Researching Classrooms in Search of Learning: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations



The chapter gives a background to research and research traditions on teaching and learning in classrooms. In the post-war period, a large number of research approaches have been developed in order to capture the complexities of classroom life. Much of this research has documented traditional patterns of communication in classrooms that seem to be fairly stable across time and educational systems. The introduction of video documentation provided new means of following and understanding the dynamics of instructional patterns. Video also made it possible to analyze the activities from different perspectives, including how students are able to follow, contribute to and make sense of classroom tasks. A close-up view of student activities provides rich opportunities for detailed analyses of the learning process.


  1. Becker, H., Geer, B., & Hughes, E. (1968). Making the grade: The academic side of college life. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Begehr, A. (2006). Students’ verbal actions in German mathematics classes. In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries. The insider’s perspective (pp. 167–182). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  3. Bellack, A. A. (1969). Methods for observing classroom behaviors of teachers. In K. Ingenkamp (Ed.), Methods for the evaluation of comprehensive schools. Berlin: Beltz.Google Scholar
  4. Bellack, A. A., Kliebard, H. M., Hyman, R. T., & Smith, F. L. (1966). The language of the classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brosseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse. The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  8. Cestari, M. L. (1998). Communication in mathematics classrooms: A dialogical approach. Diss., University of Oslo, Norway.Google Scholar
  9. Clarke, S., Howley, I., Resnick, L., & Penstein Rosé, C. (2016). Student agency to participate in dialogic science discussions. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 10, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clarke, D., Keitel, C., & Shimizu, Y. (2006). Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries. The insider’s perspective. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  11. Donald, M. (2018). The evolutionary origins of human cultural memory. In B. Wagoner (Ed.), Handbook of culture and memory (pp. 19–40). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1989). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Emanuelsson, J., & Sahlström, F. (2008). The price of participation: Teacher control versus student participation in classroom interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52(2), 205–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Flanders, N. A. (1964). Interaction analysis in the classroom: A manual for observers. School of Education, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  15. Flanders, N. A. (1970). Analyzing teaching behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  16. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  17. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  18. Giroux, H. (2001). Theory and resistance in education. London: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  19. Giroux, H., & Purpel, D. (Eds.). (1983). The hidden curriculum and moral education. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.Google Scholar
  20. Goldman, R., Pea, R. D., Barron, B., & Derry, S. J. (Eds.). (2007). Video research in the learning sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. (2011). Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gumperz, J. J., & Hymes, D. (1972). Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  23. Hammersley, M. (1990). Classroom ethnography: Empirical and methodological essays. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P. (2010). Video in qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Hoon, S. L., Kaur, B., & Kiam, L. H. (2006). Case studies of Singapore secondary mathematics classrooms: The instructional approaches of two teachers. In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries. The insider’s perspective (pp. 151–165). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  26. Hopkins, D. (2014). A teacher’s guide to classroom research (5th ed.). New York, NY: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York, NY: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  28. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaiser, G., Luna, E., & Huntley, I. (Eds.). (1999). International comparisons in mathematics education. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  30. Kaur, B., Anthony, G., Ohtani, M., & Clarke, D. (2013). Student voice in mathematics classrooms around the world. Rotterdam: Sense.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kentli, F. D. (2009). Comparison of hidden curriculum theories. European Journal of Educational Studies, 1(2), 83–88.Google Scholar
  32. Kramer, S. N. (1963). The Sumerians. Their history, culture, and character. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Kramer, S. N. (1981). History begins at Sumer. Philadelphia, PA: The University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lundgren, U. P. (1972). Frame factors and the teaching process. A contribution to curriculum theory. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
  35. Lundgren, U. P. (1977). Model analysis of pedagogical processes. Lund: Liber/Gleerup.Google Scholar
  36. Lundgren, U. P., & Säljö, R. (2017). Skolans tidiga historia och utveckling - från skrivarskola till folkskola i Sverige (The early history and development of schooling - from scribal schools to folkschools in Sweden). In U. P. Lundgren, R. Säljö & C. Liberg (Eds.), Lärande, skola, bildning (Learning, schooling, Bildung) (pp. 29-64). Stockholm: Natur & Kultur.Google Scholar
  37. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organisation in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mook, I. A. C. (2006). Teacher-dominating lessons in Shanghai: The insiders’ story. In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, & Y. Shimizu (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries. The insider’s perspective (pp. 87–98). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  39. Roser, M., & Ortiz-Ospina, E. (2017). Global rise of education. Retrieved March 13, 2017, from
  40. Sacks, H., & Jefferson, G. (1995). Lectures on conversation. Human Studies, 18(2), 327–336.Google Scholar
  41. Sahlström, F., & Lindblad, S. (1998). Subtexts in the science classroom—An exploration of the construction of science lessons and student careers. Learning and Instruction, 8(3), 194–214.Google Scholar
  42. Säljö, R. (2009). Learning, theories of learning and units of analysis in research. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 202–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shimizu, Y., Kaur, B., Huang, R., & Clarke, D. (Eds.). (2010). Mathematical tasks in classrooms around the world. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  44. Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Snyder, B. R. (1971). The hidden curriculum. New York, NY: Alfred Knopf.Google Scholar
  46. Stevenson, H. W., & Stigler, J. W. (1992). The learning gap: Why our schools are failing and what we can learn from Japanese and Chinese education. New York, NY: Summit Books.Google Scholar
  47. Stigler, J. W., Gallimore, R., & Hiebert, J. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: Examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS videotape classroom study: Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth graders mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan and the United States. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  49. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  50. Thomas, R. (1992). Literacy and orality in ancient Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Unesco. (2015). Education for all 2000-2015. Achievements and challenges. Retrieved January 12, 2017, from
  52. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech (N. Minick, Trans.). In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky: Vol. 1. Problems of general psychology (pp. 39–285). New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  53. Waller, W. (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York, NY: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Watson-Gegeo, K. (1999). Classroom ethnography. In N. H. Homberger & D. Corson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Research methods in language and education (Vol. 8, pp. 135–144). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  55. Wells, G., & Mejia Arauz, R. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Westbury, I., & Bellack, A. A. (Eds.). (1971). Research into classroom processes: Recent developments and next steps. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  57. Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labour: How working class boys get working class jobs. Farnborough: Saxon House.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Education, Communication and LearningUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical SciencesUniversity of AgderOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations