You are here:

Leveraging Analysis of Students’ Disciplinary Thinking in a Video Club to Promote Student-Centered Science Instruction
article

, California State University, Fullerton, United States ; , University of California, Irvine, United States

CITE Journal Volume 18, Number 1, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Recent policy reports and standards documents advocate for science teachers to adopt more student-centered instructional practices. Four secondary science teachers from one school district participated in a semester-long video club focused on honing attention to students’ evidence-based reasoning and creating opportunities to make students’ reasoning visible in practice. Although all participants expressed value in attending to students’ ideas and shifting autonomy to students in the classroom, they experienced varying levels and types of integration in their practice. Analysis revealed that teachers’ goals and commitments influenced the incremental ways in which participants integrated learning from the video club. Sustained and substantial changes to practice likely require support through multiple cycles of shifting visions of what is possible, coupled with collaborative attempts to work through challenges of implementation.

Citation

Barnhart, T. & van Es, E. (2018). Leveraging Analysis of Students’ Disciplinary Thinking in a Video Club to Promote Student-Centered Science Instruction. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(1), 50-80. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved August 11, 2024 from .

© 2018 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, K.J. (2012). Science education and test‐based accountability: Reviewing their relationship and exploring implications for future policy. Science Education, 96(1), 104129.
  2. Anderson, R.D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.
  3. Anelli, C. (2011). Scientific literacy: What is it, are we teaching it, and does it matter? American Entomologist, 57(4), 235–244.
  4. Blomberg, G., Renkl, A., Sherin, M.G., Borko, H., & Seidel, T. (2013). Five research-based heuristics for using video in pre-service teacher education. Journal for Educational Research Online, 5(1), 90.
  5. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
  6. Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Eiteljorg, E., & Pittman, M.E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 417–436.
  7. Borko, H., Koellner, K., Jacobs, J., & Seago, N. (2011). Using video representations of teaching in practice-based professional development programs. ZDM-International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43(1), 175–187.
  8. Calandra, B., & Rich, P.J. (2015). Digital video for teacher education: Research and practice. New York, NY: Routledge
  9. Cartier, J.L., Smith, M.S., Stein, M.K., & Ross, D. (2013). Five practices for orchestrating taskbased discussions in science. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  10. Chin, C. (2007). Classroom Interaction in science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1315-1346.
  11. Cobb, P. (2017, April). What does it take to support improvements in the quality of mathematics teaching on a large scale? Invited presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Houston, TX. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(1)
  12. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (2009). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.
  13. Coffey, J.E., Hammer, D., Levin, D.M., & Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1109–1136.
  14. Curry, M. (2008). Critical friends groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in teacher professional communities aimed at instructional improvement and school reform. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 110(4), 733–774.
  15. Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291.
  16. Franke, M.L., Carpenter, T.P., Levi, L., & Fennema, E. (2001). Capturing teachers’ generative change: A follow-up study of professional development in mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 653–689.
  17. Gallimore, R., Ermeling, B.A., Saunders, W.M., & Goldenberg, C. (2009). Moving the learning of teaching closer to practice: Teacher education implications of school-based inquiry teams. The Elementary School Journal, 109(5), 537–553.
  18. Gaudin, C., & Chaliès, S. (2015). Video viewing in teacher education and professional development: A literature review. Educational Research Review, 16, 41-67.
  19. Grant, T.J. & Kline, K. (2010) The impact of video-based lesson analysis on teachers’ thinking and practice. Teacher Development, 14(1), 69-83.
  20. Greeno, J.G., Collins, A. & Resnick, L.B. (1996) Cognition and learning. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 15-46). New York, NY:
  21. Guskey, T.R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391.
  22. Hammer, D., Goldberg, F., & Fargason, S. (2012). Responsive teaching and the beginnings of energy in a third grade classroom. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 6(1), 51-72.
  23. Hammer, D., & Schifter, D. (2001). Practices of inquiry in teaching and research. Cognition and Instruction, 19(4), 441–478.
  24. Hatch, J.A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. New York, NY: Suny Press. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(1)
  25. Hatch, T., & Grossman, P. (2009). Learning to look beyond the boundaries of representation: Using technology to examine teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 70-85.
  26. Hatch, T., Shuttleworth, J., Jaffee, A.T., & Marri, A. (2016). Videos, pairs, and peers: What connects theory and practice in teacher education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 274-284.
  27. Horn, I.S., & Little, J.W. (2010). Attending to problems of practice: Routines and resources for professional learning in teachers’ workplace interactions. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 181–217.
  28. Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., Doyle, W., & Van Driel, J. (2013). How to make innovations practical. Teachers College Record, 115(7), 1-43.
  29. Kang, H., Windschitl, M., Stroupe, D., & Thompson, J. (2016). Designing, launching, and implementing high quality learning opportunities for students that advance scientific thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(9), 1316-1340.
  30. Kazemi, E., & Hubbard, A. (2008). New directions for the design and study of professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 428-441.
  31. Levin, D.M., Hammer, D., & Coffey, J.E. (2009). Novice teachers' attention to student thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 142–154.
  32. Luna, M.J., & Sherin, M.G. (2017). Using a video club design to promote teacher attention to students' ideas in science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 282-294.
  33. Marshall, J.C., Horton, R.M., & White, C. (2009). EQUIPping teachers: A protocol to guide and improve inquiry-based instruction. Science Teacher, 76(4), 46-53.
  34. McDonald, M., Kazemi, E., Kelley-Petersen, M., Mikolasey, K., Thompson, J., Valencia, S.W., & Windschitl, M. (2014). Practice makes practice: Learning to teach in teacher education. Peabody Journal of Education, 89(4), 500-515.
  35. McDonald, S., & Rook, M.M. (2014). Digital video analysis to support the development of professional pedagogical vision. In B. Calandra & P. Rick (Eds.), Digital video for teacher education: Research and practice (pp. 21-35). New York, NY: Routledge.
  36. McLaughlin, M.W., & Talbert, J.E. (2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement (Vol. 45). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(1)
  37. McNeill, K.L., & Pimentel, D.S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203–229.
  38. Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L.B. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(4), 283-297.
  39. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School
  40. Officers. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington, DC: Author.
  41. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/ Download.php?record_id=13165
  42. National Research Council. (2015). Science teachers’ learning: Enhancing opportunities, creating supportive contexts. Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21836/ science-teachers-learning-enhancing-opportunities-creating-supportive-contexts
  43. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  44. Olitsky, S. (2006). Structure, agency, and the development of students’ identities as learners. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(4), 745–766.
  45. Opfer, V.D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407.
  46. Pimentel, D.S., & McNeill, K.L. (2013). Conducting talk in secondary science classrooms: Investigating instructional moves and teachers’ beliefs. Science Education, 97(3), 367– 394.
  47. Putnam, R.T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
  48. Remillard J.T., & Geist, P.K. (2002). Supporting teachers’ professional learning by navigating openings in the curriculum. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(1), 7-34.
  49. Richards, J., & Elby, A. (2014). Incorporating disciplinary practices into characterizations of progress in responsive teaching. Journal of Learning Sciences, 1-29.
  50. Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. The Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866.
  51. Roth, W.M., & Lee, S. (2002). Scientific literacy as collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science, 11(1), 33-56.
  52. Roth, K.J., Garnier, H.E., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., & Wickler, N.I. (2011). Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 117-148.
  53. Ruiz-Primo, M.A., & Furtak, E.M. (2006). Informal formative assessment and scientific inquiry: Exploring teachers’ practices and student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(3 & 4), 205-235.
  54. Russ, R.S., & Luna, M.J. (2013). Inferring teacher epistemological framing from local patterns in teacher noticing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 284–314.
  55. Sandoval, W.A., Deneroff, V., & Franke, M.L. (2002). Teaching, as learning, as inquiry: moving beyond activity in the analysis of teaching practice. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, New Orleans, LA.
  56. Santagata, R. (2009). Designing video-based professional development for mathematics teachers in low-performing schools. Journal of teacher education, 60(1), 38-51.
  57. Santagata, R., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J.W. (2005). The use of videos for teacher education and professional development: Past experiences and future directions. In C. Vrasidas & G.V.Glass (Eds.), Current perspectives on applied information technologies: Preparing teachers to teach with technology (Vol. 2, pp. 151-167).Greenwich,
  58. Seago, N.M., Jacobs, J.K., Heck, D.J., Nelson, C.L., & Malzahn, K.A. (2014). Impacting teachers’ understanding of geometry similarity: Results from field testing of the learning and teaching geometry professional development materials. Professional Development in Education, 40(4), 627-653.
  59. Seidel, T., Sturmer, K., Blomberg, G., Kobarg, M., & Schwindt, K (2011). Teacher learning from analysis of videotaped classroom situations: Does it make a difference whether teachers observe their own teaching or that of others? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 259-267.
  60. Sherin, M. (2004). New perspectives on the role of video in teacher education. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Using video in teacher education (pp. 1–27). New York, NY: Elsevier.
  61. Sherin, M.G., & Han, S.Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 163–183.
  62. Sherin, M.G., Jacobs, V., & Phillip, R. (2011). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers' eyes [Kindle version]. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
  63. Sherin, M.G., & Van Es, E.A. (2007, April). Using video to document changes in teachers’ professional vision. Symposium presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(1)
  64. Sherin, M.G., & Van Es, E.A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers' professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 20-37.
  65. Star, J.R. (2015). Improve math teaching with incremental improvements. Retrieved http://www.kappancommoncore.org/improve-math-teaching-with-incrementalfrom
  66. Stigler, J.W., & Hiebert, J. (2016). Lesson study, improvement, and the importing of cultural routines. ZDM, 48(4), 581-587.
  67. Stigler, J., & Thompson, B. (2009). Thoughts on creating, accumulating, and utilizing shareable knowledge to improve teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 109(5), 442457.
  68. Stroupe, D. (2014). Beginning science teachers’ use of tools to learn ambitious instruction. LEARNing Landscapes, 8(1), 269–285.
  69. Tekkumru Kisa, M., & Stein, M.K. (2015). Learning to see teaching in new ways: A foundation for maintaining cognitive demand. American Educational Research Journal, 52(1), 105-136.
  70. Thompson, J., Windschitl, M., & Braaten, M. (2013). Developing a theory of ambitious early-career teacher practice. American Educational Research Journal, 50(3), 574-615.
  71. Thompson, J., Hagenah, S., Kang, H., Stroupe, D., Braaten, M., Colley, C., & Windschitl, M. (2016). Rigor and responsiveness in classroom activity. Teachers College Record, 118(5), 1-58.
  72. Timperley, H. (2008). Teacher professional learning and development. Retrieved from http://edu.aru.ac.th/childedu/images/PDF/benjamaporn/EdPractices_18.pdf
  73. Tripp, T., & Rich, P. (2012). Using video to analyze one’s own teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 678–704.
  74. Van Es, E.A., Cashen, M., Barnhart, T., & Auger, A. (2017). Learning to notice mathematics instruction: Using video to develop preservice teachers' vision of ambitious pedagogy. Cognition and Instruction, 1-23.
  75. Van Es, E.A., & Sherin, M.G. (2008). Mathematics teachers' "learning to notice" in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 244-276.
  76. Van Es, E.A., & Sherin, M.G. (2010). The influence of video clubs on teachers' thinking and practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(2), 155-176.
  77. Van Zee, E.H., Iwasyk, M., Kurose, A., Simpson, D., & Wild, J. (2001). Student and teacher questioning during conversations about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 159–190.
  78. Walkoe, J. (2015). Exploring teacher noticing of student algebraic thinking in a video club. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18(6), 523-550.
  79. Wenger, E. (2011). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. Retrieved from http://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11736
  80. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Stroupe, D. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for science teachers. Science Education, 96(5), 878–903.
  81. Windschitl, M., & Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: The impact of preservice instruction on teachers’ understandings of modelbased inquiry. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 783–835.
  82. Yeh, C., & Santagata, R. (2015). Preservice teachers’ learning to generate evidence-based hypotheses about the impact of mathematics teaching on learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 21-34.
  83. Yin, R.K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education is an online journal. All text, tables, and figures in the print version of this article are exact representations of the original. However, the original article may also include video and audio files, which can be accessed online at http://www.citejournal.org

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References