Fostering Professional Vision in Pre-Service Teacher Education · 2012-06-27 · Fostering...
Transcript of Fostering Professional Vision in Pre-Service Teacher Education · 2012-06-27 · Fostering...
Technische Universität München
Fostering Professional Vision in Pre-Service Teacher Education
Tina Seidel Friedl Schöller Endowed Professor of Education
TUM School of Education Technische Universität München, Germany
Keynote presentation at the Special Interest Group (SIG) ‘Teaching
and Teacher Education’ meeting in Bergen 14th June 2012
Technische Universität München
2
Technische Universität München
Overview
• Professional vision and teacher competencies
• Current methodological approaches
• Development of professional vision in PST education
• Student capacities and professional vision
• Learning environments in PST education and their effect on professional vision
Technische Universität München
Overview
• Professional vision and teacher competencies
• Current methodological approaches
• Development of professional vision in PST education
• Student capacities and professional vision
• Learning environments in PST education and their effect on professional vision
Technische Universität München
Processes and effects of teacher learning Kunter et al., 2011
Context Educational system, individual school
Nutzung von Lern-
gelegenheiten
Professionelle Kompetenz
- Professions-wissen
- Überzeugungen
- Motivationale Merkmale
- Selbst-regulative Fähigkeiten
Lern-gelegenheiten
Professionelles Verhalten
- Unterricht - Beratung - Kooperation - Allgemeines
Arbeits-verhalten
Teacher learning - Innovation and
development - Professional
careers - Psychological
well-being
Use of opportunities of
learn
Professional competencies
- Knowledge - Beliefs - Motivational
characteristics - Self-regulation
skills
Opportunities to learn
Individual pre-requisites cognitive abilities, motivation, personality
Professional acting
- Teaching - Counceling - Cooperation - Working
strategies
Student learning - Cognitive - Motivational-
affective
Professional vision as indicator for ability to apply competencies to
professional situations
Technische Universität München
Model of teacher competencies Baumert & Kunter, 2011
Beliefs Values Goals
Motivational orientation
Self-regulation
Professional knowledge
Aspects of professional competencies
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical-psychological
knowledge
Counceling knowledge
Pedagogical content
knowledge
Organizational knowledge
Competence areas
Knowledge about
student content thinking
Knowledge about tasks
Knowledge about
teaching and
learning processes
Knowledge about
effective classroom manage-
ment
Deep under-
standing of subject content
Explanatory knowledge
Knowledge about
assessment and
evaluation
Competence facets
Technische Universität München
Professional vision Describes how individuals observe and interpret events and situations specific to their profession (Goodwin, 1994)
Two processes (van Es & Sherin, 2012)
Noticing
Reasoning
...ability to direct attention to situations that are relevant for teaching and learning
...ability to use knowledge about teaching and learning in order to reason about noticed situations
Technische Universität München
Professional vision: noticing • paying attention to the complexity of classroom settings
• necessity to select relevant teaching and learning situations
• Basis: Teaching effectiveness research
• Teaching components shown as relevant for student learning (Seidel & Shavelson, 2007)
– Goal setting and orientation
– Execution of learning activities
– Evaluation of learning progress
– Teacher guidance and support
– Learning climate
Effects on student learning - Cognitive - Motivational-affective
Noticing: ability to direct
attention to situations that represent
instances of effective teaching and learning
Technische Universität München
• the ability of teachers to process and interpret classroom situations based on their professional knowledge (Borko, 2004; Sherin, 2007; van Es & Sherin, 2007)
• provides insights into the quality of teachers’ mental representations and transfer to the classroom context
• distinguishes three qualitatively different dimensions (Berliner, 1991; Borko & Livingston, 1989; Evertson & Green, 1986; Sherin & van Es, 2009)
Professional vision: reasoning
Describing Explaining Predicting
identify and differentiate between observed events without making any further
judgments
link observed events to conceptual knowledge
about teaching
predict consequences of observed events based on knowledge about effects of
teaching on student learning
Technische Universität München
Integrated knowledge
Professional vision: structure
Describing
Explaining Predicting
Reasoning Noticing Ø Structure of
professional vision based on qualitative descriptions
Ø Learning about
the structure required for modeling teacher learning processes
Diff
icul
ty le
vel
Technische Universität München
Professional vision in pre-service teacher (PST) education • Sensitive learning context:
– initial acquisition of professional knowledge – quality of knowledge acquisition decisive for continuing learning
• Fostering pre-service teacher‘s professional vision – helps to avoid inert knowledge (Blomberg et al., 2011)
– equips teachers with knowledge and skills to reflect teaching as an element of life-long learning (Santagata & Guarino, 2011)
– Provides settings for ‚approximations of practice“ (Grossman et al., 2009) and ‚lessons as experiments‘ (Santagata & Yeh, 2012)
Studying pre-service teacher learning of particular importance to improve teaching
Technische Universität München
Overview
• Professional vision and teacher competencies
• Current methodological approaches
• Development of professional vision in PST education
• Student capacities and professional vision
• Learning environments in PST education and their effect on professional vision
Technische Universität München
Methodological approaches Qualitative Quantitative • Prompts: video-based examples, lesson
plans, classroom situations • Analysis of teacher elaborations while
reflecting upon classroom examples • Teacher reflections in teacher
professional development groups • Analysis of changes in noticing and
knowledge-based reasoning over time
• Prompts: video-based examples, paper-pencil test items
• Item format - Multiple-choice - Ratings / judgments
• Analysis of solutions - Correct or incorrect answers - Comparison to expert norms
Research Contexts: ² Video club (Sherin, van Es)
² Lesson analysis framework (Santagata, Stigler, van Es)
² Problem-Solving Cycle (Borko, Seidel/Gröschner)
² Adaptive Teaching (Guldimann/Baer/Vogt/Rogalla)
Research Contexts: ² Pedagogical-content knowledge test (Ball,
Baumert/Kunter)
² Pedagogical-psychological knowledge - Paper-pencil test
(Kunter, Voss, Baumert)
- Video-based judgments (Oser, Seidel/Stürmer/Blomberg)
Technische Universität München
Example 1: Lesson Analysis Framework
teacher preparation is to equip teachers with knowledge
and skills to continue to learn and improve over time, weneed to consider seriously what that knowledge and skills
entail (Hiebert et al. 2007). Our premise is that we need to
go beyond the teaching of general reflective practices andprovide future teachers with opportunities to learn to reflect
on teaching in disciplined and structured ways.
Building on research by others on teacher noticing (vanEs and Sherin 2002), professional vision (Sherin 2007),
productive reflection on teaching (Davis 2006), and onresearch on lesson analysis conducted by the first author
(Santagata, Zannoni, & Stigler 2007; Santagata & Angelici
2010), we consider as fundamental skills for reflecting andlearning from teaching the ability: (a) to attend to impor-
tant elements of instruction, (b) to reason about these ele-
ments in integrated ways, and (c) to propose alternativeinstructional strategies. To assist teachers in developing
these skills, we have designed a framework that we use to
guide their analyses of teaching.
2.1 The Lesson Analysis Framework
The Lesson Analysis Framework (Santagata, Zannoni, &
Stigler 2007; Santagata & Angelici 2010) includes ele-
ments of reflection on teaching typical of Lesson Studygroups (Lewis and Tsuchida 1998). It also resembles and is
informed by the work conducted by Hiebert, Morris, and
Glass (2003) on lessons as experiments. The frameworkcenters the analysis of teaching on classroom lessons,
which represent natural units in the process of teaching
(Hiebert et al. 2007; Santagata et al. 2007). It consists of aseries of questions that guide teachers through a process of
lesson analysis.
The first question asks PSTs to analyze the lessonlearning goals: What are the main ideas that students are
supposed to understand through this lesson? PSTs then
move to the analysis of student learning by attending to thefollowing questions: Did the students make progress
toward the learning goals? What evidence do we have that
the students made progress? What evidence do we havethat students did not make progress? What evidence are we
missing? Analyzing the particulars of student learning and
understanding as evidenced in the lesson lead PSTs to thenext question, focused on the impact of teachers’ decisions
on student learning: Which instructional strategies sup-
ported students’ progress toward the learning goals andwhich did not? This sort of reasoning on teaching and
learning is typical of expert teachers (Berliner 2001; Borko
& Livingston 1989). It also integrates various elements ofteaching (i.e., learners and learning, subject matter
knowledge, assessment, and instruction) supporting what
Davis (2006) calls ‘‘productive reflection.’’ This processalso assists in teaching in ways that are responsive to
student learning as recommended by reform efforts
(National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 2000; Smith1996).
Finally, building on the analysis of the cause–effect
relationship between teaching and learning, PSTs areasked: what alternative strategies could the teacher use?
How do you expect these strategies to impact on students’
progress toward the lesson learning goals? If any evidenceof student learning was missing, how could the teacher
collect such evidence? The generation of alternatives is animportant element of the framework because it serves as a
link between reflection on practice and action on practice
(van Es & Sherin 2002). Although this phase of theframework can be challenging for novices with a limited
knowledge of teaching strategies, we believe it is important
for PSTs to develop the habit of considering alternatives. Astudy by Kersting, Givvin, Sotelo, & Stigler (2010) found
that more effective teachers were better at proposing
alternative strategies to those observed in video clips thanteachers who were not as effective in terms of student
learning.
Figure 1 summarizes the main elements of the LessonAnalysis Framework.
2.2 Previous research on the use of the Lesson AnalysisFramework
Previous research on the use of the Lesson AnalysisFramework as a tool for developing PSTs’ lesson analysis
skills has provided promising results. Three studies were
conducted with PSTs enrolled in a secondary teacherpreparation program at an Italian university. The first two
studies (Santagata, Zannoni, & Stigler 2007) included a
pre-/post-test design and utilized a similar intervention.The second study replicated findings from the first. PSTs
were introduced to the Lesson Analysis Framework and
practiced using it with three videotaped lessons. Theirability to analyze teaching was measured prior to and on
Fig. 1 Lesson Analysis Framework
134 R. Santagata, J. Guarino
123
Author's personal copy
2007). Figure 2 summarizes the orientations, knowledge,
and skills we hypothesize are necessary to analyze lessonseffectively.
3 Using video to develop analysis skills
Video constituted the main artifact of practice we used todevelop PSTs’ analysis skills. Several authors have inves-
tigated the benefits of using video as a tool for PSTlearning. For brevity, we summarize here their main find-
ings. Video has been found to promote elaborated reflec-
tion on teaching (Star & Strickland 2008; van Es & Sherin2002; Wang & Hartley 2003). Videotaped lessons and
interviews with students have been used effectively to
focus PSTs’ attention on student thinking (Franke, Car-penter, Levi, & Fennema 2001; Herrington et al. 1998;
Jacobs, Lamb, & Philipp 2010; Santagata et al. 2007;
Towers 1998; van Es & Sherin 2006). Finally, video caseshave been used successfully to assist PSTs in learning
classroom practices aligned with recent recommendations
that otherwise they seldom have opportunities to observeduring their fieldwork experiences (Barron & Goldman
1996; Carlson and Falk 1991; Merkley and Jacobi 1993;
van Es & Sherin 2006).
3.1 Types of video
We have built on the body of literature summarized above
to design video-based activities to be included in the
‘‘Learning to Learn from Mathematics Teaching’’ course.In this section, we will describe the different kinds of
videos we used, the purposes they served (i.e., the sub-
skills they were intended to support), and the types ofactivities in which they were incorporated.
3.1.1 Videos of interviews with individual children
At the beginning of the course, we used videos of inter-views with individual students. We used two published
resources: the video clips included in the book ‘‘Children’s
Mathematics: Cognitive Guided Instruction’’ by Carpenteret al. (1999) and the ‘‘Integrating Mathematics and Peda-
gogy’’ video clips by Philipp and Cabral (2005).
The main purpose of using these clips was to developPSTs’ appreciation of the complexity of students’ mathe-
matical thinking and ability, to attend to students, and to
draw inferences about their mathematical understanding.Although these orientation and abilities can be developed
also in the context of the analysis of a classroom lesson,
interviews with individual students allow novices to focuson student thinking without too many distractions typical
of more complex classroom environments. We thus used
these clips at the beginning of the course and then transi-tioned to the analysis of students’ thinking as portrayed in
videos of classroom lessons.
In addition, the IMAP clips were used to introduce keymathematical ideas related to fractions before PSTs were
asked to analyze the video of a fraction lesson. We thought
that using clips that show children’s misconceptions mightbe a good way to address similar conceptions in PSTs
(Philipp and Cabral 2005). We, as many others involved in
elementary teacher preparation, had to deal with PSTs’limited mathematical understanding (Ball 1990; Ma 1999).
The first clip illustrated the role of the unit in fraction
problems. We believed that for some PSTs, this would bethe first time they realized that the unit of reference when
working with fractions is crucial. The second IMAP clip
showed how understanding of the meaning of fractionsallowed a second grader to solve a fraction problem
involving adding unlike fractions she had never seen
Fig. 2 Orientations andanalysis, planning, andenactment abilities
136 R. Santagata, J. Guarino
123
Author's personal copy
PST learning context:
Santagata & Guarino, 2011
Qualitative analysis of PST professional vision with regard to
Technische Universität München
Example 2: Observer
Seidel, Stürmer & Blomberg, 2011
Descrip(on+
Explana(on+
Predic(on+
Goal+clarity+
Teacher+Support+
Learning+Climate+
No(cing+ Knowledge@based+Reasoning+
Video clips 2-4 minutes Content: goal clarity, teacher support, learning climate
Format: Rating items Referring to knowledge-based reasoning 4-point likert scale Expert judgment: 1= hit, 0 = miss Integration of video and rating items in online-tool Duration: ca. 90 min
Technische Universität München
Example 2: Observer
https://ww3.unipark.de/uc/observer_engl/demo/kv//
Technische Universität München
Technische Universität München
Technische Universität München
Example 2: Observer
Seidel, Stürmer & Blomberg, 2011
Descrip(on+
Explana(on+
Predic(on+
Goal+clarity+
Teacher+Support+
Learning+Climate+
No(cing+ Knowledge@based+Reasoning+
Video clips 2-4 minutes Content: goal clarity, teacher support, learning climate
Format: Rating items Referring to knowledge-based reasoning 4-point likert scale Expert judgment: 1= hit, 0 = miss Integration of video and rating items in online-tool Duration: ca. 90 min
Scaling: IRT-models 4 scores: PV total, description, explanation, prediction
Technische Universität München
• Comparison of models by IRT model testing
• Model with 3-dimension shows best fit indices
Observer: IRT Scaling Results
PV
Description
Explanation
Prediction
PV
Description Explanation/Prediction
PV
Description/Explanation/Prediction
Technische Universität München
Observer: item difficulty
Scaling-Study: N=151; Seidel, Stürmer & Blomberg, 2012
Increasing difficulty for more complex sub-components
Technische Universität München
Observer: stability of measurement
Ø High stability over time with differing intervals Ø No learning without further instruction or support Ø Observer as a measure to study PST development
Scaling-Study: N=151; Seidel, Stürmer & Blomberg, 2012
Technische Universität München
Summary
• Significant advances in the development of measures for teacher competencies
• Professional vision: research and methodology in PST education is developing
• Structure of professional vision: – Noticing as an important element to study selective attention
– Reasoning as an indicator for the quality of knowledge acquisition
Technische Universität München
Overview
• Professional vision and teacher competencies
• Current methodological approaches
• Development of professional vision in PST education
• Student capacities and professional vision
• Learning environments in PST education and their effect on professional vision
Technische Universität München
PST‘s professional vision abilities
Without instruction pre-service teachers are • not able to direct attention to
relevant teaching and learning elements of classroom instruction (Star & Strickland, 2008)
• tend to follow intuitive and naïve beliefs (Hammerness et al., 2002)
• tend to provide fast judgments and overgeneralizations (Schwindt, 2008)
Technische Universität München
Development of PST professional vision With instruction pre-service teachers • Learn to direct attention and to
notice relevant situations (Star & Strickland, 2008)
• Are better able to use precise descriptions of observed events (Santagata & Guarino, 2011)
• Learn to use knowledge about teaching and learning to explain and predict classroom situations (Stürmer, Könings and Seidel, 2012)
Technische Universität München
Development of PST professional vision Study: Stürmer, Seidel & Schäfer, 2012 Sample: N=109 PST, Teacher Education Program, University of Jena, Germany Gender: female 65.5% Age: M=21.4; SD=1.42 Number of study terms: M=4.95; SD=0.21 Number of attended courses: educational sciences M = 7.01; SD = 2.90
teaching and learning: M = 2.55; SD = 1.12
Technische Universität München
Development of PST professional vision Study: Stürmer, Seidel & Schäfer, 2012 Design:
(1) goal clarity
(2) teacher support
(3) learning climate
winter term 2009/10
video-based courses on effective teaching and learning components
practical experiences in schools
Protocols of observed lessons Observer Observer
1. week 16. week
Technische Universität München
Development of PST professional vision Study: Stürmer, Seidel & Schäfer, 2012 Results: differential effects for low and high entry level of PST
** * ** **
Technische Universität München
Development of PST professional vision Study: Stürmer, Seidel & Schäfer, 2012 Results: qualitative analysis of observation protocols
“[The teacher] welcomes students, [he] instructs students about using the burner, [and] asks students which failed the burner test to come in front of class (teacher activities); [the students] alert listening, students which failed the burner test come in front of class (student activities); [I think] the burner test wasn’t estimated, students which failed the burner test were already informed by the teacher (thoughts).”
“[The teacher] welcomes students, [he] repeats the content of the last
lesson and asks the students for their records; [the teacher] hands out worksheets with a gap-text [In
my opinion] that should serve for repeating and consolidating the
content of the last lesson (teacher activities); [the students]
listen, take the worksheet and start to fill out the text (student
activities);[I think] the aim of the activity is to secure the results of
the last lesson (thoughts).”
Technische Universität München
Overview
• Professional vision and teacher competencies
• Current methodological approaches
• Development of professional vision in PST education
• Student capacities and professional vision
• Learning environments in PST education and their effect on professional vision
Technische Universität München
• Studies indicate individual differences as well as differential developments
• Professional vision as knowledge-guided process influenced by (Stürmer, Könings & Seidel, 2011)
– Pre-knowledge in teaching and learning – Interest in teaching and learning – Self-concept of ability
• Socialization in teacher education programs – e.g. social sciences versus math/science (Blomberg, Stürmer & Seidel, 2011)
Student capacities and professional vision
Technische Universität München
Student capacities and professional vision Study: Stürmer, Könings, & Seidel 2012
Sample: - N=55 PST, Teacher Education Program, University of Jena - Gender: female 63.6%; Age: M=20.7; SD=2.10 - Number of study terms: M=2.31; SD=2.23 - Sample comparative to 443 PST enrolled in introductory lecture
Design: Data collection in lecture ‚principles of teaching and learning‘
Instruments: Independent variables: - Pre-Knowledge: Number of courses on teaching and learning - Interest: interest in educational studies, interest in teaching and learning - Self-concept of ability: teaching-related self-concept (career choice)
Dependent variables - Observer: PV total, description, explanation, prediction
Technische Universität München
Student capacities and professional vision Dependent variable Independent variable F R2 ∆ R2 B SE B ß
Professional vision (total)
Number of courses in teaching and learning
8.01** .26 -.04 .12 .04 .36**
Interest in teaching and learning
.54 .25 .29*
Description Teaching-related self-concept (career choice)
6.40* .12 -.05 .62 .24 .35*
Explanation Number of courses in teaching and learning
11.34** .34 -.03 .11 .04 .33*
Interest in teaching and learning
.79 .25 .40**
Prediction Number of courses in teaching and learning
12.05** .21 -.04 .19 .05 .46**
Technische Universität München
Conclusions (1) Professional vision is systematically related to
students’ entry capacities (2) Professional vision is a process which seems to be
guided through specific knowledge of teaching and learning, combined with topic-specific interest
(3) Student capacities and their influence on individual PST developments should be studied in more detail and specifically fostered in PST education
Student capacities and professional vision
Technische Universität München
Overview
• Professional vision and teacher competencies
• Current methodological approaches
• Development of professional vision in PST education
• Student capacities and professional vision
• Learning environments in PST education and their effect on professional vision
Technische Universität München
Design of learning environments for PST Core Instructional Components (Seidel & Shavelson, 2007)
(1) Constructive active learning, higher-order learning processes
(2) Content-specific targets teacher professional knowledge facets
(3) Social learning in a community of students
(4) Goal directed related to specific learning goals
(5) Evaluative self-evaluation, formative and summative assessment
(6) Regulative fosters self-regulation of learners
Technische Universität München
Design of learning environments for PST Example: Effects of educational courses on PST professional vision (Stürmer, Könings, & Seidel, 2012)
Sample: 3 compulsory ‚teaching and learning‘ courses
(1) Video teaching and learning course: N = 16 (2) Nature of learning processes: N = 16 (3) Hot topics of instruction: N = 21
Courses comparable with regard to Core Instructional Components however variation in content-specificity No significant differences in student characteristics: female: 66 %; age: M=22.89, SD = 3.71; academic half year: M = 7.54, SD =1.83 Design: Observer instrument as pre- and post-test measure
Technische Universität München
Design of learning environments for PST Example: Effects of educational courses on PST professional vision (Stürmer, Könings, & Seidel, 2012)
Pre-Post-Main Effect: Description: F (1, 52) = 27.08** ; p = < .01 ; n2 = .34; Pre-Post-Main Effect: Explanation: F (1, 52) = 26.44**; p = < .01 ; n2 = .34; Pre-Post-Main Effect: Prediction: F (1, 52) = 36.19**; p = < .01; n2 = .41
Technische Universität München
Design of learning environments for PST Example: Effects of educational courses on PST professional vision (Stürmer, Könings, & Seidel, 2012)
Conclusions (1) Educational courses showed positive effects on development of
professional vision
(2) Specific effects of content-specificity on sub-dimensions of professional vision
(3) Findings have implications for the specific design of learning environments: Professional vision can be trained and developed specifically
Technische Universität München
Design of learning environments for PST Example: Learning to Learn from Mathematics Teaching (LLMT) (Santagata & Guarino, 2011; Santagata & Yeh, 2012)
teacher preparation is to equip teachers with knowledge
and skills to continue to learn and improve over time, weneed to consider seriously what that knowledge and skills
entail (Hiebert et al. 2007). Our premise is that we need to
go beyond the teaching of general reflective practices andprovide future teachers with opportunities to learn to reflect
on teaching in disciplined and structured ways.
Building on research by others on teacher noticing (vanEs and Sherin 2002), professional vision (Sherin 2007),
productive reflection on teaching (Davis 2006), and onresearch on lesson analysis conducted by the first author
(Santagata, Zannoni, & Stigler 2007; Santagata & Angelici
2010), we consider as fundamental skills for reflecting andlearning from teaching the ability: (a) to attend to impor-
tant elements of instruction, (b) to reason about these ele-
ments in integrated ways, and (c) to propose alternativeinstructional strategies. To assist teachers in developing
these skills, we have designed a framework that we use to
guide their analyses of teaching.
2.1 The Lesson Analysis Framework
The Lesson Analysis Framework (Santagata, Zannoni, &
Stigler 2007; Santagata & Angelici 2010) includes ele-
ments of reflection on teaching typical of Lesson Studygroups (Lewis and Tsuchida 1998). It also resembles and is
informed by the work conducted by Hiebert, Morris, and
Glass (2003) on lessons as experiments. The frameworkcenters the analysis of teaching on classroom lessons,
which represent natural units in the process of teaching
(Hiebert et al. 2007; Santagata et al. 2007). It consists of aseries of questions that guide teachers through a process of
lesson analysis.
The first question asks PSTs to analyze the lessonlearning goals: What are the main ideas that students are
supposed to understand through this lesson? PSTs then
move to the analysis of student learning by attending to thefollowing questions: Did the students make progress
toward the learning goals? What evidence do we have that
the students made progress? What evidence do we havethat students did not make progress? What evidence are we
missing? Analyzing the particulars of student learning and
understanding as evidenced in the lesson lead PSTs to thenext question, focused on the impact of teachers’ decisions
on student learning: Which instructional strategies sup-
ported students’ progress toward the learning goals andwhich did not? This sort of reasoning on teaching and
learning is typical of expert teachers (Berliner 2001; Borko
& Livingston 1989). It also integrates various elements ofteaching (i.e., learners and learning, subject matter
knowledge, assessment, and instruction) supporting what
Davis (2006) calls ‘‘productive reflection.’’ This processalso assists in teaching in ways that are responsive to
student learning as recommended by reform efforts
(National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 2000; Smith1996).
Finally, building on the analysis of the cause–effect
relationship between teaching and learning, PSTs areasked: what alternative strategies could the teacher use?
How do you expect these strategies to impact on students’
progress toward the lesson learning goals? If any evidenceof student learning was missing, how could the teacher
collect such evidence? The generation of alternatives is animportant element of the framework because it serves as a
link between reflection on practice and action on practice
(van Es & Sherin 2002). Although this phase of theframework can be challenging for novices with a limited
knowledge of teaching strategies, we believe it is important
for PSTs to develop the habit of considering alternatives. Astudy by Kersting, Givvin, Sotelo, & Stigler (2010) found
that more effective teachers were better at proposing
alternative strategies to those observed in video clips thanteachers who were not as effective in terms of student
learning.
Figure 1 summarizes the main elements of the LessonAnalysis Framework.
2.2 Previous research on the use of the Lesson AnalysisFramework
Previous research on the use of the Lesson AnalysisFramework as a tool for developing PSTs’ lesson analysis
skills has provided promising results. Three studies were
conducted with PSTs enrolled in a secondary teacherpreparation program at an Italian university. The first two
studies (Santagata, Zannoni, & Stigler 2007) included a
pre-/post-test design and utilized a similar intervention.The second study replicated findings from the first. PSTs
were introduced to the Lesson Analysis Framework and
practiced using it with three videotaped lessons. Theirability to analyze teaching was measured prior to and on
Fig. 1 Lesson Analysis Framework
134 R. Santagata, J. Guarino
123
Author's personal copy
Technische Universität München
Design of learning environments for PST Example: Learning to Learn from Mathematics Teaching (LLMT) (Santagata & Yeh, 2012)
Results: Post-test scores for PST quality of analyzing classroom video, comparison of LLMT versus NON-LLMT group
1
LLMT (N=12)
NON-LLMT (N=12)
Low Sophistication Student thinking only minimally visible
1 5
Medium Sophistication Student thinking made visible
3 5
High Sophistication Student thinking made visible and pursued
8 2
Table 4. Ability to make student thinking visible and to pursue student thinking during teaching
by group.
LLMT (N=12)
NON-LLMT (N=12)
Low Sophistication Teacher Focused 0 7
Medium Sophistication General focus on students
4 3
High Sophistication Math-specific focus on students
8 2
Table 5. Ability to use evidence of student learning to assess successes in teaching by group.
LLMT (N=12) NON-LLMT (N=12)
Low Sophistication Teacher Focused 0 6
Medium Sophistication General focus on students
3 3
High Sophistication Math-specific focus on students
9 3
Table 6. Ability to use evidence of student learning to assess missed opportunities in teaching by
group.
)LQGLQJV�WDEOH
Technische Universität München
Conclusions & future directions Professional vision as an important objective in PST education
Initial acquisition of professional knowledge and professional vision Long-term studies to describe PST development
Individual differences and differential effects
Implications for student selection Adaptive learning environments in pre-service
Design of learning environments for PST
Integrating knowledge from instructional design Contributions to Higher Education Research
Technische Universität München
Development of PST professional vision Study: Stürmer, Seidel & Schäfer, 2012 Results: differential effects for low (lowest) and high (highest quartile) entry level students
** ** ** **