Further exploration of the classroom video analysis (CVA) instrument as a measure of usable knowledge for teaching mathematics: taking a knowledge system perspective
In this article we report further explorations of the classroom video analysis instrument (CVA), a measure of usable teacher knowledge based on scoring teachers’ written analyses of classroom video clips. Like other researchers, our work thus far has attempted to identify and measure separable components of teacher knowledge. In this study we take a different approach, viewing teacher knowledge as a system in which different knowledge components are flexibly brought to bear on specific teaching situations. We explore this idea through a series of exploratory factor analyses of teachers clip level scores across three different CVA scales (fractions, ratio and proportions, and variables, expressions, and equations), finding that a single dominant dimension explained from 55 to 63 % of variance in the scores. We interpret these results as consistent with a view that usable teacher knowledge requires both individual knowledge components, and an overarching ability to access and apply those components that are most relevant to a particular teaching episode.
KeywordsVideo Clip Pedagogical Content Knowledge Usable Knowledge Student Thinking Aggregate Score
This study was supported by the Department of Education, Institute of Educational Sciences, Grant No. R305M060007. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organization or agency that provided support for this project.
- Ball, D., & Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). Westport: Ablex.Google Scholar
- Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–32). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
- Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2009). Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques and in structural equation modeling (pp. 269–297). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 269–297.Google Scholar
- Baumert, J. & Kunter, M. (2013). The COACTIV Model of Teachers’ Professional Competence. In M. Kunter, J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss, & M. Neubrand (Eds.). Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers. Results from the COACTIV project (pp. 49–63). New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-5149-5.
- Berliner, D. C. (1989). Implications of studies of expertise in pedagogy for teacher education and evaluation. In J. Pfleiderer (Ed.), New directions for teacher assessment (Proceedings of the 1988 ETS Invitational Conference) (pp. 39–68). Princeton: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
- Berliner, D. C. (1994). The wonder of exemplary performances. In J. N. Mangieri & C. Collins Block (Eds.), Creating powerful thinking in teachers and students (pp. 161–186). Forth Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehard, & Winston.Google Scholar
- Council, National Research (Ed.). (2000). How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Hill, H. C., Blunk, M., Charalambous, C., Lewis, J., Phelps, G. C., Sleep, L., & Ball, D. L. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: an exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26(4), 430–511. doi: 10.1080/07370000802177235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K., Sotelo, F., & Stigler, J. W. (2010). Teacher’s analysis of classroom video predicts student learning of mathematics: further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 172–181. doi: 10.1177/0022487109347875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Thompson, B., Santagata, R., & Stigler, J. (2012). Developing measures of usable knowledge: teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 568–590. doi: 10.3102/0002831212437853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kersting, N. B., Sherin, B., & Stigler, J. W. (2014). Automated scoring of teachers’ open-ended responses to video prompts: bringing the classroom video analysis (CVA) assessment to scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 74(6), 950–974. doi: 10.1177/0013164407313369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- König, J., Blömeke, S., & Kaiser, G. (2015). Early career mathematics teachers general pedagogical knowledge and skills: do teacher education, teaching experience, and working conditions make a difference? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 331–350. doi: 10.1007/s10763-015-9618-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- König, J., Blömeke, S., Klein, P., Suhl, U., Busse, A., & Kaiser, G. (2014). Is teachers general pedagogical knowledge a premise for noticing and interpreting classroom situations? A video-based assessment approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 76–88. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2013.11.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Magnus, B. E. (2013). the influence of parceling on the implied factor structure of multidimensional item response data. (Master’s Thesis). Available from the ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No: 1545097).Google Scholar
- Seidel, T., Blomberg, G., & Stürmer, K. (2010). OBSERVE -Validation of a video-based instrument assessing professional vision. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, (Beiheft), 56, 296–306.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. ISSN: 1059-7069.Google Scholar
- Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1175860.