Advertisement

Effects of short-term video-based interventions and instructions on teachers’ feedback skills to support students’ self-regulated learning

  • Christiane BaadteEmail author
Article
  • 55 Downloads

Abstract

It was investigated whether teachers’ feedback skills to support students’ self-regulated learning (SRL) can be improved by short-term video-based interventions and/or direct instructions that were adapted to a SRL framework. Forty pre-service and 40 in-service teachers were assigned to a video + instruction or an instruction-only condition. Highest improvements were expected for the combination of the two interventions. However, results indicated that functional feedback to support SRL benefited most from instruction-only, while the reduction of dysfunctional feedback was highest in the video + instruction condition. The findings have practical implications for the design of interventions to improve teachers’ feedback skills.

Keywords

Improving teachers’ feedback skills Video-based interventions Text−/picture comprehension 

Notes

Acknowlegements

I would like to thank Dr. Eva Christophel and Dr. Nora Heyne for supporting the production of the video vignettes and the data collection.

Compliance with ethical standards

Prior to the study, all participants were informed about the aims of the study, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, and institutional affiliations of the researchers. All subjects participated voluntarily. According to the Declaration of Helsinki, written informed consent was obtained from all participants and the experimental procedures were approved by the local ethics committee. In addition, for the students displayed in the video vignettes, consent was also obtained from their parents and only the students who had returned the written agreement of their parents were video-taped.

References

  1. Baadte, C., & Schnotz, W. (2014). Feedback effects on performance, motivation and mood: Are they moderated by the learner's self-concept? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58, 570–591.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.781059.
  2. Baadte, C., & Kurenbach, F. (2017). The effects of self-focusing and expectancy-incongruent feedback on task performance in secondary school students. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 32, 113–131.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-016-0312-y.
  3. Blomberg, G., Stürmer, K., & Seidel, T. (2011). How pre-service teachers observe teaching on video: effects of viewers’ teaching subjects and the subject of the video. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(7), 1131–1140.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.04.008.Google Scholar
  4. Blomberg, G., Sherin, M. G., Renkl, A., Glogger, I., & Seidel, T. (2014). Understanding video as a tool for teacher education: investigating instructional strategies to promote reflection. Instructional Science, 42(3), 443–463.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9281-6.Google Scholar
  5. Bond, L., Smith, T., Baker, W., & Hattie, J. (2000). The certification system of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards: a construct and consequential validity study. Washington DC: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.Google Scholar
  6. Brophy, J. (Ed.). (2004). Using video in teacher education. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  7. Brunot, S., Huguet, P., & Monteil, J. M. (1999). Performance feedback and self-focused attention in the classroom: when past and present interact. Social Psychology of Education, 3(4), 271–293.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009631930740. Google Scholar
  8. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245.Google Scholar
  9. Corbalan, G., Kester, L., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2009). Dynamic task selection: effects of feedback and learner control on efficiency and motivation. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 455–465.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.07.002.Google Scholar
  10. Cowie, B. (2005). Pupil commentary on assessment for learning. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 137–151.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170500135921. Google Scholar
  11. Dignath, C., Buettner, G., & Langfeldt, H. P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101–129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003. Google Scholar
  12. Engle, R. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 19–23.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00160.Google Scholar
  13. Etscheidt, S., Curran, C. M., & Sawyer, C. M. (2012). Promoting reflection in teacher preparation programs: a multilevel model. Teacher Education and Special Education, 35(1), 7–26.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406411420887.Google Scholar
  14. Göbel, K., & Helmke, A. (2010). Intercultural learning in English as foreign language instruction: the importance of teachers’ intercultural experience and the usefulness of precise instructional directives. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(8), 1571–1582.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.05.008.Google Scholar
  15. Hamer, R. N., & van Rossum, E. J. (2010). The meaning of learning and knowing. (Doctoral dissertation). Utrecht University, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  16. Harnett, J. A. (2007). Changing learning conversations: an action research model of reflective professional development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massey University, Palmerston North. Retrieved on Sept. 05, 2018 from: http://mro.massey.ac.nz/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10179/675/02whole.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
  17. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.  https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.Google Scholar
  18. Kaplan, S., & Berman, M. G. (2010). Directed attention as a common resource for executive functioning and self-regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(1), 43–57.Google Scholar
  19. Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Thompson, B. J., Santagata, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 568–589.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212437853.Google Scholar
  20. Kleinknecht, M., & Gröschner, A. (2016). Fostering pre-service teachers’ noticing with structured video feedback: results of an online-and video-based intervention study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 45–56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.020.Google Scholar
  21. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: historical review, a meta-analysis and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.Google Scholar
  22. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1998). Feedback interventions: toward the understanding of a double-edged sword. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(3), 67–72.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10772989.Google Scholar
  23. Krause, U.-M., Stark, R., & Mandl, H. (2009). The effects of cooperative learning and feedback on e-learning in statistics. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 158–170.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.03.003.Google Scholar
  24. Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: the place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279–308.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01320096.Google Scholar
  25. Michalsky, T. (2014). Developing the SRL-PV assessment scheme: Preservice teachers’ professional vision for teaching self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43, 214–229.Google Scholar
  26. Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32(1), 99–113.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021811.66966.1d. Google Scholar
  27. Narciss, S. (2006). Informatives tutorielles Feedback. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  28. Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a computer-based training for written subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 16(4), 310–322.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.07.003.Google Scholar
  29. Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090.Google Scholar
  30. Ogrin, S., Keller, S., Friedrich, A., Trautwein, U., & Schmitz, B. (2017). Entwicklung und empirische Prüfung einer Lehrkräftefortbildung zur Förderung von Selbstregulationskompetenz und mathematischer Kompetenz bei Schülerinnen und Schülern der Haupt- und Werkrealschule (“Lernen mit Plan”) [Development and evaluation of a training to improve teachers’ skills to foster students’ self-regulation and mathematical competence]. In C. Gräsel & K. Trempler (Eds.), Entwicklung von Professionalität pädagogischen Personals [Developing professionalism of pedagogical staff] (pp. 195–214). Berlin: Springer Online.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-07274-2_11.Google Scholar
  31. Oser, F., Salzmann, P., & Heinzer, S. (2009). Measuring the competence-quality of vocational teachers: an advocatory approach. Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training, 1(1), 65–83.Google Scholar
  32. Pauli, C. (2010). Fostering understanding and thinking in discursive cultures of learning. Unpublished paper presented at the meeting of EARLI SIG 10 and SIG 21, Utrecht, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  33. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 452–502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3. Google Scholar
  34. Renkl, A., Mandl, H., & Gruber, H. (1996). Inert knowledge: analyses and remedies. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 115–121.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3102_3.Google Scholar
  35. Santagata, R., Zannoni, C., & Stigler, J. (2007). The role of lesson analysis in pre-service teacher education: an empirical investigation of teacher learning from a virtual video-based field experience. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(2), 123–140.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9029-9.Google Scholar
  36. Schäfer, S., & Seidel, T. (2015). Noticing and reasoning of teaching and learning components by pre-service teachers. Journal of Educational Research Online, 7(2), 34–38.Google Scholar
  37. Schmitz, B., & Wiese, B. (2006). New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: time series-analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(1), 64–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.02.002.Google Scholar
  38. Schnotz, W., Horz, H., McElvany, N., Schroeder, S., Ullrich, M., Baumert, J., Hachfeld, A., & Richter, T. (2010). Das BITE-Projekt: Integrative Verarbeitung von Texten und Bildern in der Sekundarstufe I [Integrative comprehension of texts and pictures in secondary schools]. In E. Klieme, D. Leutner, & M. Kenk (Eds.), Kompetenzmodellierung. Zwischenbilanz des DFG-Schwerpunktprogramms und Perspektiven des Forschungsansatzes. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 56, 143–153.Google Scholar
  39. Seidel, T., Prenzel, M., Schwindt, K., Stürmer, K., Blomberg, G., & Kobarg, M. (2009). LUV and observe: two projects using video to diagnose teachers’ competence. In T. Janik & T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 243–259). Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  40. Seidel, T., Blomberg, G., & Stürmer, K. (2010). “Observer:” Validierung eines videoba-sierten instruments zur Erfassung der professionellen Wahrnehmung von Unterricht [“Observer:” Validation of a video-based instrument for measuring the perception of professional lessons]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik. Journal of Education & Psychology, 56, 296–306.Google Scholar
  41. Seidel, T., Blomberg, G., & Renkl, A. (2013). Instructional strategies for using video in teacher education. Teach Teach Educ, 34(1), 56–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.004. Google Scholar
  42. Seidel, T., & Stürmer, K. (2015). Modeling the structure of professional vision in preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 51(4), 739–771.Google Scholar
  43. Sherin, M. G. (2004). New perspectives on the role of video in teacher education. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Using video in teacher education (pp. 1–28). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  44. Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2005). Using video to support teachers’ ability to notice classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475–491.Google Scholar
  45. Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 20–37.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108328155.Google Scholar
  46. Sherin, M. G., Jacobs, V. R., & Philipp, R. A. (2011). Situating the study of noticing. In M. G. Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 3–14). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795.Google Scholar
  48. Souvignier, E., & Behrmann, L. (2016). Wie viel Fortbildung ist für eine Anleitung strategieorientierten Leseunterrichts nötig? Vergleich dreier unterschiedlich intensiver Fortbildungskonzepte [How much training is required to guide strategy-oriented reading in the classroom—a comparison of three different training concepts]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 44, 391–407.Google Scholar
  49. Star, J. R., & Strickland, S. K. (2008). Learning to observe: using video to improve pre-service mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107–125.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9063-7.Google Scholar
  50. Stürmer, K., Seidel, T., & Schäfer, S. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ professional vision changes following practical experience: a video-based approach in university-based teacher education. Gruppendynamik und Organisationsberatung, 44(3), 339–355.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-013-0216-0. Google Scholar
  51. Ullrich, M., Schnotz, W., Horz, H., McElvany, N., Schroeder, S., & Baumert, J. (2012). Kognitionspsychologische Aspekte der Bild-Text-Integration [Cognitive aspects of text and picture integration]. Psychologische Rundschau, 63, 11–17.  https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000105.Google Scholar
  52. Van den Bergh, L., Ros, A., & Beijaard, D. (2014). Improving teacher feedback during active learning: Effects of a professional development program. American Educational Research Journal, 51(4), 772–809.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214531322.
  53. Van den Bogert, N., Van Bruggen, J., Kostons, D., & Jochems, W. (2014). First steps into understanding teachers’ visual perception of classroom events. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37, 208–216.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.09.001.Google Scholar
  54. van Es, E., & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: instruction new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571–596.Google Scholar
  55. Vancouver, J. B., & Tischner, E. C. (2004). The effect of feedback sign on task performance depends on self-concept discrepancies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1092–1098.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1092.Google Scholar
  56. Voerman, L., Meijer, P. C., Korthagen, F. A., & Simons, R. J. (2012). Types and frequencies of feedback interventions in classroom interaction in secondary education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1107–1115.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.06.006.Google Scholar
  57. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation. A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego: Academic Press.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7.Google Scholar
  58. Zimmerman, B. J. (2009). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement (pp. 125–151). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Zottmann, J. M., Stegmann, K., Strijbos, J.-W., Vogel, F., Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2013). Computer-supported collaborative learning with digital video cases in teacher education: the impact of teaching experience on knowledge convergence. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), 2100–2108.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.014.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Lisboa and Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of PsychologyJohannes Gutenberg-University MainzMainzGermany

Personalised recommendations