Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Decisions and reasons: examining preservice teacher decision-making through video self-analysis

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

METHODS USED TO STUDY TEACHER THINKING have both provided insight into the cognitive aspects of teaching and resulted in new, as yet unresolved, relationships between practice and theory. Recent developments in video-analysis tools have allowed preservice teachers to analyze both their practices and thinking, providing important feedback for self-improvement as well as insights into their thinking. In this study, four student teachers used the Video Analysis Tool to enquire about and analyze their teaching. Constant-comparative methods revealed different decision-making and reasoning patterns, indicating decisions driven primarily by teacher-centered thinking and decisions driven primarily by student-centered thinking. We discuss how understanding these differences might benefit the teacher education community and describe the implications of video analysis in both research and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abell, S.K., Bryan, L.A., & Anderson, M.A. (1998). Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reflective thinking using integrated media case-based instruction in elementary science teacher preparation.Science Teacher Education, 82, 491–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H., & Niles, J.A. (1984). Instructional planning. In J. Keefe & J. Jenkins (Eds.),Instructional leadership handbook. Virginia: National Association of Secondary School Principals.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H., & Shavelson, R.J. (1990). Teacher decision making. In B.F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.),Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 311–346). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryan, L.A., & Recesso, A. (2006). Promoting reflection with a Web-based video analysis tool.Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(1), 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. Gubrium & J.A. Holstein (Eds.),Handbook of interview research (pp. 675–694). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheek, E.H., Jr., Steward, F.A., & Launey, B.L. (2004). Facilitative reading instruction: Preservice teachers' voices and perceptions.Reading Improvement, 41(2), 129–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L.M., Wilson, E.K., & Sunal, C.S. (2004). Through the looking glass: Reflection or refraction? Do you see what I see?Journal of Social Studies Research, 28(1), 33–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clandinin, J., & Connelly, F.M. (1987). Teachers' personal knowledge: What counts as ‘personal’ in studies of the personalJournal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 487–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C.M. (1988). Asking the right questions about teacher preparation: Contributions of research on teacher thinking.Educational Researcher, 17, 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C.M., & Peterson, P.L. (1986). Teachers' though processes. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed, pp. 225–296). New York: Macmillan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C.M., & Yinger, R. (1979).Three studies of teacher planning. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Institute of Research on Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (Eds.). (2005).Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research on teacher education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, S.T. (1999). Characteristics of reflective thought during the student teaching experience.Journal of Teacher Education, 50(3), 173–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell, J.P., Spencer, M.B., & Aber, J.L. (1994). Educational risk and resilience in African-American youth: Context, self, action, and outcomes in schools.Developmental Psychology, 65, 492–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, P.F. (2001). Anticipatory reflection while learning to teach: From a temporally trucated to a temporally distributed model of reflection in teacher education.Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(1), 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (1986).Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teacher's College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K.A., & Simon, H.A. (1993).Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, J.C., & Latta, M.M. (2001). What constitutes becoming experienced in teaching and learning?Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(8), 885–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fogarty, J.L., Wang, M.C., & Creek, R. (1982, March).A descriptive study of experienced and novice teachers' interactive instructional decision processes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City.

  • Fuller, F.F., & Bown, O.H. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K. Ryan (Ed.),Teacher education: 74th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, (part II) pp. 25–52). Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A.L. (1967).The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research Chicago: Aldine De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation.Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 33–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Housner, L.D., & Griffey, D.C. (1985). Teacher cognition: Differences in planning and interactive decision-making between experienced and inexperienced teachers.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 56, 45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard, R.S., & Power, B.M. (2003).The art of classroom inquiry. A handbook for teacher-researchers (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jay, J.K., & Johnson, K.L. (2002). Capturing complexity: A typology of reflective practice for teacher education.Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 73–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J., & Winitzky, N. (2002).Exploring preservice teacher thinking: A comparison of five measures. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

  • Johnson, K. (1992). Instructional actions and decisions of preservice ESL teachers.TESOL quarterly, 26(3), 507–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, D.M. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief.Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 65–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Killion, J., & Todnem, G. (1991). A process for personal theory building.Educational Leadership, 48(6), 14–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H.-J. (2005). Understanding and assessing preservice teachers' reflective thinking.Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(6), 699–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKay, D.A., & Marland, P.W. (1978, March).Thought processes of teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Canada.

  • Meijer, P., Zanting, A., & Verloop, N. (2002). How can student teachers elicit experienced teachers' practical knowledge? Tools, suggestions, and significance.Journal of Teacher Education, 53(5), 406–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching.Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O'Donnell, A., Reeve, J., & Smith, J. (2007).Educational psychology: Reflection for action. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, F. (1992). Teacher's beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct.Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, W.C. (1984). Developing teachers' decision-making.Journal of Experimental Education, 52(4), 220–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigge, F., & Marso, R. (1997). A seven-year longitudinal multi-factor assessment of teaching concerns development through preparation and early teaching.Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 225–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perlberg, A. (1987). Microteaching: Conceptual and theoretical bases. In M. Dunkin (Ed.),The international encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (pp. 715–720). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, M., Ginsberg, H. P., Jang, S., Eisenband, J. G., Moretti, F., & Sommer, P. (2005).Video interactions for teaching and learning (VITAL): A learning environment for courses in early childhood mathematics education. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association. from http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/vital/nsf/VITAL_AERA_2005.pdf

  • Rich, P., Recesso, A., Allexsaht-Snider, M. & Hannafin, M. (2007, April).The use of video-based evidence to analyze, act on, and adapt preservice teacher practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

  • Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sakula (Ed.),Handbook of research on teacher education, (2nd ed., pp. 102–119). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schepens, A., Aelterman, A., & Van Keer, H. (2007). Studying learning processes of student teachers with stimulated recall interviews through changes in interactive cognitions.Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(4), 457–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1983).The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutz, A. (1970).On phenomenology and social relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavelson, R.J., & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers' pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions and behavior.Review of Educational Research, 51(4), 445–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Smith, D., & Sanche, R. (1992). Saskatchewan interns' concerns at three stages of a four-month practicum.The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 38(2), 121–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D., & Sanche, R. (1993). Interns' personaly expressed concerns: A need to extend the Fuller model?Action in Teacher Education, 15(1), 36–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990).Basic of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques, (2nd ed.) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturtevant, E.G., & Linek, W.M. (2003). The instructional beliefs and decisions of middle and secondary teachers who successfully blend literacy and content.Reading Research and Instruction, 43(1), 74–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Es, E.A., & Sherin, M.G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers' interpretations of classroom interactions.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Manen, M. (1995). Epistemology of reflective practiceTeacher and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1(1), 33–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolfolk Hoy, A., Davis, H., & Pape, S.J. (2006). Teacher knowledge and beliefs. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.).Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 715–737). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. (1994). Research on teacher thinking and different views of reflective practice in teaching and teacher education. In I. Carlgreen, G. Handal & S. Vaage (Eds.),Teachers minds and actions: Research on teacher's thinking and practice. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Peter J. Rich

    Present address: Brigham Young University, 150K MCKB, 84602, Provo, Utah

  2. Michael J. Hannafin

    Present address: Learning & Performance Support Laboratory, University of Georgia, 611 Aderhold Hall, 30602, Athens, GA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brigham Young University, 150K MCKB, 84602, Provo, Utah

    Michael J. Hannafin

Authors
  1. Peter J. Rich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael J. Hannafin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Peter Rich is Associate Professor in Instructional Psychology and Technology at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. He received his PhD in Instructional Technology from the University of Georgia. Dr. Rich's research interests include video annotation tools and teacher education, focusing on the marriage of theory and practice.

Michael Hannafin is the Georgia Research Alliance Eminent Scholar in Technology-Enhanced Learning, Director of the Learning & Performance Support Laboratory (LPSL), and Professor in the Department of Educational Psychology & Instructional Technology at the University of Georgia. His research focuses on the study of technology-enhanced teaching and learning environments—especially uses of technology that are open-ended and student-centered in nature.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rich, P.J., Hannafin, M.J. Decisions and reasons: examining preservice teacher decision-making through video self-analysis. J. Comput. High. Educ. 20, 62–94 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03033432

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03033432

Keywords

Search

Navigation