Learning Classroom Management Through Web-Based Case Instruction: Implications for Early Childhood Teacher Education

Abstract

In this article, we report a research project on web-based case instruction that was developed and implemented to allow prospective early childhood teachers to be exposed to various dilemmas faced by practicing teachers. The goal of this project was to design an instructional tool and method that could help prospective teachers expand their notion of classroom management beyond a set of techniques. We collected 23 prospective teachers’ pre and postessays before and after the 3-week implementation of the web-based case instruction, along with surveys and a focus group interview data. The initial data analysis results indicated that this instructional method was effective for (a) promoting prospective teachers’ awareness of multiple perspectives, (b) encouraging them to explore diverse ways of problem solving, and (c) articulating their justification based on a sense of moral responsibility and affective engagement. We conclude with implications for future research and early childhood teacher education.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although we call those 23 students the “participant students” in this article, thereby allowing us to use their work as our research data, all 30 students participated in the web-based case learning as part of the course activities. We indicated in the consent letter, approved by our campus IRB, that if a student decided to participate in this study, it would not affect her grade in this class. To ensure this and the participants’ honest opinions, the survey was conducted anonymously. The focus group interview was conducted by Ikseon, who was not the instructor of this course, and the interview was transcribed after the grades were turned in.

  2. 2.

    The entire course, except for the online self-study session, was face-to-face and met twice a week for 1 h and 15 min per class. The online self-study session was arranged separately because both of us had to attend a conference and could not be present in class.

References

  1. Ayers, W. (2001). To teach: The journey of a teacher (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown, A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R. A., & Campione, J. C. (1983). Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognitive development (vol. 3, pp. 77–166). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving: Advances in the psychology of human intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Denzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 392–431). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Elbaz, F. (1981). The teacher’s “practical knowledge”: Report of a case study. Curriculum Inquiry, 11, 43–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. White Plains, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grant, C., & Gillette, M. (2006). Learning to teach everyone’s children: Equity, empowerment, and education that is multicultural. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Harrington, H. L., Quinn-Leering, K., & Hodson, L. (1996). Written case analyses and critical reflection. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jarz, E. M., Kainz, G. A., & Walpoth, G. (1997). Multimedia-based case studies in education: Design, development, and evaluation of multimedia-based case studies. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 6, 23–46.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. ETR&D, 45, 65–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jonassen, D. H., & Hernandoz-Serrano, J. (2002). Case-based reasoning and instructional design: Using stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 65–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lundeburg, M. A., Levin, B. B. & Harrington, H. L. (Eds.). (1999). Who learns what from cases and how? The research base for teaching and learning with cases. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  18. McDermott, R. P., & Varenne, H. (1996). Culture, development, disability. In R. Jessor, A. Colby, & R. A. Shweder (Eds.), Ethnography and human development: Context and meaning is social inquiry (pp. 101–126). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meacham, J. A., & Emont, N. M. (1989). The interpersonal basis of everyday problem solving. In J. D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 7–23). New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Merseth, K. K. (1996). Cases and case methods in teacher education. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 722–743). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Richert, A. E. (1991). Using teacher cases for reflection and enhanced understanding. In A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.), Staff development for education in the 90’s (pp. 113–132). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shin, N., Jonassen, D. H., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shulman, J. H. (1991). Revealing the mysteries of teacher-written cases: Opening the black box. Journal of Teacher Education, 42, 250–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 1–29). New York: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Shulman, J. H. & Mesa-Bains, A. (Eds.). (1990). Diversity in the classroom: A casebook for teachers and teacher educators. San Francisco: Research for Better Schools.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sinnott, J. D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problems: Implications for everyday and abstract problem solving. In J. D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 72–99). New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Spiro, R. J., Coulson, R. L., Feltovich, P. J., & Anderson, D. K. (1998). Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Paper presented at the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.

  28. The Cognition Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33, 52–70.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tippins, D. J., Koballa, T. R., & Payne, B. D. (2002). Learning from cases: Unraveling the complexities of elementary science teaching. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Varenne, H., & McDermott, Y. (1998). Successful failure: The school America builds. Boulder, CD: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Voss, J. F., & Means, M. L. (1991). Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning & Instruction, 1, 337–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Voss, J. F., & Post, T. A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 261–285). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wertsch, J. V. (1989). A sociocultural approach to mind. In W. Damon (Ed.), Child development today and tomorrow (pp. 14–33). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wood, P. K. (1983). Inquiring systems and problem structures: Implications for cognitive developments. Human Development, 26, 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (1996). Reflective teaching: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowlegement

This project was supported by a Learning Technologies Grant offered by the Office of Instructional Support and Development at The University of Georgia.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyunghwa Lee.

Appendix A

Appendix A

The Pre and Postessay Case

Note: This case was posed by a local school teacher.

Cynthia Williams is a 3rd-grade teacher who has taught for 4 years. She has a strong teaching philosophy emphasizing collaboration and team work. Last year, however, one of her students, Ben, challenged her philosophy. “Ben was sneaky. He tried to make other students disgusted with him as much as he could. He seemed to feed off of other people’s anger.” Cynthia talked privately to his classmates to encourage them to work with Ben, and she also talked with Ben alone. In these conversations, Ben expressed that he felt like he did not fit in with other students. Cynthia learned that at home Ben talked mainly with people who were older because he did not have siblings. He also had little opportunity to interact with children his own age outside of the classroom and therefore felt much more comfortable working on his own than with other students. Wondering whether Ben was gifted, Cynthia referred him to gifted education for testing. These tests, however, indicated that Ben was right on the borderline, which meant he might receive gifted education in several years but not at the moment. Cynthia firmly believed that “students should learn to work with others because that’s what people should be able to do in their lives beyond school,” so at times she “forced Ben to be in group work situations but never felt these attempts were successful. After being in the class only for half of the year, Ben moved to an alternative school because his mother thought Ben would do better in school with a small group of students.” Looking back on this experience, Cynthia wondered “whether some children are not able to work with others,” and whether she “should have adjusted her philosophy to give more individual work to a student like Ben.”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, K., Choi, I. Learning Classroom Management Through Web-Based Case Instruction: Implications for Early Childhood Teacher Education. Early Childhood Educ J 35, 495–503 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-008-0250-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Case methods
  • Classroom management
  • Early childhood teacher education
  • Web-based Instruction
  • Technology integration