Expert Teachers’ Interactive Cognition: an Analysis of Stimulated Recall Interviews

• Authors: František Tůma , Michaela Píšová , Petr Najvar , Věra Janíková

Abstracts

EN

The presented study focuses on the interactive cognition of expert teachers during their teaching. 16 foreign language teachers’ lessons were videotaped and the teachers were asked to reveal their interactive cognition through a stimulated recall interview. The verbal protocols were then analyzed in the light of argumentation analysis and the claims were subject to content analysis. The results showed that individual teachers varied greatly as regards their percentages of stimulated recall as well as other aspects of their interactive cognition, which supports the prototypical view of teacher expertise.

Keywords

EN

interactive cognition; stimulated recall; pedagogical content knowledge; foreign language teaching

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: The New Educational Review
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 36
• Pages: 289-299

Dates

published

2014

Contributors

author

František Tůma

• Masaryk University

author

Michaela Píšová

• Masaryk University

author

Petr Najvar

• Masaryk University

author

Věra Janíková

• Masaryk University

References

• Ball, D., Thames, M.H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content Knowledge for Teaching: What Makes It Special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389 - 407.
• Ericsson, K.A., & Simon, H.A. (1999). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Glaser, R., & Chi, M. (1988). Overview. In M. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. xv-xxvii). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
• Grossman, P.L. (1990). The making of a teacher. Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Gumperz, J.J. (1992). Contextualization and understanding. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context. Language as an interactive phenomenon. (pp. 229 - 252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(8), 835 - 854.
• Henderson, L., & Tallman, J. (2006). Stimulated recall and mental models: Tools for teaching and learning computer information literacy. Lanham: The Scarecrow Press.
• Janík, T., Maňák, J., & Knecht, P. (2009). Cíle a obsahy školního vzdělávání a metodologie jejich utváření. Brno: Paido.
• Janík, T., Najvar, P., Slavík, J., & Trna, J. (2009). On the dynamic nature of physics teachers pedagogical content knowledge. Orbis scholae, 3(2), 47 - 62.
• Janík, T., Knecht, P., Najvar, P., Pavlas, T., Slavík, J., & Solnička D. (2010). Kurikulární reforma na gymnáziích v rozhovorech s koordinátory pilotních a partnerských škol. Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze.
• Janík, T., Janko, T., Knecht, P., Kubiatko, M., Najvar, P., Pavlas, T., Slavík, J., Solnička, D., & Vlčková, K. (2010). Kurikulární reforma na gymnáziích: výsledky dotazníkového šetření.. Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze.
• Janíková, V., Tůma, F., & Najvar, P. (2013). Fremdsprachenlehrkräfte als Experten: Teilergebnisse einer introspektiven Studie. In V. Janíková & R. Seebauer (Eds.), Education and Languages in Europe. Bildung und Sprachen in Europa (pp. 121 - 130). Wien/Berlin: LIT Verlag.
• Kelly, G.J., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students’ reasoning about electricity: combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849 - 871.
• Kerlin, S.C., McDonald, S.P., & Kelly, G.J. (2010). Complexity of Secondary Scientific Data Sources and Students’ Argumentative Discourse. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1207 - 1225.
• Kopperschmidt, J. (1985). An analysis of argumentation. In T.A. van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis. Volume 2. (pp. 159 - 168). London: Academic Press.
• Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95 - 132). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Píšová, M., Kostková, K., & Janík, T. (Eds.) (2011). Kurikulární reforma na gymnáziích: případové studie tvorby kurikula. Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický.
• Píšová, M. et al. (in preparation). Učitel expert. Výzkumná zpráva. [working title]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
• Shulman, L.S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching. A contemporary perspective. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 3 - 36). New York: MacMillan.
• Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching. Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1 - 22.
• Schepens, A., Aelterman, A., & van Keer, H. (2007). Studying learning processes of student teachers with stimulated recall interviews through changes in interactive cognitions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(4), 457 - 472.
• Sternberg, R.J., & Horvath, J.A. (1995). A prototype view of expert teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(6), 9 - 17.
• Sutton, R.E., & Wheatley, K.F. (2003). Teachers ’ emotions and teaching: a review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 15(4), 327 - 358.
• Toulmin, S.E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/tner.14.36.2.23

Biblioteka Nauki

2031656