaching experience, preparation and teaching hours, and a university degree in pedagogy on course quality. Furthermore, we assume a positive effect of teachers´ reflective behaviour on course quality (Szogs et al., 2019).
Conclusion
This proposal provides first evidence that, after a few adaptions to measurements and theoretical considerations, teaching quality is transferrable to the AE context in a moderate manner. These and the regression-analytical findings indicate that course quality and possible influencing factors need to be discussed context-specifically.
ReferencesAutorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (Eds.). (2020). Bildung in Deutschland 2020. Ein indikatorengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Bildung in einer digitalisierten Welt. https://www.bildungsbericht.de/de/bildungsberichte-seit-2006/bildungsbericht-2020/pdf-dateien-2020/bildungsbericht-2020-barrierefrei.pdf
Blossfeld, H.-P., Roßbach, H.-G., & von Maurice, J. (Eds.). (2011). Education as a lifelong process: The German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS) [Special Issue]. ZfW, 14.
Fauth, B., Decristan, J., Rieser, S., Klieme, E., & Büttner, G. (2014). Student ratings of teaching quality in primary school: Dimensions and prediction of student outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 29, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.07.001
Harroff, P. & Valentine, T. (2006). Dimensions of Program Quality in Web-Based Adult Education. American Journal of Distance Education, 20, 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde2001_2
Hascher, T. (2005). Die Erfahrungsfalle [The experience trap]. Journal für Lehrerinne- und Lehrerbildung, 5, 39-46.
Klieme, E., Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2009). The Pythagoras study: Investigating effects of teaching and learning in Swiss and German mathematics classrooms. In T. Janik & T. Seider (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom. Waxman.
Kuckartz, U. (2018). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung [Qualitative content analysis: Methods, practices, computer-based analysis]. Beltz Juventa.
Marx, C., Goeze, A., Kelava, A., & Schrader, J. (2018). Lehrkräfte in der Erwachsenen- und Weiterbildung – Zusammenhänge zwischen Vorbildung und Erfahrung mit dem Wissen über Lehr-Lernmethoden und -konzepte. [Teachers and trainers in adult and further education: relations between their educational background and teaching experience with their knowledge about teaching methods]. ZfW, 41, 57–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40955-018-0108-6
OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 technical report. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2019). Teaching and learning international survey TALIS 2018: Technical report.
OECD Publishing.
OECD (2021). Bildung auf einen Blick 2021: OECD-Indikatoren [Education at a Glance 2021: OECD Indicators]. wbv Media. https://doi.org/10.3278/6001821ow
Rubenson, K., & Elfert, M. (2015). Adult education research. Exploring an increasingly fragmented map. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 6, 125–138. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:11451S
Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.
Szogs, M., Krüger, M., & Korneck, F. (2019). Veränderung der Unterrichtsqualität durch kollegiale Reflexion [Change in teaching quality based on reflexion with colleagues]. In: C. Maurer (Eds.), Naturwissenschaftliche Bildung als Grundlage für berufliche und gesellschaftliche Teilhabe. Gesellschaft für Didaktik der Chemie und Physik, Jahrestagung in Kiel 2018. Universität Regensburg.
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Opportunities to Learn and Competence Development in Teacher Education
Herbert Altrichter1, Katharina Soukup-Altrichter2, Christoph Weber2
1Johannes Kepler University, Austria; 2University of Education Upper Austria, Linz, Austria, AT
Presenting Author: Altrichter, Herbert;
Soukup-Altrichter, Katharina
In the past decade, teacher education research has developed various models to explain the development of teachers, their qualifications and their ability to act ethically and effectively ("professionalization") (Cramer, 2020). One of these models, the so-called competency-based approach (e.g., Bauer et al., 2010), focuses its attention on "competencies" that describe both "individual prerequisites of learners [and] their learning outcomes - achieved in the context of, in particular, institutionalized learning and educational processes" (König, 2020, p. 163). Competencies are "context-specific cognitive performance dispositions that functionally relate to situations and requirements in specific domains" (Klieme & Leutner, 2006, p. 879); this concept refers to "the cognitive abilities and skills available in individuals or learned by them to solve specific problems, as well as the associated motivational, volitional, and social readiness and skills to be able to use the problem solutions successfully and responsibly in variable situations" (Weinert, 2001, pp. 27), i.e., in addition to professional knowledge, to other job-related characteristics, such as values, attitudes and beliefs, motivational orientations, or self-regulation.
Competency-theoretical models are often invoked when examining the impact of teacher education on teacher qualifications and actions. In this context, teacher education is understood as a series of opportunities to learn (OTL; Klemenz, König & Schaper, 2019; Kunina-Habenicht et al., 2013) that are offered to students and that they have to actively use for their professional development (Fend, 1981; Helmke, Rindermann & Schrader, 2008).
OTL can be described according to different characteristics: while initially much attention was paid to the weight of different curricular contents (subject, subject didactics, education) and their influence on competence development (cf. Schmidt et al., 2011), currently different formats of teacher education (university courses versus internships) or task elements of teachers (lesson planning, performance assessment, etc.) are frequently examined (Klemenz, König & Schaper, 2019).
In the proposed paper, we will use data of the Linz Longitudinal Study of Teacher Education (L3; Weber et al., 2021), to ask how OTL experienced by students (in the secondary teacher education programme ‘Secondary General Education‘ in the region of Cluster Mitte/Upper Austria) are related to their learning outcomes (in terms of dimensions of professional competence). In particular, we will examine the following research questions:
1. Which OTL do secondary teacher education students experience in the central profession-related university courses and internships in the third year of their studies?
1a. Which of these OTL do students experience more frequently in university courses, which more frequently in internships?
2. What is the relationship between the OTL experienced and self-reported competence growth in various dimensions of professional competence?
2a. Is there a differential relationship between OTL experienced and self-reported competence growth in university courses as opposed to internships?
2b. Is there a differential relationship between various task-related types of OTL and self-reported competence growth in various dimensions of professional competence?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo answer the research questions, data from the Linz Longitudinal Study of Teacher Education (L3; Weber et al. 2021) will be used. Students of the first cycle of the new bachelor's degree programme in secondary education (general education) in the region of Upper Austria were surveyed (online) five times during their studies. For this paper, data from 119 students who participated in the L3 study at measurement time t3 around the middle of their 5th semester and at measurement time t4 at the end of their 6th semester are used.
Specifically, we want to focus on the 3rd year of study and students’ experience 2 central profession-oriented university courses in their teacher education programme and 2 internship phases. The diversity of OTL is reflected (1) by different formats (university course or internship), and (2) by the frequency of students’ experience of OTLs related to typical teacher tasks (Gröschner, 2009). Competence growth is measured in different dimensions (self-concept with respect to various teacher tasks, self-efficacy, professional beliefs; Schmitz & Schwarzer, 2002; Sharma, Loreman & Forlin, 2012; Retelsdorf, Bauer, Gebauer, Kauper & Möller, 2014) and indicated by the difference between measurements at the middle of the 5th semester and at the end of the 6th semester is presented.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe results show that OTL referring to formative and summative performance assessment are experienced least frequently in both university courses and internships of the 3rd year of study. Not surprisingly, students say that they experience teaching preparation and classroom management OTLs more often in internships than in university courses, while there are no significant differences with respect to OTLs reflecting teaching.
With respect to relationships of OTL and competence dimensions we found among other results: The more OTLs (particularly in internships) are experienced by students, the better their self-concept in “interdisciplinary collaboration”. Furthermore, OTLs in university courses are associated with self-concept increases in the area of “innovation”. Contrary to expectations, a negative correlation between learning opportunities in the internship and the development of self-concept in “media use” is found.
Moreover, competence growth in different competence dimensions can be associated differentially to specific OTLs: For example, students’ self concept in “innovation” is the higher, the more often they experience OTLs with respect to “reflection of teaching”, “teaching planning and teaching” and “classroom management” (all three dimensions in university courses).
These and other findings are discussed in terms of their potential significance for teacher education research and for further developing teacher education curricula.
Although the analyzed data come from a single European country, the results may be of broader European relevance, as similar formats and task-related features of OTL recur in many European teacher education curricula (cf. Symeonidis, 2021). Furthermore, the specific perspective and the limitations of the competency-based approach in teacher education research with regard to both research and curriculum as well as potential complements are critically discussed (Cramer, 2020; Heinrich et al. 2019).
ReferencesBauer, J., Drechsel, B., Retelsdorf, J., Sporer, T., Rösler, L., Prenzel, M. & Möller, J. (2010). Panel zum Lehramtsstudium – PaLea. Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 32(2), 34–55.
Cramer, C. (2020). Meta-Reflexivität in der Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung. In C. Kramer, J. König, M. Rothland & S. Blömeke (Eds.), Handbuch Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung (pp. 204-214). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Fend, H. (1981). Theorie der Schule. München: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
Gröschner, A. (2009). Skalen zur Erfassung von Kompetenzen in der Lehrerausbildung. Jena: Friedrich-Schiller-Universität.
Heinrich, M., Wolfswinkler, G., van Ackeren, I., Bremm, N., & Streblow, L. (2019). Multiparadigmatische Lehrerbildung. Die Deutsche Schule, 111(2), 244–259.
Helmke, A., Rindermann, H. & Schrader, F.-W. (2008). Wirkfaktoren akademischer Leistungen in Schule und Hochschule. In W. Schneider & M. Hasselhorn (Eds.), Handbuch der Pädagogischen Psychologie (PP. 145–158). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Klemenz, S., König, J. & Schaper, N. (2019). Learning opportunities in teacher education and proficiency levels in general pedagogical knowledge. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 31, 221–249.
Klieme, E., & Leutner, D. (2006). Kompetenzmodelle zur Erfassung individueller Lernergebnisse und zur Bilanzierung von Bildungsprozessen. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 52, 876–903.
König, J. (2020). Kompetenzorientierter Ansatz in der Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung. In C. Kramer, J. König, M. Rothland & S. Blömeke (Eds.), Handbuch Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung (pp. 163-171). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Kunina-Habenicht, O. et al. (2013). Die Bedeutung der Lerngelegenheiten im Lehramtsstudium und deren individuelle Nutzung für den Aufbau des bildungswissenschaftlichen Wissens. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 59(1), 1–23.
Retelsdorf, J. et al. (2014). Erfassung berufsbezogener Selbstkonzepte von angehenden Lehrkräften (ERBSE-L). Diagnostica, 60, pp. 98-110. https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924/a000108
Schmidt, W. H., Cogan, L., & Houang, R. (2011). The role of opportunity to learn in teacher preparation: an international context. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(2), 138–153.
Schmitz, G. S. & Schwarzer, R. (2000). Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Lehrern. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 14, 12–25.
Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring teacher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12–21.
Symeonidis, V. (2021). Europeanisation in Teacher Education. London: Routledge.
Weber, C., Altrichter, H., Reitinger, J., Bergmann, J. & Himmelsbach, M. (2021). Kompetenzentwicklung und Studienerleben in der Ausbildung von Lehrpersonen. In D. Kemethofer, J. Reitinger & K. Soukup-Altrichter (Eds.), Vermessen? Zum Verhältnis von Bildungsforschung, Bildungspolitik und Bildungspraxis (pp.127–141). Münster: Waxmann.
Weinert, F. E. (2001). Vergleichende Leistungsmessung in Schulen – eine umstrittene Selbstverständlichkeit. In F. E. Weinert (Ed.), Leistungsmessungen in Schulen (pp. 17-31). Weinheim: Beltz.
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Pre-service and In-service Teachers Situating Themselves in Inclusive Classrooms with Gifted Students: Gaps Between Teacher Thinking and Evidence-Based Practices
Erkki T. Lassila1, Eeva Kaisa Hyry-Beihammer2, Oktay Kızkapan3, Angela Rocena4, Manabu Sumida5
1Kobe University, Japan; 2University of Education Upper Austria, Austria; 3Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Turkey; 4University of the Philippines, the Philippines; 5Ehime University, Japan
Presenting Author: Lassila, Erkki T.;
Hyry-Beihammer, Eeva Kaisa
Our research focuses on gifted education as an often neglected dimension in teacher’s work. We highlight the necessity of acknowledging the gifted students as a learner group with special needs when differentiating teaching in inclusive classrooms. To achieve this, teachers need to develop a base of theoretical knowledge and a positive attitude for an in-depth understanding and meaningful educational responses towards the gifted (van Gerven, 2021). The nature of giftedness is a contested issue, but here, gifted are understood as those who are above their age peers in one or more subjects, show creativity and a tendency to immerse themselves in topics of interest (Renzulli & Reis, 2021).
World Council for Gifted and Talented Children (2021) has published global principles for professional learning in gifted education for improving teacher education globally. However, how giftedness is understood and reacted to are strongly conditioned not just by culture, socio-historical and socio-political realities, but also by organizational practices in educational institutions (Cross & Cross, 2021). Unpacking these aspects is important when planning the education of both the gifted students and their teachers. Our research is informed by sociocultural theories where meaning is seen as situated but not situation-bound (Ellis et al., 2010).
In our research, we ask:
-
How do pre-service and in-service teachers thinking about giftedness in an inclusive classroom differ when using the method of empathy-based stories as a data collection method?
-
How does this pre-service and in-service teachers’ thinking relate to evidence-based practices and recommendations in gifted education research?
Through examining our recent empirical research on pre-service and in-service teacher thinking on giftedness inclusive classrooms in five countries (Finland, Austria, Turkey, Philippines and Japan), we identify gaps between the participating teachers’ knowledge and latest research-based knowledge. “Teacher thinking” refers here to knowledge and concepts that teachers use to plan, interact with, and reflect on teaching; that are intertwined with teachers’ beliefs and attitudes (Levin, 2015); and that influence their pedagogical choices and actions.
We also consider the culturally situated differences in teacher thinking and discuss implications of our findings on teacher education in terms of curricular content, policies and teaching practices. For example our results suggest how in some contexts this could take the form of critically unpacking the teacher’s position as an authority or the one who knows the right answer to everyhing.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWe have employed method of empathy-based stories(Wallin et al. 2019) for studying teachers’ thinking and beliefs about specific educational phenomena such as moral imagination in ethically challenging situations (Hyry-Beihammer et al. 2020) and teaching gifted students in inclusive classrooms (Lassila et al. manuscript). In this method, the researcher gives participants a premise (called a frame story), on which they continue writing their story freely. The premise is for participants to imagine themselves in an inclusive regular classroom and write about what they would think and feel, and how they would act in a when faced with few intellectually gifted and very capable students to whom the pace of the teaching is too slow and the content unchallenging. This has started to show in the gifted students’ behavior in the class and toward the teacher. Thus one key interest was to find out what kind of solutions do pre-service teachers imagine they would employ with gifted students in an inclusive regular classroom setting.
To achieve this, we use pre-service teacher data collected in five countries, around 25 participants in each country and in-service teacher data collected/to be collected in the same five countries. First the national data were/will be analysed using categorical content analysis of stories (Lieblich et al. 1998) and then thematised horizontally across cases, thus making a cross-case analysis between the data from five countries (Miles, Huberman & Saldana 2020, p. 95; Riessman 2008).
Since we understand the production of narrative research knowledge as a co-construction process and our educational practices grounded in narrative pedagogies (Hyry-Beihammer, Lassila & Uitto, 2021), we will reflect on the kind of role the teacher educator / researcher plays regarding the process. As a pedagogical tool, the empathy-based method connects with the idea of a “third space” as a site for challenging each others’ thinking, melding together practical and theoretical knowledge and helping reconfigure the power balance between teacher educator and pre-service teacher knowledge (e.g. Ellis & Maguire, 2017).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsFirst results show how pre-service teachers mentioned the most common and often recommended solutions for responding to the needs of the gifted, starting with giving more challenging tasks and encouraging peer-learning and having gifted students act as teaching assistants. They also suggested more communication with gifted students. Our results indicate that the pre-service teachers as a whole (group) do come up with a wide range of solutions even if individual pre-service teacher’s thinking can be somewhat limited in scope.
Preliminary analysis of collected in-service teacher data suggests that solutions were highly similar to those in the pre-service teacher data. However, the amount of details and depth of their answers reveals greater capacity for pedagogical reflection. There were also some solutions that were not present in pre-service teacher data such as varying the pace of teaching for the gifted.
Since the participants of this research came mostly from non-gifted-education-specialist programs, their thinking is reflective of general pedagogical practices and existing values with the corresponding merits and demerits. While most solutions are based on sound pedagogical reasoning, the lack of theoretical knowledge of gifted education may lead to inadvisable use of various means of differentiation and holding bias against solutions, such as acceleration (i.e. increasing the pace of instruction, skipping grades or curriciculum content already mastered), which are supported by research but against which there is resistance within teachers in many countries.
Our results suggest collaborative and dialogical activities where participants share their ideas with each other and where the teacher educator acts as a commentator adding to the already existing (tacit) knowledge and raising to discussion differences with evidence-based practices. Furthermore, we recommend organizing educational opportunities between pre-service and in-service teachers for sharing of different perspectives and enabling novel examination of the relationship between theoretical and practical knowledge (see Max 2010).
ReferencesCross, T. L., & Cross, J. R. (2021), A School-based conception of giftedness: Clarifying roles and responsibilities in the development of talent in our public schools. In R. J.
Sternberg & D. Ambrose (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness and talent (pp. 83–98). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-56869-6_6
Ellis, V., Edwards, A., & Smagorinsky, P. (Eds) (2010). Cultural-historical perspectives on teacher education and development: Learning teaching. London: Routledge.
Hyry-Beihammer, E.K, Lassila, E.T., Estola, E. & Uitto, M. (2020). Moral imagination in student teachers’ written stories on an ethical dilemma. European Journal of Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1860013
Hyry-Beihammer, E.K., Lassila, E.T. & Uitto, M. (2021). Narrative pedagogies in cultivating the professional development of teacher educators. In: Exploring professional development opportunities for teacher educators: Promoting faculty-student partnerships (pp: 179-193).
London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
Lassila, E.T., Hyry-Beihammer, E.K., Kızkapan, O., Rocena, A., & Sumida, M. (manuscript). Giftedness in inclusive classrooms: A cross-cultural examination of pre-service teachers’ thinking in Finland, Austria, Turkey, the Philippines, and Japan.
Levin, B. (2015). The development of teachers’ beliefs. In H. Fives & M. Gregoire Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 48–65). New York and London: Routledge. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203108437
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R. & Zilber, T.B. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, Sage.
Max, C. (2010). Learning-for-teaching across educational boundaries: An activity-theoretical analysis of collaborative internship projects in initial teacher education. In V. Ellis, A. Edwards & P. Smagorisnky (Eds), Cultural-historical perspectives on teacher education and development: Learning teaching. London: Routledge.
Miles, M., Huberman, M. & Saldana, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A Methods sourcebook (4th ed). Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage.
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (2021). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A change in direction from being gifted to the development of gifted behaviors. In R. J. Sternberg & D. Ambrose (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness and talent (pp. 335–356). Palgrave Macmillan.
Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Los Angeles, California: Sage.
Wallin, A., Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Eskola, J. (2019). The method of empathy-based stories. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 42(5), 525–535. DOI: 10.1080/1743727X.2018.1533937
van Gerven, E. (2021). Raising the bar: The competencies of specialists in gifted education. Diepenbeek: Uhasselt.
World Council for Gifted and Talented Children. (2021). Global principles for professional learning in gifted education. https://world-gifted.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/professional-learning-global-principles.pdf
|
