Time: Tuesday, 27/Aug/2024: 15:15 - 16:45 Session Chair: Stefanie A. Hillen |
Location: Room 016 in ΧΩΔ 02 (Common Teaching Facilities [CTF02]) [Ground Floor] Cap: 56 |
Paper
A Teacher-educator Perspective on the Implementation of a Virtual Reality Module in Pre-service Teacher Education
1Saxion UAS, the Netherlands; 2University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Presenting Author:This conference presentation aims to contribute to the further development of the implementation and research of Virtual Reality (VR) practices in higher education. The study's impetus is the knowledge gap of the teacher-educator perspective in Virtual Reality practices. Recent review studies regarding VR practices in teacher education indicate that researchers have focused on identifying factors and prerequisites to successfully implement VR in higher education, such as the right technological equipment and sufficient ICT support (Amhag et al., 2019; Kavanagh et al., 2017; McGarr, 2020; Ungar & Baruch, 2016). In addition, the review studies reported measurements of student experiences with VR applications and their effects on students’ skills and knowledge. Interestingly, none of the studies included in the review studies addressed or covered the perspective of the teacher-educator. A possible explanation for the lack of the teacher-educator perspective could be that the VR applications were delivered by the initiators and designers of the VR application (Pomerantz, 2019), instead of an ecologically valid setting of a teacher-educator implementing the VR application.
To strengthen the implementation of VR practices in higher education, we argue that the perspectives and experiences of teacher-educators should be included in the evaluation of VR curriculum implementations. This is a perspective that is missing in contemporary literature.
To address this knowledge gap and include the teacher-educator perspective, the current study follows the implementation of the VR-kindergarten curriculum “Keeping Order in a Virtual Reality Kindergarten Classroom” (Mouw & Fokkens-Bruinsma, 2022) at three Dutch universities of applied sciences. The VR-kindergarten curriculum is designed by two educational scientists who teach at teacher-training programs to support pre-service teachers in developing kindergarten-specific classroom management strategies by offering a realistic environment in which students actively participate and experiment with a variety of specific classroom management strategies during a circle time activity (Mouw & Fokkens-Bruinsma, 2022). The VR application is built upon the work of Lugrin et al. (2016). In the Netherlands, kindergarten is part of compulsory education (pupils aged: 4-6 years). Therefore, all pre-service teachers are required to be able to teach in kindergarten.
The VR-kindergarten curriculum was previously implemented at a university. In the current study, it is implemented in three universities of applied sciences. The aim of our study is twofold: 1) We focus on describing what the perspectives of teacher-educators are regarding the implementation of a VR-kindergarten curriculum into the pre-existing teacher-education curriculum and 2) identifying which knowledge and skills are required by teacher-educators to (successfully) implement the VR-kindergarten curriculum. We did this by collecting data via questionnaires and individual, semi-structured interviews.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
Participants in this study were teacher-educators (n= 5) and tech-supporting staff (n= 4) from the three universities of applied sciences involved in the implementation of the VR-kindergarten curriculum “Keeping Order in a Virtual Reality Kindergarten Classroom” (Mouw & Fokkens-Bruinsma, 2022). Before the semi-structured interviews, all participants completed an online questionnaire containing background questions about their roles within the implementation of the VR-kindergarten curriculum. The questionnaire items tap into teachers’ Technological-Pedagogical-and-Content-Knowledge (TPACK; Mishra & Koehler, 2005). For purposes of the current study, wordings such as “mathematics” and “social sciences” were replaced by “Virtual Reality Module” from TPACK-items by Schmidt et al. (2009) and Sahin (2011) were adopted to adequately measure TPACK for VR applications and not digital technology in general. The adopted TPACK survey for Virtual Reality contains four technological knowledge domains, respectively labelled as technological knowledge of Virtual Reality (VR-TK) consisting of six items, technological pedagogical knowledge of Virtual Reality (VR-TPK) consisting of four items, and pedagogical content knowledge of Virtual Reality (VR-PCK) consisting of three items. The interview protocol delineated questions addressing two main themes, namely the expectations and implementation of the VR-kindergarten curriculum into the pre-service teacher-education curriculum and the (self-identified) teacher-educators' skills and knowledge to successfully implement VR applications. Within these themes, questions were asked related to expectations towards the VR-kindergarten curriculum and teacher-educator professionalization training, teacher-educators experiences with VR applications in general, the implementation of the VR-kindergarten curriculum, future intentions to continue the VR-kindergarten curriculum and reflections on improving the VR-kindergarten curriculum.
The interviews were held from June to October 2023 and were conducted by the first and second authors. For the analyses of the interviews, a multi-grounded theory approach was applied, this approach allows the development of a codebook that is based on data-driven (open-coding) and theory-driven (in this study TPACK domains) codes (Goldkuhl & Cronholm, 2010). To determine the codebooks intercoder agreement, calculated with Cohen’s Kappa (k), five of the nine interviews were coded by both the first and second authors. The agreement was k .826, which is an acceptable value (Lombard et al., 2002).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
In line with the first aim, the results point towards the value of including teacher-educator perspectives when evaluating the implementation of a VR curriculum. Interviewees indicated that as users and implementors of the VR curriculum, have suggestions on how the VR-kindergarten curriculum can be further developed to meet not only their needs as teacher-educators into account but also the curriculum development and implementation at university of applied sciences. The participants also mentioned that they were unaware of the strictness regarding the VR-kindergarten curriculum implementation fidelity. Both the reflections for improving the VR-kindergarten curriculum, as implementation difficulties, were related to the setting of the curriculum and other prerequisites at the universities of applied sciences. Interviewees discussed difficulties in implementing the VR-kindergarten curriculum into the current curriculum. These difficulties were related to the teacher's workload and preparation, working with the technology, the number of students present in the lessons, and the number of lessons in a day.
Regarding the second aim, identifying the required skills and knowledge to successfully implement a VR application in their curriculum, the interviewees were clear. Primarily, technological knowledge was deemed most necessary for successful implementation and for dealing with technological difficulties that arise with the implementation of VR applications. Knowledge about kindergarten education and pedagogical knowledge were also deemed prerequisites. Additionally, interviewees underlined the necessity of a positive attitude towards VR applications. Overall, specific skills and knowledge domains that were mentioned are related to the TPACK framework from Koehler and Mishra (2005).
The study’s findings, together with best practices from the literature, will provide insights for the implementation of VR applications and curricula in pre-service teacher education. These insights are not only valuable for the further implementation of the VR-kindergarten curriculum at other pre-service teacher education but also VR applications in higher education in general.
References
Amhag, L., Hellström, L., & Stigmar, S. (2019). Teacher educators' use of digital tools and needs for digital competence in higher education. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(4), 203-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1646169
Goldkuhl, G., & Cronholm, S. (2010). Adding theoretical grounding to grounded theory: Toward Multi-Grounded Theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(2), 187-205.
Kavanagh, S., Luxton-Reilly, A., Wuensche, B., & Plimmer, B. (2017). A systematic review of virtual reality in education. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 10(2), 85-119.
Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 587-604.
Lugrin, J. L., Latoschik, M. E., Habel, M., Roth, D., Seufert, C., & Grafe, S. (2016). Breaking Bad Behaviors: a new tool for learning classroom management using virtual reality. Frontiers in ICT, 3, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fict.2016.00026
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
McGarr, O. (2020). The use of virtual simulations in teacher education to develop pre-service teachers’ behaviour and classroom management skills: implications for reflective practice. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(2), 159-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1733398
Mouw, J. M., & Fokkens-Bruinsma, M. (2022). When technology meets educational sciences: Combining virtual reality and microteaching to train pre-service teachers’ kindergarten classroom management strategies. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (pp. 1043-1050). Universitat Politècnica de València. http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/HEAd22.2022.14618
Pomerantz, J. (2019). XR for teaching and learning: Year 2 of the EDUCAUSE/HP Campus of the Future Project. EDUCAUSE.
Sahin, I. (2011). Development of survey of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 97-105.
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://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
Ungar, O. A., & Baruch, A. F. (2016). Perceptions of teacher educators regarding ICT implementation. Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Skills and Life Long Learning, 12, 279-296.
Paper
Enhancing Pre-Service Teachers’ Understanding of Diffusion through a Modeling-Based Learning Approach
1University of Cyprus, Cyprus; 2Teachers College, Columbia University, New York
Presenting Author:The objective of this study is to investigate the conceptual development of pre-service teachers regarding diffusion in both liquids and gases through a Modeling-Based Learning (MBL) approach. The focus was on examining whether teachers' involvement in modeling activities related to ink diffusion would facilitate the development of their ideas about how evaporated lavender oil diffuses in a classroom environment (gas diffusion). The research questions that the study aimed to address were: (1) What are pre-service teachers' ideas about diffusion in gas and liquid environments, and do these ideas differ based on the expressed state of matter? (2) How does their mechanistic reasoning about diffusion evolve as they transition between gas-liquid-gas phenomena?
Modeling, the process of constructing a conceptual representation of a phenomenon under study, is fundamental to scientific endeavors and plays a central role in science teaching and learning (Günther et al., 2019). To build an internal mental model of a scientific phenomenon, learners must create external representations or artifacts of the phenomenon. Understanding the underlying mechanism of a phenomenon is linked to mechanistic reasoning, defined as "reasoning systematically through the underlying factors and relationships that give rise to a phenomenon" (Krist et al., 2019, p. 161). This is particularly crucial for phenomena involving processes at the microscopic level, as mechanistic reasoning goes beyond observable patterns, revealing the regularities behind empirical observations. Consequently, engaging learners in modeling diffusion is proposed as a productive way to facilitate the development of their understanding of the underlying mechanism governing the process.
Nineteen participants were engaged in a specially crafted MBL unit where they constructed various models to explain diffusion in gases and liquids. Data sources encompassed pre- and post-test paper-and-pencil models for gas diffusion, as well as initial and revised models for liquid diffusion, along with subsequent computer-based models. Data analysis employed open coding methods and a mechanistic reasoning coding scheme derived from existing literature.
Three crucial findings emerged: Firstly, pre-service teachers expressed non-canonical ideas about fluid diffusion, with only a minority of these ideas not being specific to the state of matter. Secondly, there was an advancement in teachers' mechanistic reasoning from their initial to final models. Lastly, the computer-based modeling environment acted as a facilitator for their mechanistic reasoning, aiding in their explanations of how diffusion occurs in liquids. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to MBL's potential to support pre-service teachers in understanding microscopic phenomena.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
The participants comprised nineteen pre-service teachers (3 males and 16 females), who were enrolled in a specialized science education course focusing on the integration of new technologies in science teaching and learning. The Modeling-Based Learning (MBL) unit within the course was divided into three phases, spanning eight 90-minute sessions each. In Phase 1, emphasis was placed on designing a drawing, including illustrations and an explanation of how the scent of evaporated lavender oil, released in the classroom, reached every student's nose. Phase 2 involved creating models, initially on paper and later in an online computer-based environment called MoDa, to demonstrate the diffusion of ink in cold and hot water. MoDa integrates building computational models using domain-specific code blocks and comparing models with real-world data (Fuhrmann et al., 2018). The initial ink model was developed after teachers observed the related phenomenon through an experiment conducted in pairs. The revised ink model was then created after each pair presented their model and received feedback from the instructor and other participants regarding the explanatory power of the presented model. Phase 3 replicated the activities of Phase 1.
Data were collected from various sources, including the initial and final lavender diffusion paper-and-pencil models (pre- and post-test) created by the teachers. Additionally, the study involved the examination of the initial and revised ink diffusion paper-and-pencil models, as well as subsequent computer-based models. The analysis of these models was conducted using open coding techniques, and a mechanistic reasoning coding scheme was applied that derived from the works of Krist et al. (2019) and Russ et al. (2007). The mechanistic reasoning coding scheme consisted of four distinct levels: Level 0 (Providing a phenomenological description of the phenomenon), Level 1 (Identifying entities beyond what is directly observed), Level 2a (Identifying entities and their properties), Level 2b (Identifying entities and their interactions), Level 3 (Identifying entities, properties, and interactions among them), and Level 4 (Integrating all features into an explanatory scheme).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
The examination of teachers' models regarding diffusion in both gas and liquid contexts revealed a diverse array of advanced non-canonical ideas that shaped their initial, ongoing, and final conceptualizations of the diffusion process. Some of these ideas were specific to either liquids or gases, while a few were expressed in both states of matter.
Teachers' mechanistic reasoning demonstrated a progression to more sophisticated levels from the pre-test to the post-test. The prevalent levels of teachers' initial mechanistic reasoning, focusing on phenomenological descriptions of diffusion and the identification of entities and/or properties, were notably absent in their post-test performance, where approximately one-fourth of them successfully linked all features in an explanatory manner. Notably, the computer-based environment (MoDa) played a significant role in facilitating the development of teachers' mechanistic reasoning, particularly at the highest levels.
The outcomes of this study offer insights into how an MBL approach can aid learners in enhancing their mechanistic reasoning, a crucial aspect in explaining the functioning of microscopic-level phenomena. Notably, the teachers' involvement in modeling ink diffusion using the computer-based medium had a substantial impact on the evolution of their ideas regarding the diffusion of evaporated lavender oil. This is evident as their pre-test ideas predominantly focused on the phenomenological description of the diffusion phenomenon.
Furthermore, the similarity between teachers' diffusion models and those expressed by younger students, as found in the literature (see Fuhrmann et al., 2022), suggests that curriculum developers should carefully consider both the instructional approach for teaching diffusion and the sequence of phenomena (e.g., transitioning from macro- to micro-level) to effectively scaffold learners' conceptual understanding. This consideration is crucial for ensuring a more productive learning experience for learners in the study of diffusion.
References
Fuhrmann, T., Wagh, A., Eloy, A., Wolf, J., Bumbacher, E., Wilkerson, M., & Blikstein, P. (2022). Infect, Attach or Bounce off?: Linking Real Data and Computational Models to Make Sense of the Mechanisms of Diffusion. Proceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS, 1445–1448.
Fuhrmann, T., Schneider, B., & Blikstein, P. (2018). Should students design or interact with models? Using the Bifocal Modelling Framework to investigate model construction in high school science. International Journal of Science Education, 40(8), 867–893. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1453175
Günther, S. L., Fleige, J., zu Belzen, A. U., & Krüger, D. (2019). Using the Case Method to Foster Preservice Biology Teachers’ Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge Related to Models and Modeling. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 30(4), 321–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1560208
Krist, C., Schwarz, C. V., & Reiser, B. J. (2019). Identifying Essential Epistemic Heuristics for Guiding Mechanistic Reasoning in Science Learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(2), 160–205.
Russ, R. S., Scherr, R. E., Hammer, D., & Mikeska, J. (2008). Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science. Science Education, 92(3), 499–525. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20264
Paper
Analyzing the Effectiveness of a Teacher Education Intervention for DigCompEdu Competencies in Germany
Universität Trier, Germany
Presenting Author:The digital age has been upon us since 1989 (Stengel, 2017). Still, adapting to it is a continuous challenge across European countries (European Commission, 2024). In Germany, about one-third of 8th graders in Germany only show rudimentary ICT competence levels (Eickelmann et al., 2019). German pre-service teachers hold less favorable attitudes than students from other programs (Behrens et al., 2017) and most pre-service teachers do not meet the basic requirements of ICT competence levels defined by experts (Senkbeil et al., 2020). Even though respective German experts largely share a consensus about the importance of empowering teachers professionally with digital competencies (vbw, 2017; SWK, 2022), 20% of higher education curricula do not consider digital competencies (Monitor Lehrerbildung, 2022a). Therefore, action is needed to improve digital attitudes and competencies in pre-service teachers.
As a transitory means to implement relevant and innovative objectives and content areas in higher education curricula for pre-service teachers in Germany, extra-credit courses are offered as additionally certified qualification opportunities (Monitor Lehrerbildung, 2022b). One of those opportunities is subject to this contribution. It was developed as an intervention in the context of a joint research project, which was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) in Germany and addresses competencies based on the European DigCompEdu framework (Redecker & Punie, 2017). It consists of a basic and three compulsory elective modules (Vocational Orientation, Democracy Education, Education for Sustainable Development). The basic module consists of ten according elements, e.g., basic technological knowledge (TK), technological-content-knowledge (TCK), technological-pedagogical-knowledge (TPK), legal implications etc.
Several studies have been made about the effects of different interventions based on the DigCompEdu (see Haşlaman et al., 2023). However, there are only few that address a longitudinal perspective and none that consider test-based rather than self-reported indicators for competencies. The complementation of self-reported by test-based indicators to measure competence is important, e.g, because self-reported and test-based competencies only share a weak link (Drummond & Sweeney, 2017; Lachner et al., 2019) and especially low-performing students tend to overestimate themselves (Max et al., 2022). In summary, the main research question is: How does the intervention impact pre-service teacher’s digital attitudes, self-reported and test-based competencies? The main objective is to discuss the results and share insights that might inspire similar projects to optimize their process and results.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
To examine the research questions and to contribute to the main objective, data from a pre-post design is used in which pre-service teachers voluntarily enrolled in an extra-credit course about teaching in the digital age with the incentive of an according certification. All pre-service teachers at the local university have been invited to enroll in the intervention via several channels. The total work scope is approximately 210 hours, which are spent over a flexible time span of up to two years.
242 pre-service teachers registered for the intervention. As of now, 22 have completed it which makes the sample for preliminary results. They are 23.45 ± 3.23 years old and 86.4% female. 14 are from the B. Ed. and 8 from the M. Ed. program. They responded to twenty different validated measures for digital (1) attitudes, e.g., Hawlitschek & Fredrich (2018), (2) self-reported, e.g., Rubach & Lazarides (2019) and (3) test-based competencies, e.g., Lachner et al. (2019) in a pre-post design. Due to the small sample size, nonparametric testing (Wilcoxon-signed-rank test) was applied in the preliminary analysis. However, for parametric testing, a considerably larger sample size is anticipated until the final submission.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
The preliminary results across all measures taken show that only self-reports on TCK (r = .55; p = .009) and negative attitudes towards the use of digital media in teaching (r = -.45; p = .035) show significant differences. Hence, the results suggest so far that the intervention had a positive impact on their belief to be able to use digital technologies in their future teaching practices for their respective school subjects and their motivation to use digital media in their future teaching practices. However, the effects on attitudes and self-reports seem rather weak because most mean differences in other measures are insignificant. Also, the results on test-based competencies imply that the students did not progress in their actual knowledge about digital media and its use for teaching practices. These overall limited effects and practical implications will be further analyzed and discussed.
References
Drummond, A., & Sweeney, T. (2017). Can an objective measure of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) supplement existing TPACK measures? British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 928–939.
Eickelmann, B., Bos, W., & Labusch, A. (2019). Die Studie ICILs 2018 im Überblick. Zentrale Ergebnisse und mögliche Entwicklungsperspektiven. Waxmann.
European Commission. (2021). Digital Education Action Plan (2021-2027). https://education.ec.europa.eu/de/focus-topics/digital-education/action-plan
Haşlaman, T., Atman Uslu, N., & Mumcu, F. (2023). Development and in-depth investigation of pre-service teachers’ digital competencies based on DigCompEdu: a case study. Quality & Quantity, 1–26.
Hawlitschek, A., & Fredrich, H. (2018). Die Einstellungen der Studierenden als Herausforderung für das Lehren und Lernen mit digitalen Medien in der wissenschaftlichen Weiterbildung. Zeitschrift Hochschule und Weiterbildung, (1), 9-16.
Lachner, A., Backfisch, I., & Stürmer, K. (2019). A test-based approach of modeling and measuring technological pedagogical knowledge. Computers & Education, 142, 103645.
Max, A. L., Lukas, S., & Weitzel, H. (2022). The relationship between self-assessment and performance in learning TPACK: Are self-assessments a good way to support preservice teachers’ learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(4), 1160–1172.
Monitor Lehrerbildung. (2022a). Curriculare Verankerung von Inhalten zu Medienkompetenz in einer digitalen Welt. https://www.monitor-lehrerbildung.de/diagramme/curriculare-verankerung-von-inhalten-zu-medienkompetenz-in-einer-digitalen-welt/
Monitor Lehrerbildung. (2022b). Zertifikatsangebote an Hochschulen. https://www.monitor-lehrerbildung.de/diagramme/zertifikatsangebote-an-hochschulen/
Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. European Commission. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC107466 https://doi.org/10.2760/159770
Rubach, C., & Lazarides, R. (2019). Eine Skala zur Selbsteinschätzung digitaler Kompetenzen bei Lehramtsstudierenden. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 9(3), 345-374.
Schmid, U., Goertz, L., Radomski, S., Thom, S., & Behrens, J. (2017). Monitor Digitale Bildung: Die Hochschulen im digitalen Zeitalter. mmb Institut; Bertelsmann Stiftung. https://doi.org/10.11586/2017014
Senkbeil, M., Ihme, J. M., & Schöber, C. (2020). Empirische Arbeit: Schulische Medienkompetenzförderung in einer digitalen Welt: Über welche digitalen Kompetenzen verfügen angehende Lehrkräfte? Psychologie in Erziehung Und Unterricht, 68(1), 4–22.
Stengel, O., van Looy, A., & Wallaschkowski, S. (2017). Digitalzeitalter - Digitalgesellschaft: Das Ende des Industriezeitalters und der Beginn einer neuen Epoche. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16509-3
Ständige wissenschaftliche Kommission der Kultusministerkonferenz. (2022). Digitalisierung im Bildungssystem: Handlungsempfehlungen von der Kita bis zur Hochschule. Gutachten der Ständigen Wissenschaftlichen Kommission der Kultusministerkonferenz (SWK). https://doi.org/10.25656/01:25273
vbw - Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft e. V. (2017). Bildung 2030 – veränderte Welt. Fragen an die Bildungspolitik. Waxmann. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:14542