You are here:

Use of an Online Simulation to Support Pre-service Teacher Knowledge of Literacy Instruction
PROCEEDINGS

, University of Wollongong, Australia

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-60-0 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

The authors of this paper report on software that made use of segment excerpts of authentic classroom literacy experiences into interconnected, short-term teaching episodes called cycles. Sets of cycles link in a variety of ways to create a representation of the diversity of possible teaching episodes. As a result, each teaching episode unfolds according to the decisions that users make about the management of the classroom, teaching experience and students, and of random events that occur during each cycle. This research affirmed that these simulated cycles are effective in developing pre-service teachers' understanding of literacy teaching when users have access to support from cognitive tools designed to connect them with the theory needed to understand and address the pedagogical problems posed by the simulation. We found that this allowed pre-service teachers to more fully appreciate the reasons behind, and the potential impact of, subtle changes that expert teachers make during lessons.

Citation

Ferry, B. (2006). Use of an Online Simulation to Support Pre-service Teacher Knowledge of Literacy Instruction. In T. Reeves & S. Yamashita (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2006--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 512-519). Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 9, 2024 from .

© 2006 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Aldrich, C. (2004). Simulations and the future of learning. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
  2. Brown, A.H. (1999). Simulated classrooms and artificial students: The potential effects of new technologies on teacher education. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(2), 307-18.
  3. Carpenter, T.P., Fennema, F., Franke, M.L., Empson, S.B., & Levi, L.W. (2000). Cognitively guided instruction: a research based teacher professional development program for elementary school mathematics (Res. Rep. 00-3). Madison, WI: National Centre for Improving Student Learning and Achievement in Mathematics and Science.
  4. Carter, K & Doyle, W. (1989). Classroom research as a resource for the preparation of graduate teachers. In A. Woolfolk (Ed.) Research perspectives on the graduate preparation of teachers. (pp. 51-68). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
  5. Crevola, C., & Hill, P. (1998). CLaSS: Children's literacy success strategy: Anoverview. Melbourne: Catholic Education Office. Department of Education Science& Training. (2003). Australia’s teachers: Australia’s future: Advancing innovation, science, technology and mathematics. Canberra: AGPS.
  6. Eckersley, C., Richards, C. & Schofield, N. (2004). Evaluation of a Learning Object. In L. Cantoni& McLoughlin, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2004: World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia& Telecommunications (pp. 3718-3720). Norfolk, VA: AACE.
  7. Gibson (2004) New directions in e-learning: Personalization, simulation and program assessment. Retrieved February, 2006 from: http://www.etips.info/
  8. Herrington, A., Herrington, J., Sparrow, L., & Oliver, R. (1998). Learning to teach and assess mathematics using multimedia: A teacher development project. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1 (1), 89-112.
  9. Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23-48.
  10. Jonassen, D.H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology: Research& Development, 48 (4), 63-85.
  11. Korthagen, F. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher. Towards a more holistic approach to teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77-97.
  12. Lampert, M., & Ball, D.L. (1998). Teaching, multimedia, and mathematics: Investigations of real practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  13. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: CUP.
  14. Marx, R.W., Blumenfeld, P.C., Krajcik, J.S., & Soloway, E. (1998). New technologies for teacher professional development. Teacher and Teacher Education, 14(1), 33-52.
  15. MCEETYA (2003). Demand and Supply of Primary and Secondary School Teachers in Australia. Retrieved February, 2006 from: http://www.mceetya.edu.au/public/demand.htm
  16. Mousley, J., Sullivan, P., & Mousley, P. (1996). Learning about teaching: An interactive tutorial program to facilitate the study of teaching. Adelaide: AAMT/CSMSE, Deakin University/Australian Catholic University.
  17. Prensky, M. (2004). Digital game-based learning. New York: Paragon Press.
  18. Putnam, R., & 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.
  19. Ramsey, G. (2000). Quality matters. Revitalising teaching: Critical times, critical choices. Sydney: Report of the Review of Teacher Education, New South Wales.
  20. Reeves, T.C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing and Higher Education, 16(2), 97-116.
  21. Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts