10. Teacher Education Research
Poster
Introducing Teacher Education Students to Escape Rooms as a Didactic Tool for Teaching and Learning in Mathematics
Lene Hayden Taraldsen
Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Norway
Presenting Author: Taraldsen, Lene Hayden
In the study I would like to present, the aim is to gain insight into teacher education students’ experience with the introduction of the use of escape rooms as a didactic tool in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Escape room is a new, game-based, didactic tool in school that may offer teacher education students new possibilities in the mathematics classroom. According to Nicholson (2015) escape rooms are live-action, team-based games in which the players discover clues, solve puzzles, and accomplish tasks to complete a mission in a limited amount of time. Within educational research we see a steady increase in the use of escape rooms as a didactic tool (e.g. Morell et al., 2020; Ouariachi & Wim, 2020; Taraldsen et al., 2020; Veldkamp et al., 2020), where most research articles refer to the use of escape rooms in teaching in higher education (Taraldsen et al., 2020; Veldkamp et al., 2020).
In addition, for instance Borasi and Finnegan (2010) and Van der Heijden et al. (2015) highlight the potential of teachers as change agents, and Taraldsen et al. (2020) identify this potential in the teacher education student’s position as well, because teacher education students may bring new ideas to the schools where they conduct their teaching practice as students and to the schools where they eventually work as teachers. One such idea is to use escape rooms for teaching and learning in mathematics. According to the theories of John Dewey (e.g. Dewey, 1916, 1938), experience may transfer into learning, which means that teacher education students in practice periods, and then as qualified teachers, may bring new ideas, didactic tools and possibilities to the practice field, based on what they learn during their teacher education. This is not just because they learn something specific about a didactic tool such as escape rooms, but also because, in general, they go through a significant kind of learning-based metamorphosis, from being an experienced pupil to becoming a new teacher, which may affect their beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning (e.g. Beijaard et al., 2000), and therefore what priorities to make in their teaching. Van Zoest et al. (1994) reveal that teacher education students in general have had quite traditional, experience-based beliefs about teaching and learning priorities in school mathematics when they enter a teacher education programme. Through their time at a teacher education programme the students may be introduced to, and influenced by, approaches and opinions regarding mathematics teaching and learning that may challenge their beliefs. Because of its well-documented novelty, the introduction to escape rooms offered the participating teacher education students one such belief-influencing opportunity.
Therefore, the introduction of escape rooms for use in mathematics to teacher education students may have two objectives. First, escape rooms are a new, game-based, didactic tool that offers teacher education students an example of non-traditional possibilities in the mathematics classroom. Second, the introduction may offer the opportunity to gain insight into teacher education students’ development as mathematics teachers and position as possible change agents for mathematics teaching in school, through well-grounded influence on their bildung (Hohr, 2011) as mathematics teachers. Hence, attention to these two objectives was given in my study through this research question:
How do teacher education students experience an introduction to the use of escape rooms as a didactic tool in the teaching and learning of mathematics?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedIn this study a qualitative design was applied to understand teacher education students’ experiences of the use of escape rooms as a didactic tool in the teaching and learning of mathematics. 12 teacher education students, from a group of 44 students taking a 7.5 ETCS mathematics education course in the sixth semester of a five-year-long teacher education programme, were recruited to take part in the study. The data were collected in the spring of 2021. Data were collected through three stages. At the first stage the students answered a small, qualitative survey. This was followed by a stage of observation. Finally semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted. The analyses started with a preliminary, deductive analysis, with emphasis on theory-driven identification of categories related to game-based learning and escape room, and Dewey’s theory of learning through experience. Four categories related to learning were identified: experience, self-regulation, social interaction and motivation. I then used the data from both the survey and the observation to interpret and try to understand the experience that the teacher education students were involved in and identified three areas of interest: expectations, experiences and present thoughts. In a next round of deductive analysis, I analysed the transcripts from the three focus group interviews to further investigate how teacher education students experience an introduction to use of escape rooms as a didactic tool in the teaching and learning of mathematics. This round of analysis included attention to self-regulation, social interaction and motivation in addition to experience. This deduction-based analysis was followed by multiple close readings and interpretations of the transcripts. This attempt to get a revised overall understanding of the studied introduction can be described as inductive because of the influence from my revised preconception based on the conducted deductive analyses.
These analyses of teacher education students’ experiences, along with Dewey’s theory on learning, an established understanding of impact from the teacher’s beliefs and identity on the teaching of mathematics within mathematics education research, and Klafki’s theory on categorical bildung allowed me to enter an abductive phase of analysis. The introduction to escape rooms provided the teacher education students with experiences that may have an impact on their beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning, and their bildung as mathematics teachers. However, this possible influence is hidden, both for me and for them. Hence, hypotheses can only be generated regarding bildung and the teacher education students’ possible change agent influence.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe findings show that use of escape rooms in mathematics teaching was met from a traditional perspective on teaching and learning of mathematics in school, for instance through the importance of getting to know the solutions to problems. However, the findings also implied glimpses of willingness and curiosity about the idea of trying out this new, game-based, didactic tool. It is important to emphasize that teacher education students will face and critically interpret various didactic tools on their journey towards their future positions as teachers. The introduction to escape rooms offered them opportunities for both active and passive experiences, and to critically reflect on teaching and learning of mathematics based on application of a new didactic tool. This may have made a difference when it comes to the intrinsic impact on the students’ beliefs and thereby bildung as mathematics teachers. One of the students stated that without the well-founded introduction to escape rooms she experienced, she would have been unlikely to try out escape rooms in her own teaching practice.
By bringing escape rooms into mathematics teaching in school, the teacher education student may be recognized as a mathematics teaching change agent, but such an initiative will only stem from an inner conviction about the value of making such a didactic choice, related to one’s didactic stance. The findings in this study are based on the participation of a few teacher education students, during their introduction to this particular didactic tool. Therefore, additional research on teacher education students’ use of escape rooms as a didactic tool in practice periods, or as new teachers in primary and secondary school teaching, is needed to form an impression of their position as change agents when applying an escape room based on the didactic questions of what you learn and how you learn.
ReferencesBeijaard, D., Verloop, N., Wubbels, T., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2000). The professional development of
teachers. In R. J. Simmons, J. van der Linden, & T. Duffy (Eds.), New learning (pp. 261–274).
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Borasi, R. & Finnegan, K. (2010). Entrepreneurial attitudes and behaviors that can help prepare
successful change-agents in education. New Educator, 6(1), 1–29.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. The
Free Press.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi.
Hohr, H. (2011). Kategorial danning og kritisk-konstruktiv didaktikk – den didaktiske tilnærmingen
hos Wolfgang Klafki [Categorical bildung and critical-constructive didactics – the didactical approach of Wolfgang Klafki]. In K. Steinsholt & S. Dobson (Eds.), Dannelse. Introduksjon til et ullent pedagogisk landskap [Bildung. Introduction to a woolly pedagogical landscape], (pp. 163–175). Tapir Akademisk Forlag.
Morell, B. L. M., Eukel, H. N., & Santurri, L. E. (2020). Soft skills and implications for future
professional practice: Qualitative findings of a nursing education escape room. Nurse Education Today, 93, 104462.
Nicholson, S. (2015). Peeking behind the locked door: A survey of escape room facilities. Scott
Nicholson homepage. http://scottnicholson.com/pubs/erfacwhite.pdf
Ouariachi, T. & Wim, E. J. L. (2020). Escape rooms as tools for climate change education: an
exploration of initiatives. Environmental Education Research, 26(8), 1193–1206.
Taraldsen, L. H., Haara, F. O., Lysne, M. S., Jensen, P. R., & Jenssen, E. S. (2020). A review on use of
escape rooms in education – Touching the void. Education Inquiry, 13(2), 169–184.
Van der Heijden, H. R. M. A., Geldens, J. J. M., Beijaard, D., & Popeijus, H. L. (2015). Characteristics of
teachers as change agents. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 681–699.
Van Zoest, L. R., Jones, G. A., & Thornton, C. A. (1994). Beliefs about mathematics teaching held by
pre-service teachers involved in a first grade mentorship program. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 6(1), 37–55.
Veldkamp, A., van de Grint, L., Knippels, M.-C. P. J., & van Joolingen, W. R. (2020b). Escape
Education: A systematic review on escape rooms in education. Educational Research Review, 31, 100364.
10. Teacher Education Research
Poster
Fair Assessment. A research with prospective teachers
Debora Aquario, Elisabetta Ghedin, Alioscia Miotto, Ignacio Pais, Federica Pasqual, Eleonora Zorzi
University of Padova, Italy
Presenting Author: Aquario, Debora;
Zorzi, Eleonora
An increased focus on equity and justice in education emerges from the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, where the commitment is to provide inclusive and equitable quality education at all levels, as well as from other European and international documents (OECD, 2012, 2005; UNESCO, 2015). However, little is known about the specific field of learning assessment and about the possible enhancement for assessment processes when inspired by discourses about justice, equity and fairness.
The present contribution is part of a larger research project SHIFT (Shaping and Inspiring a Fair Thinking in assessment) that aims to investigate how to shift assessment practices toward equity and justice/fairness and how the assessment methods can meet the diversity of the students. Specifically in this contribution the aim is to explore how and when an assessment process or practice is fair/equitable from the students’ perspective.
Empirical and theoretical studies have highlighted the need to investigate the students’ insights about the introduction of the issue of justice in the assessment field. A review by Struyven et al. (2005) reveals that from university students’ points of view, assessment has a positive effect on their learning and is ‘fair’ when it: (1) relates to authentic tasks; (2) represents reasonable demands; (3) encourages them to apply knowledge to realistic contexts; (4) emphasizes the need to develop a range of skills; and (5) is perceived to have long-term benefits. Other studies with university students (Lizzio et al., 2007) show the contribution of some factors of fair assessment to the perception of a fair academic environment: the transparency and objectivity (‘Students are assessed on clear and objective criteria’) and the equity (‘Rules and procedures are applied consistently and fairly’) of the learning and assessment process.
Other relevant studies (Pepper and Pathak, 2008; Scott et al., 2014; Flores et al., 2015; Murillo & Hidalgo, 2017) show that students give great attention to some aspects when defining an assessment as fair: 1) explicitness in grading criteria, 2) frequent feedback, 3) assessment capacity to meet the characteristics of each student, 4) equality for all in terms of conditions and support, 5) participation in the assessment process, 6) focus on the effort and the progress (not just the results), 7) continuity and flexibility, 8) attention to aspects not strictly related to learning, such as their attitude, empathy, respect for peers, 9) learner-centred approach to assessment.
A study by Pitt and Winstone (2018) investigates the role of anonymous marking on university students’ perspectives about fairness by exploring whether students perceive anonymous marking as fairer than non-anonymous marking. Results revealed no significant difference according to whether or not marking was anonymous. The study suggests to seriously question whether transparency and equity require anonymous marking and to distinguish between anonymous grading and anonymous feedback (Whitelegg, 2002): whilst anonymous grading has clear advantages (such as removal of bias/prejudgement), the provision of feedback on an anonymous basis is potentially problematic because it disrupts the feedback loop by removing the individualisation of feedback comments, increasing the distance between staff and students. The specific aim of the presented research is to explore these issues with a group of students enrolled in teacher education programmes. Their perspectives and insights about how to shift assessment cultures and practices towards fairness are relevant given their path for becoming teachers in addition to the fact that reflecting upon the nature and the purposes of assessment is fundamental for the development of their professional identity.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedSHIFT intends to give value to the logic and the flow of the 4-D model of the Appreciative Inquiry (AI) generating the positive energy that is needed to carry out changes.
Specifically, the present contribution is aimed at focussing on a part of the second step “Dream”. It invites to ask “what might be” and how things might work well in the future, imagining and envisioning ideas and practices. A group of 250 prospective teachers were involved in a qualitative research.
Specifically, 200 students enrolled in the teacher education program at University of Padova completed a written interview. Written interviews were collected in the context of a course for pre-service teachers at the teacher education programme (Course taught: Didactics and Pedagogy for inclusion) and at the time of the course,the participants were in their third year of studies.
Moreover, 50 students from 5 different countries (UK, Turkey, Lithuania, Netherlands and Portugal) and enrolled in teacher education programs participated in 4 focus groups. All the participants were informed about the pedagogical and research purposes of the data collection, which was also to promote reflection as an important part of teachers’ professional development.
The same appreciative questions guided the reflection in written interviews and in the focus groups with the aim to foster the capacity to aspire and imagine possible and future actions about learning assessment. The students were required to reflect upon each question. They received the following guidelines: ‘Reflect upon your experiences of learning assessment. Take into account the following questions: 1) In your idea of the school of the future, what role does assessment play? How should it be? What features should it have? 2) How might we shift assessment practices toward equity, justice and fairness? How might we assess for learning and growth of all students? 3) How future assessment methods meet the diversity of the students? and 4) Have you ever felt, or do you know someone, excluded from the assessment? In your experience, is there anything that assessment has allowed you to do and enhance, or exclude?’
Data from written interviews and transcriptions of focus groups are analysed by content analysis.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsData analysis revealed the capacity of the appreciative protocol of interview to generate positive and creative answers. Collected answers contained reflections about a possible dialogue between assessment and the issues of equity and fairness as well as practical implications of introducing these dimensions in the assessment discourse and procedure. Alternative assessment practices (self-assessment, peer-assessment, portfolio) are perceived as helpful to learn in a more in-depth way and “fair procedures” (the feeling is that traditional examinations are an unfair measure of learning). Also the ‘essay’ is perceived as helpful to reduce feelings of injustice. In any case, two factors seem related to a perception of fairness in assessment: quality feedback (and communication in general) and transparency of the assessment process (above all in the phase of constructing and sharing criteria). Another issue is the connection between fairness and the discourse about the students’ rights: assessment practices are fair if able to protect students’ rights as having the opportunities to participate in the learning process and to demonstrate learning. This is in line with Elwood and Lundy (2010) sustaining that an equitable assessment is a right that implies “equality of opportunity for all, without discrimination on any grounds” (p. 345).
Further analyses are expected to reveal useful aspects to be shared and then implemented in schools. Specifically, the ideas and observations participants have envisioned in the Dream step will be translated into innovative actions and ways to bring into existence the “preferred future” about fair assessment for sustaining the change in assessment cultures and practices.
ReferencesElwood J., & Lundy L. (2010). Revisioning assessment through a children’s rights approach: Implications for policy, process and practice. Research Papers in Education, 25(3): 335–353.
Flores M. A., Veiga Simao A.M., Barros A. and Pereira D. (2015). Perceptions of effectiveness, fairness and feedback of assessment methods: a study in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 40, 9: 1523-1534.
Flórez Petour M. T., Rozas Assael T., Gysling J. and Olave Astorga J. M. (2018). The consequences of metrics for social justice: tensions, pending issues, and questions. Oxford Review of Education, 44, 5: 651-667.
Hanesworth P., Bracken S. and Elkington S. (2019). A typology for a social justice approach to assessment: Learning from universal design and culturally sustaining pedagogy. Teaching in Higher Education, 24 (1): 98-114.
Heritage M., Wylie C. (2018). Reaping the benefits of assessment for learning: achievement, identity, and equity. ZDM, 50 (4): 729–741.
Hidalgo N., Murillo F.J. (2016). Evaluación de Estudiantes para la Justicia Social. Propuesta de un Modelo. Revista Internacional de Educación para la Justicia Social (RIEJS), 5(2): 159-179.
Klenowski V. (2014). Towards fairer assessment. Australian Educational Researcher, 41: 445–470.
Lizzio A., Wilson K. and Hadaway V. (2007). University students’ perceptions of a fair learning environment: a social justice perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 2: 195-213.
McArthur J. (2016). Assessment for social justice: the role of assessment in achieving social justice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41, 7: 967-981.
Murillo F. J., Hidalgo N. (2017). Students’ conceptions about a fair assessment of their learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53: 10-16.
Pepper M. B., Pathak S. (2008). Classroom contribution: What do students perceive as fair assessment? Journal of Education for Business, 83(6): 360–368.
Pitt E., Winstone N. (2018). The impact of anonymous marking on students’ perceptions of fairness, feedback and relationships with lecturers. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43, 7: 1183-1193.
Sambell K., McDowell L. and Montgomery C. (2013). Assessment for Learning in Higher Education. Abingdon: Routledge.
Scott S., Webber C. F., Lupart J. L., Aitken N. and Scott D. E. (2014). Fair and equitable assessment practices for all students. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21,1: 52-70.
Tierney R. D. (2013). Fairness in classroom assessment. In: McMillan J. H., editor, SAGE Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment (pp. 125-144). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Tierney R.D. (2014). Fairness as a multifaceted quality in classroom assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43: 55-69.
10. Teacher Education Research
Poster
Development of a Video-Based Learning Platform to Improve the Diagnostic Competence of Teachers in Inclusive Science Education Classrooms
Max Thevißen, Eva Blumberg
University of Paderborn, Germany
Presenting Author: Thevißen, Max;
Blumberg, Eva
With the ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, societies worldwide faced the challenge of developing an inclusive education system that provides access to education for all children (UN, 2006). Teaching in increasingly diverse and heterogeneous classrooms requires a great deal of professional competence on the part of the teaching staff. A central aspect of being able to do justice to all children individually is the development of a distinctive didactic and diagnostic competence. In the DiPoSa project (Didaktisch diagnostische Potentiale des inklusionsorientierten Sachunterrichts), further education and training modules are being developed to help implement formative assessment as an everyday teacher activity and an elementary part of the teaching profession (Schroeder, Blumberg, Kottmann, Miller & Reh, 2021).
There are different approaches to pedagogical diagnostics that imply process- and product-oriented approaches. The different types of diagnosis have been applied in teaching practice and currently, in inclusive classrooms, it is mainly support diagnosis that is linked to an assumed improvement of the initial situation through adaptive support measures that is common (Heimlich & Kahlert, 2012). However, due to the important role of special needs education in Germany, support diagnosis also has the dual function of diagnosis and selection. The research work in the DiPoSa project is based on didactic diagnostics that are directly integrated into the classroom and are suitable for everyday use to accompany teaching-learning processes. This strength-oriented understanding of diagnostics in the heterogeneous classroom takes on a special significance when based on the increasing labelling of pupils with special educational needs in Germany in recent years, which is justified by the support-oriented diagnostics from the beginning and the political requirements (KMK, 2008; 2020).
The subject of science education, with its subject-immanent resource orientation, offers many opportunities to see diversity in the classroom as a chance to use many different potentials (Prengel, 2016). For this reason, the DiPoSa project is located in science education and offers the possibility to define a subject-specific understanding of diagnosis. Didactic diagnostics should enable teachers to support all children during lessons by designing the learning offer in such a way that it is adapted to the interests and needs of the children and problem definitions are reflected against this background (Liebers, Maier, Prengel & Schönknecht, 2013; Schönknecht & Maier, 2012 ¸ Schroeder, 2016). This form of formative assessment takes place in the didactic context of science education lessons and enables teachers to offer adaptive learning settings. In the IGEL study (2017), formative assessment was found to have positive effects on students' concept development, which is in line with previous study results that attribute a beneficial effect to the increased use of formative assessment (Decristan et al., 2017).
A special concern of the work in this project is the continuous iterative cooperation of science and practice in order to develop a training and further education offer for teachers that is suitable for practice and that promotes the development of a resource-oriented didactic diagnosis.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo have great transfer effects into practice, the design-based-research approach was chosen for DiPoSa, which requires close science-practice cooperation (Reinmann, 2005; McKenney & Reeves, 2019). The aim of this science-practice cooperation was to develop a video-based learning platform that can be used in both university teacher training and in-service teacher training to promote the didactic-diagnostic competence of all participants. At the beginning, group discussions were conducted at the participating primary schools to ascertain the current status and needs of the teachers in dealing with diversity and heterogeneity in inclusive science education. Following on from this, regular development conferences were held at which the information gathered was first discussed and then clustered into different sub-areas. These sub-areas were called "building blocks". Each "building block" is given a different name (e.g. experimentation, language, etc.) and represents the visible potential of inclusive science education from the perspective of the teachers involved. Subsequently, "building block groups" were formed, consisting of representatives from science and practice, who were to deal with their respective building block in depth. During this development process, series of lessons were videotaped in the science education lessons of the teachers involved, so that a basis was given for the video-based learning platform to be developed. These videos were jointly evaluated and assigned to the respective modules, so that there are video sequences on the learning platform for each module, which are followed by good learning tasks to improve the didactic-diagnostic competence of the teachers.
Using a pre-post vignette test design with a control group, possible effects on the improvement of the didactic-diagnostic competence of the participants of the intervention will be evaluated. For this purpose, two selected video sequences were implemented in an online questionnaire with open response formats. The teachers involved in the project viewed the videos and within 5 minutes noted down an initial professional assessment of the situation they had seen on the basis of three guiding questions. They were then able to watch the video again and add their observations to their notes without time pressure. These assessments were summarised and serve as an expert opinion to compare the statements of the training participants. In addition, the training participants ticked scales on non-cognitive aspects such as attitudes towards inclusive science education or self-efficacy beliefs about designing inclusive science education and about diagnosing in inclusive science education.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe development of didactic-diagnostic competence in the sense of formative assessment is of great importance for the successful design of inclusive science teaching (e. g. Black & Wiliam, 1998; Hattie, 2013; Wylie et al., 2012). The video-based learning platform developed in the DiPoSa project together with the teachers will offer the students of the experimental group the possibility to improve their professional competence in combination with the required theoretical input. This learning platform is a learning offer that has emerged from a close science-practice cooperation and thus has the claim to demonstrate transferable effects for teaching practice. Making these effects visible should be the subject of further research.
As the work on the teaching platform is ongoing, the initial results may allow conclusions to be drawn for modifications to the video-based tool. Dealing with teaching situations from practice offers students and teachers a good learning opportunity to improve their diagnostic skills. Through the design-based-research approach, there is a great added value for teachers and especially researchers in the development and improvement of the tool (Reinmann, 2005; McKenney & Reeves, 2019). Through this close science-practice coordination, the actual diversity in German classrooms can be seen as an opportunity to develop diverse potentials, as they become more visible through the improvement of teachers' diagnostic skills in further education and training.
Enenkiel, Bartel, Walz & Roth (2022) have conducted a study in which students were able to significantly improve their diagnostic skills for secondary school students in mathematics using a video-based learning platform. Similar results are therefore expected for the competence growth of students participating in the DiPoSa project intervention.
In this poster presentation, the structure of the research project in terms of the design-based-research approach and the development status of the video-based learning platform will be presented.
ReferencesBlack, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.
Decristan, J., Hardy, I., Klieme, E., Büttner, G., Hertel, S., Kunter, M. et al. (2017). Individuelle Förderung und adaptive Lerngelegenheiten im Grundschulunterricht. In: U. Hartmann, M. Hasselhorn & A. Gold (Hrsg.), Entwicklungsverläufe verstehen -Individuelle Förderung wirksam gestalten. Forschungsergebnisse des Frankfurter IDeA-Zentrums (S.312–326). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Enenkiel, P., Bartel, M. E., Walz, M., & Roth, J. (2022). Diagnostische Fähigkeiten mit der videobasierten Lernumgebung ViviAn fördern. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 43(1), 67-99.
Hattie, J. (2013). Lernen sichtbar machen. Überarbeitete deutschsprachige Ausgabe von "Visible Learning“. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider.
Heimlich, U. & Kahlert, J. (2012). Inklusion in Schule und Unterricht. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Kultusministerkonferenz (2008). Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Schulen 1997 bis 2006. Bonn/Berlin: Statistische Veröffentlichungen, Dokumentation Nr. 185.
Kultusministerkonferenz (2020). Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Schulen 2009 bis 2018. Berlin: Statistische Veröffentlichungen, Dokumentation Nr. 223.
Liebers, K., Maier, P., Prengel, A. & Schönknecht, G. (2013). Pädagogische Diagnostik und Lernwege von Kindern im inklusiven Sachunterricht. In S. Wittkowske & K. v. Maltzahn (Hrsg.), Lebenswirklichkeit und Sachunterricht. Erfahrungen - Ergebnisse - Entwicklungen (S. 48–62). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
McKenney, S. & Reeves, T. C. (2019). Conducting Educational Design Research (2. Auflage). London: Routledge.
Prengel, A. (2016). Didaktische Diagnostik als Element alltäglicher Lehrerarbeit - Formatives Assessment im inklusiven Unterricht. In B. Amrhein (Hrsg.), Diagnostik im Kontext inklusiver Bildung (S. 49–63). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Reinmann, G. (2005). Innovation ohne Forschung? Ein Plädoyer für den Design-Based Research-Ansatz in der Lehr-Lernforschung. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 33(1), 52–69.
Schroeder, R. (2016). Diagnostik im inklusiven Sachunterricht - Zwischen Fachbezug und Lebenswelt. In H. Giest, T. Goll & A. Hartinger (Hrsg.), Sachunterricht - zwischen Kompetenzorientierung, Persönlichkeitsentwicklung, Lebenswelt und Fachbezug (S. 75–83). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Schroeder, R., Blumberg, E., Kottmann, B., Miller, S. & Reh, A. (2021). Chancen des inklusionsorientierten Sachunterrichts für didaktisch-diagnostisches Handeln – Konzeptionelle und methodologisch-methodische Grundlagen eines forschungsbasierten Entwicklungsansatzes für die Lehrer*innenbildung. Qualifizierung für Inklusion. Online-Zeitschrift zur Forschung über Aus-, Fort- und Weiterbildung pädagogischer Fachkräfte. 3(2), 1-18.
Schönknecht, G. & Maier, P. (2012). Diagnose und Förderung im Sachunterricht. Kiel: IPN.
United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities [CRPD]. Available at: http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf (last accessed: 26 January 2023).
Wylie, E. C., Gullickson, A., Cummings, K., Noakes, L., Egelson, P., Norman, K. & Veeder, S. (2012). Improving Formative Assessment Practice to Empower Student Learning. Thousend Oaks: Corwin.
10. Teacher Education Research
Poster
What Kinds of Factors Are Related to Danish Student Teachers' Study Intensity?
Eyvind Elstad, Are Turmo, Knut-Andreas Christophersen
University of Oslo, Norway
Presenting Author: Elstad, Eyvind
The teacher education in Denmark is an education that has been reformed again and again. In connection with the 2013 teacher training, admissions interviews were held with all applicants who have below 7.0 in upper secondary school average. The results of an evaluation study indicate that the admissions interviews have contributed to reducing the dropout from teacher training among students admitted via quota 2 (EVA, 2017). There is only motivation that says something with some certainty about the student teachers' dropout probability (EVA, 2017). Over time, there is a decreasing number of first-priority applicants for teacher training (apart from the year 2020), and there is a relatively high dropout rate from teacher training compared to other major professional training programs. It is therefore important to attract skilled and motivated students and to retain them in the education and in teaching.
With the 2013 reform of teacher training, a significant change followed in the relationship between vocational colleges and schools regarding the responsibility for student teachers' teaching practice. Until then, the teacher education program was responsible for the quality and quantity of the student teacher's practice, but after 2013 the school became an equal educational partner for the implementation of the student teacher's three practice modules. Since the reform, the schools have been obliged to draw up a plan, which the university of applied sciences must approve, for the content and structure of the student teacher's progress and results within the three modules, based on the modules' competence targets. The university of applied sciences' teachers supplement the guidance from the school's staff and participate in the investigation of student teachers' reflections on their practice module. However, available resources to ensure systematic contact between teacher educators from the vocational colleges and the schools' practice supervisors are not extensive.
This article focuses on study intensity. The use of time in higher education has in several countries become an increasingly important area in the debate about good education. The basis for the goal of increased study intensity is the desire for better teacher training (Goldhaber, 2019; Goldhaber, Liddle & Theobald, 2013). The quality of the teacher's work with teaching and guidance has a significant impact on student learning (Gansle, Noell & Burns, 2012; Chetty, Friedman & Rockoff, 2014). Spending time in study work is a prerequisite for dedicated learning in campus-based teaching. For this reason, we argue that study intensity is an important prerequisite for campus-based teaching to work well.
The purpose of this article is to investigate what kind of factors are statistically associated with study intensity in the campus-based part of teacher education. In this article, study intensity means the student teacher's time spent on teacher training and indicates the sum of the student's activities devoted to their studies: lectures/ group teaching/ guest lecture, dialogue-based teaching, study groups and individual study work. There is an obligation to attend the internship, but not in the campus teaching. The study intensity can therefore vary from student to student. We limit ourselves to some factors that are partly about the student teachers' motivation and self-discipline, but also about how the student teachers perceive the demands and the pressure that the study gives. The latter is connected with the fact that the development group points to a changed learning culture so that all students experience being met with high expectations (through formal requirements, more teaching hours and feedback, etc.).We assume that a student teacher's study intensity depends on the student teacher's internal factors - motivation and self-discipline - as well as how the student teacher perceives the demands made.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study is part of a research project that studies the quality dimensions of teacher education in the Nordic countries. In order to investigate and test the four hypotheses, we have carried out a quantitative questionnaire survey. The questionnaire was sent to Danish student teachers at vocational colleges in 2017. The analyzes are based on responses from 1224 student teachers from four different campuses in Jutland. In the survey, student teachers responded on a seven-point Likert scale. The indicators (Table 1) had previously been validated in a similar study in Norway and Finland
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe coefficient for students' self-discipline is significant, and the value 0.31 indicates that the correlation between self-discipline and time-on-task is moderately strong. External academic pressure (han) is somewhat weaker (0.14) associated with study intensity, but still statistically significant. On the other hand, intrinsic motivation is only weakly (0.06) associated with study intensity. The coefficient for self-determined extrinsic motivation is also weak (0.03). Neither the coefficient for intrinsic motivation nor extrinsic motivation is significantly related to study intensity.
A main result of this study is that the students' self-discipline stands out by being clearly statistically linked to the students' study intensity (time spent in study work). External academic pressure is somewhat more weakly associated with study intensity than self-discipline, but it is there.
Since much of the teaching takes place in teacher-led teaching, the individual teacher in the campus teaching has opportunities to build relationships with the student teachers. This relationship can be useful for student teachers to make an effort to fulfill the teacher educator's expectations of high study intensity (Kim & Schallert, 2011). In other words, this relationship may have an impact on whether student teachers' self-discipline is triggered in critical moments when student teachers may be tempted to low effort. Therefore, we believe that strategies to strengthen relationships and create closeness between teacher and student can be useful strategies to increase study intensity.
Self-discipline can also be seen as a characteristic of the individual student teacher. On the other hand, there are several studies that show that self-discipline can be practiced and that it is influenced by how student teachers perceive the requirements of an education.
A limitation is that we do not have variables dealing with the quality of campus teaching itself. We acknowledge this limitation and suggest that this be part of future research.
ReferencesAshton, P. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5), 28-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248718403500507
Baumeister, R., & Tierney, J. (2011). Willpower: Rediscovering the greatest human strength. Penguin.
Blickle, G. (1996). Personality traits, learning strategies, and performance. European Journal of personality, 10(5), 337–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199612)10:5<337::AID-PER258>3.0.CO;2-7
Brophy, J. (1986). Teacher influences on student achievement. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1069-1077. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1069
Bruch, S. K., & Soss, J. (2018). Schooling as a formative political experience: Authority relations and the education of citizens. Perspectives on Politics, 16(1), 36-57. https://doi 10.21913/jps.v5i1.1483
Calderhead, J. (1991). The nature and growth of knowledge in student teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(5-6), 531-536. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(91)90047-S
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. The American Economic Review, 104(9), 2633-2679. https://doi: 10.1257/aer.104.9.2633
Diseth, Å., Mathisen, F. K. S., & Samdal, O. (2020). A comparison of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among lower and upper secondary school students. Educational Psychology, 40(8), 961-980. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1778640
Duckworth, A. (2016). Grit: The power of passion and perseverance. Scribner.
EVA (2017). Effekten af optagelsessamtaler på læreruddannelsen. Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut.
Gansle, K. A., Noell, G. H., & Burns, J. M. (2012). Do student achievement outcomes differ across teacher preparation programs? An analysis of teacher education in Louisiana. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(5), 304-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112439894
Gettinger, M. (1986). Issues and trends in academic engaged time of students. Special Services in the Schools, 2(4), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v02n04_01
Goldhaber, D. (2019). Evidence-based teacher preparation: Policy context and what we know. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(2), 90-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118800712
Goldhaber, D., Liddle, S., & Theobald, R. (2013). The gateway to the profession: Assessing teacher preparation programs based on student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 34, 29-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.01.011
Grossman, P. L. (1989). Learning to teach without teacher education. Teachers College Record, 91(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146818909100201
Hampson, S. E. (2012). Personality processes: Mechanisms by which personality traits “get outside the skin”. Annual review of psychology, 63, 315-339. https://doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100419
Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2020). Education, knowledge capital, and economic growth. The economics of education, 171-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815391-8.00014-8
Kim, M., & Schallert, D. L. (2011). Building caring relationships between a teacher and students in a teacher preparation program word-by-word, moment-by-moment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(7), 1059-1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.05.002
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guildford Press.
10. Teacher Education Research
Poster
Teacher Education Curricula Towards Balancing Theory and Practice: A Comparative Study of American and French-Patterned Universities in Lebanon
Talar Agopian
Charles University, Czech Republic
Presenting Author: Agopian, Talar
Lebanon is a socially and religiously diverse country, hence, Lebanese higher education is also diversified (Abouchedid & BouZeid, 2017). Universities are classified based on the higher education model they follow, such as the American and French models (El-Amine, 1997; BouJaoude, 2000; Ghaith, 2012). The differences in academic models can be ascribed to the philosophy of education that each model follows (Nauffal, 2009), and the curricula of each model are developed complementarily to the system they follow (Freiha, 1997).
The American-patterned universities offer undergraduate programs like those offered in the USA. They have a credit-point course system, focus on general education and elective courses (Freiha, 1997; “Education in Lebanon,” 2017), conduct assessment frequently, and have English as the language of instruction (Nauffal, 2009). The French-patterned universities use coefficients instead of credits, offer three- or four-year degrees, and provide early specialization (BouJaoude, 2000). While literature informs us of differences in higher education in general between the two models, this study will use the review of literature as a theoretical assumption to do a comparison in Teacher Education (TE) curricula between the two models. TE is offered by 15 universities in Lebanon (El-Mouhayar & BouJaoude, 2012). Teachers are required to receive three years of undergraduate education at the education department of any university to receive a Bachelor of Arts degree in Education (“Education in Lebanon,” 2017).
The theory of Lee Shulman will be used as a framework. According to Shulman (1986), prospective teachers acquire different knowledge bases during their initial preparation. Content Knowledge (CK) is highly specialized knowledge and is acquired in formal learning environments (Shulman, 1987). Previously, it was thought that specific content was what a teacher needed to know to teach (Kind, 2009, as cited in Fernandez, 2014). However, practical knowledge should supplement theoretical knowledge, hence, Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) is also essential. PK is psychological knowledge, it is not subject-specific, and it includes skills that help teachers create effective learning environments (Voss et al., 2011, as cited in Kunter et al., 2013). Additionally, Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) has been conceptualized as the knowledge required by teachers to be able to transfer content to students (Kleickmann et al., 2012). PCK differentiates a pedagogue from an expert in content and is thus important for prospective teachers to acquire (Shulman, 1987). Technology Knowledge (TK) encompasses knowledge about various technologies such as computers, the Internet, and software applications (Koehler & Mishra, 2008, as cited in Öz, 2015). According to Jamieson-Proctor et al. (2010), TE programs should provide prospective teachers with TK to enable them to integrate technology into teaching. In 2006, Mishra & Koehler built on Shulman’s theory of PCK and introduced the concept of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) to describe the integration of technology into teaching (Schmidt et al., 2009).
This study aims to explore the perceived effectiveness of TE curricula in American and French-patterned universities in Lebanon as described by graduate teachers from both systems. Other aims are to describe the content of TE curricula, to examine the knowledge bases acquired, to identify similarities and differences in programs and challenges, and to propose reforms to improve quality of curricula.
The research questions are:
1. What is the attitude of schoolteachers who have graduated from American and French-patterned universities in Lebanon about the balance between theoretical and practical courses in their TE curricula?
2. How do schoolteachers from both systems evaluate the duration and quality of their practicum experience?
3. Which knowledge bases from Shulman’s theory are acquired by prospective teachers in both systems?
4. What reforms to TE curricula do schoolteachers from both systems suggest?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study will adopt the qualitative approach since it aims to identify the perception of schoolteachers about TE curricula. Qualitative research attempts to understand the meaning individuals construct about their experiences (Merriam & Grenier, 2019) and results in data about the experiences and perspectives of participants (Wray & Barrett, 2022). Through interview questions and the resulting discussions, researchers can gain an understanding of the experiences of participants (Husband, 2020). This study will follow the interpretive design, in which the research questions relate to a particular setting and time (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2013), and the methods of data collection are interviews, observations, and documents (Merriam & Grenier, 2019).
Researchers should select participants who are likely to have had the experiences that the questions are asking about (Magnusson & Marecek, 2015). Therefore, I will conduct semi-structured interviews with schoolteachers who have graduated from American and French-patterned universities in Lebanon. These will be teachers who have obtained their teaching degrees within the past three years. I will interview ten graduates from each model from six universities selected for this study, making the total number of my participants twenty.
To reach out to participants, I will post advertisements in social media groups of Lebanese teachers. Once I get participants, I will use chain referral, which involves researchers asking participants to suggest names of others who could be potential participants (Creswell & Guetterman, 2021). I will also use targeted nominations, which entails researchers asking people who are not part of the study to nominate suitable participants (Magnusson & Marecek, 2015). I will ask university instructors to suggest names of TE graduates.
The process of reaching concepts, themes, and categories from the gathered data is inductive (Merriam & Grenier, 2019). My data will be analyzed using the inductive content analysis method in two stages: in the first stage, the content of the recorded interviews will be analyzed using the transcriptions, and data pertinent to my research questions will be selected. In the second stage, analysis will be performed following the thematic analysis coding technique, and the recurring themes that are generated will form the main categories that will be presented in the results and elaborated on in the discussion to answer the research questions.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsTo identify expected results, it is essential to conduct a review of literature. The curricula in Lebanese universities, both American and French models, stress mainly on theoretical courses, with little emphasis given to practical courses (Freiha, 1997; Farah-Sarkis, 1997, as cited in BouJaoude, 2000; Ghaith, 2012). Moreover, in TE programs, practical field work comprises less than 25% of the whole program (Farah-Sarkis, 1997, as cited in El-Mouhayar & BouJaoude, 2012). In private universities that follow the American system, students do practice teaching for six months, whereas in universities that follow the French system, students do practice teaching for a minimum of one year (Naccache, 2021). According to El-Mouhayar & BouJaoude (2012), TE programs in Lebanon do not provide prospective teachers with the knowledge and skills necessary to cater for the needs of all kinds of students in their classrooms. However, according to Ghaith (2012), in Lebanon, TE programs highlight students’ acquisition of knowledge and skills of teaching, as well as content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge.
In this study, by conducting interviews with participants who have graduated from universities in Lebanon and are teaching, I will examine the attitudes and perspectives of the teachers regarding the practical courses in their TE programs. This way, I will obtain evidence concurring with or contradicting previous research on Lebanese university TE programs. The expected results would be that teachers find the practicum experience and the practical courses insufficient, and they would prefer if they had acquired more practical knowledge and skills during their years of study.
ReferencesAbouchedid, K., & BouZeid, M. (2017). Lebanon: Legacy of the past and present challenges. Education in the Arab World, 59-85.
BouJaoude, S. (2000). Science Teacher Preparation in Lebanon. In Science teacher education (pp. 45-74). Springer, Dordrecht.
Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2021). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson.
Education in Lebanon. (2017, May 2). WENR. From https://wenr.wes.org/2017/05/education-in-lebanon
El-Amine, A. (1997). Higher education in Lebanon. Lebanese Association for Educational Studies Publications, Beirut.
El-Mouhayar, R., & BouJaoude, S. (2012). Structural and conceptual foundations of teacher education programs in selected universities in Lebanon. Recherches Pédagogique: Revue éditée par la Faculté de Pédagogie de l’Université Libanaise, Beyrouth, 22, 37-60.
Freiha, N. (1997). Curricula in higher education institutions. In A. El-Amine (Ed.). Higher Education in Lebanon. Beirut: Lebanese Association for Educational Sciences.
Ghaith, G. (2012). A concept note on enhancing teacher training and cooperation among faculties and departments of education in public and private universities in Lebanon. Recherches Pédagogique: Revue éditée par la Faculté de Pédagogie de l’Université Libanaise, Beyrouth, 22, 7-25.
Husband, G. (2020). Ethical data collection and recognizing the impact of semi-structured interviews on research respondents. Education Sciences, 10(8), 206.
Magnusson, E., & Marecek, J. (2015). Making decisions about participants. In Doing Interview-based Qualitative Research: A Learner's Guide (pp. 34-45). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107449893.004
Merriam, S. B., & Grenier, R. S. (Eds.). (2019). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
Nauffal, D. I. (2009). Do educational outcomes in Lebanese universities differ based on the academic model? Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues.
Öz, H. (2015). Assessing pre-service English as a foreign language teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge. International Education Studies, 8(5), 119-130. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1060887
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. https://web-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.is.cuni.cz/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=27b18fe1-e740-4cbd-87cc-93679342938d%40redis
Schwartz-Shea, P., & Yanow, D. (2013). Interpretive research design: Concepts and processes. Routledge.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23. https://meridian.allenpress.com/her/article-abstract/57/1/1/31319/Knowledge-and-Teaching-Foundations-of-the-New
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4-14. https://www-jstor-org.ezproxy.is.cuni.cz/stable/1175860?sid=primo&seq=1
Wray, J., & Barrett, D. (2022). In the room where it happens: in-person or remote data collection in qualitative research? Evidence-Based Nursing, 25(2), 44-45.
|
