Advertisement

Instructional Science

, Volume 42, Issue 3, pp 443–463 | Cite as

Understanding video as a tool for teacher education: investigating instructional strategies to promote reflection

  • Geraldine BlombergEmail author
  • Miriam Gamoran Sherin
  • Alexander Renkl
  • Inga Glogger
  • Tina Seidel
Article

Abstract

There is a general consensus among researchers and teacher educators that classroom video can be a valuable tool for pre-service teacher education. Media such as video are not, however, in themselves effective. They have to be embedded in an instructional program to be useful. Yet, little empirical research examines how specific instructional approaches might effectively exploit the potential of video in teacher education. In this study we explored the use of two video-based university courses, one representing a cognitive instructional strategy integrating video, the other representing a situative strategy. Using data from learning journals we analyzed the effects of the two strategies on pre-service teachers’ (N = 28) ability to reflect on classroom video. We found that the two strategies have distinct impacts on the kinds of reflection patterns that are fostered. Our findings suggest that the learning goal and purpose at hand should determine which instructional strategy should be employed when embedding classroom video into teacher education courses.

Keywords

Teacher education Classroom video Instructional design Reflection skills Learning journals 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG, SE 1397/2-1/2). We would like to thank all pre-service teachers who participated in this study. We also thank Kathleen Kemter and Anne Töpfer for their assistance in coding the learning journal data.

References

  1. Anderson, J. R. (1996). ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition. American Psychologist, 51, 355–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayram, L. (2012). Use of online video cases in teacher training. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1007–1011. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Berliner, D. C. (1986). In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15, 5–13. doi: 10.3102/0013189X015007007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berliner, D. C. (1991). Perceptions of student behavior as a function of expertise. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 26, 1–8.Google Scholar
  6. Berthold, K., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17, 564–577. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Eiteljorg, E., & Pittman, M. E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 417–436. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 473–498. doi: 10.3102/00028312026004473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brophy, J. (Ed.). (2004). Using video in teacher education. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  10. Brouwer, N. (2007). Imaging teacher learning: A literature review on the use of digital video for preservice teacher education and teacher professionalization. Nijmegen: ILS Graduate School of Education.Google Scholar
  11. Cantrell, J. R., Fusaro, J. A., & Dougherty, E. A. (2000). Exploring the effectiveness of journal writing on learning social studies: A comparative study. Reading Psychology, 21, 1–11. doi: 10.1080/027027100278310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analysis of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42, 21–29. doi: 10.1007/BF02299088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33, 52–70.Google Scholar
  15. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Eds.), Knowing, learning and instruction. Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Conner-Greene, P. A. (2000). Problem-based service learning: The evolution of a team project. Teaching of Psychology, 29, 193–197. doi: 10.1207/S15328023TOP2903_02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for assessing program outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 120–138. doi: 10.1177/0022487105283796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. D. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Franscisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  20. Davis, E. A. (2006). Characterizing productive reflection among preservice elementary teachers: Seeing what matters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Drechsel, B. (2001). Subjektive Lernbegriffe und Interesse am Thema Lernen bei angehenden Lehrpersonen [Subjective conceptions of learning and interest in the subject of learning among pre-service teachers]. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  22. Erickson, F. (2007). Ways of seeing video: Toward a phenomenology of viewing minimally edited footage. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 145–155). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  23. Evertson, C. M., & Green, J. L. (1986). Observation as inquiry and method. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (Vol. 3, pp. 162–213). New York, London: Macmillian Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  24. Flavell, J. H. (1978). Metacognitive development. In J.M.Scandura & C.J.Brainerd (Eds.), Structural/process theories of complex human behavior (pp. 213–245). Alphen aan den Rijin: Sijthoff and Noordhoff.Google Scholar
  25. Flavell, J. H., Beach, D. R., & Chinsky, J. M. (1966). Spontaneous verbal rehearsal memory tasks as a function of age. Child Development, 37, 283–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fuller, F. F., & Manning, B. A. (1973). Self-confrontation review: A conceptualization for video playback in teacher education. Review of Educational Research, 43, 469–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gilar, R., de los Angeles Martinez Ruiz, M., & Castéjon Costa, J. L. (2007). Diary-based strategy assessment and its relationship to performance in a group of trainee teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 1334–1344.Google Scholar
  28. Glogger, I., Schwonke, R., Holzäpfel, L., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2012). Learning strategies assessed by journal writing: Prediction of learning outcomes by quantity, quality, and combinations of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 452–468. doi: 10.1037/a0026683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goldman, R., Pea, R., Barron, B., & Denny, S. J. (Eds.). (2007). Video research in the learning sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. Gomez, L. M., Sherin, M. G., Griesdorn, J., & Finn, L.-E. (2008). Creating social relationships: The role of technology in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 117–131. doi: 10.1177/0022487107314001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Greeno, J. G. (1989). Situations, mental models and generative knowledge. In D. Klahr & K. Kotovsky (Eds.), Complex information processing: The impact of Herbert A. Simon (pp. 285–318). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  32. Gruber, H., Law, L.-C., Mandl, H., & Renkl, A. (1995). Situated learning and transfer. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 168–188). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  33. Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., & Shulman, L. (2002). Toward expert thinking: How curriculum case-writing prompts the development of theory-based professional knowledge in student teachers. Teacher Education, 13, 221–245. doi: 10.1080/1047621022000007594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hiebert, J., Morris, A. K., Berk, D., & Jansen, A. (2007). Preparing teachers to learn from teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 58, 47–61. doi: 10.1177/0022487106295726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235–266. doi: 10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hoogveld, A. W. M., Paas, F., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2005). Training higher education teachers for instructional design of competency-based education: Product-oriented versus process-oriented worked examples. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 287–297. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kellogg, R. (1994). The psychology of writing. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Sotelo, F. L., & Stigler, J. W. (2010). Teachers’ analyses of classroom video predict student learning of mathematics: Further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 172–181. doi: 10.1177/0022487109347875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75–86. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Koc, M. (2011). Let’s make a movie: Investigating pre-service teachers’ reflections on using video-recorded role playing cases in Turkey. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 95–106. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.07.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Koster, B., Brekelmans, M., Korthagen, F., & Wubbels, T. (2005). Quality requirements for teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 157–176. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Krammer, K., Ratzka, N., Klieme, E., Lipowsky, F., Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2006). Learning with classroom videos: Conception and first results of an online teacher-training program. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Mathematik, 38, 422–432. doi: 10.1007/BF02652803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Krapp, A., & Weidenmann, B. (Eds.). (2006). Pädagogische psychologie [educational psychology]. Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  44. Kuhn, D. (2007). Is direct instruction an answer to the right question? Educational Psychologist, 42, 109–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Llinares, S., & Valls, J. (2009). The building of pre-service primary teachers’ knowledge of mathematics teaching: Interaction and online video case studies. Instructional Science, 37, 247–271. doi: 10.1007/s11251-007-9043-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lonka, K., & Ahola, K. (1995). Activating instruction: How to foster study and thinking skills in higher education. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10, 351–368. doi: 10.1007/BF03172926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Loud, B. (1999). Effects of journal writing on attitudes, beliefs, and achievement of students in a college mathematics course (PhD thesis, Boston University, 1999).Google Scholar
  50. Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology. European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1, 85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marsh, B., Mitchell, N., & Adamczyk, P. (2010). Interactive video technology: Enhancing professional learning in initial teacher education. Computers & Education, 54, 742–748. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Masingila, J. O., & Doerr, H. M. (2002). Understanding pre-service teachers’ emerging practices through their analyses of a multimedia case study of practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 235–263. doi: 10.1023/A:1019847825912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. McCrindle, A., & Christensen, C. (1995). The impact of learning journal on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performances. Learning and Instruction, 5, 167–185. doi: 10.1016/0959-4752(95)00010-Z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Miller, K., & Zhou, X. (2007). Learning from classroom video: What makes it compelling and what makes it hard. In R. Goldmann, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 321–334). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  55. Nückles, M., Hübner, S., & Renkl, A. (2009). Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols. Learning and Instruction, 19, 259–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74, 557–576. doi: 10.3102/00346543074004557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  58. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., & Congdon, R. (2004). HLM 6 for windows [computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.Google Scholar
  59. Renkl, A., Mandl, H., & Gruber, H. (1996). Inert knowledge: Analyses and remedies. Educational Psychologist, 31, 115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Resnik, L. B. (1991). Shared cognition: Thinking a social practice. In L. B. Resnik, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 1–20). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Reusser, K. (2005–2009). Videoportal. http://www.didac.uzh.ch/videoportal/. Retrieved 4 June 2010.
  62. Roth, W.-M. (2007). Epistemic mediation: Video data as filters for the objectification of teaching by teachers. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 367–382). Mahawah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  63. Sabers, D. S., Cushing, K. S., & Berliner, D. C. (1991). Difference among teachers in a task characterized by simultaneity, multidimensionality, and immediacy. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 63–88. doi: 10.3102/00028312028001063.Google Scholar
  64. Santagata, R., & Angelici, G. (2010). Studying the impact of the lesson analysis framework on pre-service teachers’ ability to reflect on videos of classroom teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 339–349. doi: 10.1177/0022487110369555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Santagata, R., & Guarino, J. (2011). Using video to teach future teachers to learn from teaching. ZDM the International Journal of Mathematics Education, 43, 133–145. doi: 10.1007/s11858-010-0292-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 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, 123–140. doi: 10.1007/s10857-007-9029-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schmidt, H. G. (2009). Problem-based learning: Rationale and description. Medical Education, 17, 11–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1983.tb01086.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schmidt, H. G., Loyens, S. M., Gog, V. T., & Paas, F. (2006). Problem-based learning is compatible with human cognitive architecture: Commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42, 91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schrader, P. G., Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Ataya, R., Teale, W. H., & Labbo, L. D. (2003). Using internet delivered video cases, to support pre-service teachers’ understanding of effective early literacy instruction: An exploratory study. Instructional Science, 31, 317–340. doi: 10.1023/A:1024690111227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning argumentation skills through the use of prompts for self-explaining examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 285–296. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Seago, N. (2004). Using video as an object of inquiry mathematics teaching and learning. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Using video in teacher education (Vol. 10, pp. 259–285). Amsterdam: Advances in Research on Teaching.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Seidel, T., Prenzel, M., Rimmele, R., Kobarg, M., Schwindt, K., & Meyer, L. (2005). Do videos really matter?—An experimental study on the use of video in teacher professional development. In C. P. Constantinou, D. Demetriou, A. Evagorou, M. Evagorou, A. Kofteros, M. Michael, C. Nicolaou, D. Papademetriou & N. Papadouris (Eds.), 11th European conference for research on learning and instruction (pp. 1117–1118). Nicosia: University of Cyprus.Google Scholar
  73. 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. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  74. Sharpe, L., Hu, C., Crawford, L., Gopinathan, S., Khine, M. S., & Moo, S. N. (2003). Enhancing multipoint desktop video conferencing (MDVC) with lesson video clips: Recent developments in pre-service teaching practice in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 529–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 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
  76. Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 20–37. doi: 10.1177/0022487108328155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Star, J. R., & Strickland, S. K. (2008). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 107–125. doi: 10.1007/s10857-007-9063-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Stockero, S. L. (2008). Using a video-based curriculum to develop a reflective stance in prospective mathematics teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 373–394. doi: 10.1007/s10857-008-9079-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 59–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Tobias, S., & Duffy, T. M. (Eds.). (2009). Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  82. van Es, E. (2009). Participants’ roles in the context of a video club. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18, 100–137. doi: 10.1080/10508400802581668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. van Es, E., & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 571–596.Google Scholar
  84. van Merriënboer, J. (1997). Training complex cognitive skills. A four-component instructional design model for technical training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  85. van Merriënboer, J., Clark, R. E., & de Croock, M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50, 39–64. doi: 10.1007/BF02504993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. van Merriënboer, J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2012). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instructional design (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  87. van Merriënboer, J., Kirschner, P., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner’s mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 5–13. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Vermunt, J. D. (1995). Process-oriented instruction in learning and thinking strategies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10, 325–349. doi: 10.1007/BF03172925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  90. Wong, S. L., Yung, B. H. W., Cheng, M. W., Lam, K. L., & Hodson, D. (2006). Setting the stage for developing pre-service teachers’ conceptions of good science teaching: The role of classroom videos. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1–24. doi: 10.1080/09500690500239805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Wouters, P., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. (2008). How to optimize learning from animated models: A review of guidelines based on cognitive load. Review of Educational Research, 78, 645–675. doi: 10.3102/003465430832032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wouters, P., Tabbers, H. K., & Paas, F. (2007). Interactivity in video-based models. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 327–342. doi: 10.1007/s10648-007-9045-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geraldine Blomberg
    • 1
    Email author
  • Miriam Gamoran Sherin
    • 2
  • Alexander Renkl
    • 3
  • Inga Glogger
    • 3
  • Tina Seidel
    • 1
  1. 1.TUM School of Education, Technische Universität MünchenMunichGermany
  2. 2.School of Education and Social PolicyNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Psychology, Educational and Developmental PsychologyUniversity of FreiburgFreiburgGermany

Personalised recommendations