You are here:

The Effect of Reflection Sheets focused on Standing-Positions for Pre-service Teacher Trainee

, Aichi Institute of Technology, Japan ; , Hokusei Gakuen University, Japan ; , Department of Education, Philippines

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Austin, TX, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-27-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


The way of coaching to pre-service teachers is one of the concerns of university supervisors because the society and parents expect that new teachers already possess the qualities of professional teachers. We focused on “reflection in/ on action”. No doubt that reflections allow teachers to continually improve their practices, but the fact remains that we lack established way of reflection for teacher trainees. In this study, the authors developed a sheet for reflection that supervisors make trainees reflect after mock-up lessons. The authors conducted study-dividing students into non-sheet-using group and sheet-using group and employed multiple regression analysis in order to consider what students use as criteria for self-evaluation. Control group students tend to evaluate themselves using the following characteristics. Experimental group students focus on both outcome and substance of lesson because they pointed out the preparation for lesson and effective use of blackboard.


Sakamoto, M., Kaneko, D. & Avendano, F.V. (2017). The Effect of Reflection Sheets focused on Standing-Positions for Pre-service Teacher Trainee. In P. Resta & S. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1777-1782). Austin, TX, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Allen, D. & Ryan, K. (1969). Microteaching. Reading. Massachusetts: Addicson-Wesley Publishing Company.
  2. Arani, M.R.S. (2016). An examination of oral and literal teaching traditions through a comparative analysis of mathematics lessons in Iran and Japan. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 5(3), pp. 196-211.
  3. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D.C. Heath and Company.
  4. Fernandez, M.L. (2005). Learning through microteaching lesson study in teacher preparation. Action in Teacher Education, 26, pp. 37-47.
  5. Flanders, N.A. (1970). Analyzing teaching behavior. Addison-Wesley.
  6. Lee, H.J. (2005). Understanding and assessing preservice teachers’ reflective thinking. Teaching and teacher education, 21(6), pp. 699-715.
  7. Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers college Record, 108 (6), pp. 1017-1054.
  8. Nur Mustafa, M. (2013). Professional Competency Differences among High School Teachers in Indonesia. International Education Studies, 6(9), pp. 83-92.
  9. Popovich, N.G. & Katz, N.L. (2009). A microteaching exercise to develop performance based abilities in pharmacy students. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(4), Article 73.
  10. Schön, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.
  11. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), pp. 4-31.
  12. Yhosizaki, S. (1988). Research on Teaching and Teacher Education (1) : Through the Mediation of Research on Teacher Knowledge. National Association for Study of Educational Methods, 13, pp. 11-17.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact