首页> 外文学位 >INSTRUCTOR VERSUS PEER FEEDBACK IN MICROTEACHING ON THE ACQUISITION OF CONFRONTATION; ILLUSTRATING, ANALOGIES, AND USE OF EXAMPLES; AND QUESTION-ASKING TEACHING SKILLS FOR PRE-SERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS.
【24h】

INSTRUCTOR VERSUS PEER FEEDBACK IN MICROTEACHING ON THE ACQUISITION OF CONFRONTATION; ILLUSTRATING, ANALOGIES, AND USE OF EXAMPLES; AND QUESTION-ASKING TEACHING SKILLS FOR PRE-SERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS.

机译:微指令教学中教师与同行的反馈意见插图,类比和示例的使用;和理科教师的提问和提问技巧。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The investigator's purpose for conducting this study was to determine if pre-service secondary science teachers benefited more from teachers who had experience teaching science at the secondary level from other preservice teachers participating in the microteaching process. In addition, the researcher attempted to find any relationships between the ratings of independent judges, feedback sources, and the study participants and the responses of the participants to a critique of the microteaching process.;The experienced teacher feedback sources were doctoral students in Science Education who were experienced science teachers at the secondary level. The judges all had experience in secondary science teaching and were in instructional positions in Science Education at Indiana University.;The participants were introduced to the microteaching process, instructed on the use of the video-tape, received an explanation of sequence of events during the study, and use of the instruments to evaluate and critique the microteaching experience. The initial microteaching lesson was based on a selected objective in an area of science appropriate for the secondary science teaching.;After an initial microteaching experience, the participants practiced the teaching skills of confrontation; illustrating, analogies, and use of examples; and question-asking. These skills were selected as examples of aspects of instruction being addressed in the methods course. The microteaching experiences were rated by judges who viewed a video-tape of the lesson. The participants were divided into high and low rating groups and randomly assigned to microteaching groups. All participants were randomly assigned to either experienced-teacher feedback or another participant (peer) feedback. After each video-taped microteaching lesson the participants were rated by their teaching group, by three independent judges, by their feedback source, and themselves; received a critical feedback session with their feedback source; and critiqued the entire process. The independent judges rated all the microteaching experiences on an instrument modified from the Stanford Teacher Competency Appraisal Guide and a specific teaching skill instrument. The feedback source, the participant, and microteaching group evaluated the lesson using the specific teaching skill instrument.;The subjects of the study included nineteen preservice secondary science teachers involved in science methods instructions.;A multiple analysis of variance design was used to analyze differences between the judged ratings of teaching skill on four successive microteaching experiences. There were no differences between the judged acquisition of skills, but there were differences between the ratings of the three judges of the skills performed. In addition differences were found between the ratings the judges and the participants, judges and the feedback sources, but no differences were found between the feedback sources and the participants. After completing each microteach and feedback session, the participants responded to a critique of the process. Correlations were found between the ratings and the perceptions of the participants.;It was concluded that there were no differences between the acquisition of teaching skills that depended on the source of feedback, but differences did occur between the judged ratings of the performance. More attention should have been paid in the study to establishing reliability within and between judges by insisting on common agreement on the criteria used in measurement. The skill providing critical feedback learned by the peer evaluators may have improved their own teaching. The recognition that teachers can be taught to critically analyze the teaching process, be observant of others' teaching, should be utilized in enhancing their own teaching.
机译:研究者进行这项研究的目的是确定在职中学中学教师是否从参与过微教学过程的其他职前教师中学到了具有中学教学科学经验的老师中受益更多。此外,研究人员试图找到独立法官的评分,反馈来源与研究参与者之间以及与参与者对微教学过程的批判的反应之间的任何关系。经验丰富的教师反馈来源是理科教育中的博士生。他们是中学科学的资深老师。评委们都具有中学科学教学的经验,并且在印第安纳大学的科学教育中任教。•向参与者介绍了微教学过程,对录像带的使用进行了指导,并在培训过程中对事件的顺序进行了解释。研究和使用工具评估和批判微教学的经验。最初的微型教学课程是基于适合中学科学教学的科学领域中的选定目标进行的;在初步的微型教学经验之后,参与者练习了对抗性的教学技能;说明,类比和示例的使用;和问问题。选择这些技能作为方法课程中要解决的教学方面的例子。观看过录像带的法官对微教学的经历进行了评分。参与者分为高和低评分组,并随机分配到微教学组。将所有参与者随机分配给有经验的老师反馈或另一位参与者(同伴)反馈。每次录制了视频的微型教学课程后,参与者将由他们的教学小组,三位独立的法官,他们的反馈来源以及他们自己进行评分;与他们的反馈源一起进行了重要的反馈会议;并批评了整个过程。独立法官使用斯坦福教师能力评估指南修改过的工具和特定的教学技巧工具,对所有微教学的经历进行了评分。反馈源,参与者和微教学小组使用特定的教学技能工具对课程进行了评估。;研究的对象包括19位从事科学方法指导的职前中学科学教师。;使用方差设计的多元分析来分析差异连续四个微教学经验的评判教学技能等级之间。所判断的技能获得之间没有差异,但是三位执行技能的法官的评分之间存在差异。此外,在评委和参与者的评分,评委和反馈来源之间发现差异,但在反馈来源和参与者之间未发现差异。在完成每个微教学和反馈会话后,参与者对流程的评论做出了回应。发现评分与参与者的看法之间存在相关性。结论是,在取决于反馈源的教学技能的习得之间并没有差异,但是在所评估的绩效评分之间确实存在差异。在研究中应更加重视通过在测量中使用的标准上达成共识来建立法官内部和法官之间的可靠性。提供由同行评估者学到的重要反馈的技能可能会改善他们自己的教学。应该认识到可以教老师批判性地分析教学过程,要注意别人的教学,应该用来增强自己的教学。

著录项

  • 作者

    FRANKLIN, CAROL ANN.;

  • 作者单位

    Indiana University.;

  • 授予单位 Indiana University.;
  • 学科 Education Teacher Training.
  • 学位 Educat.D.
  • 年度 1981
  • 页码 140 p.
  • 总页数 140
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号