Mengke Wang, Taotao Long, Na Li, Yawen Shi, Zengzhao Chen
{"title":"The impact of different types of feedback on pre-service teachers’ microteaching practice and perceptions","authors":"Mengke Wang, Taotao Long, Na Li, Yawen Shi, Zengzhao Chen","doi":"10.1007/s10639-024-13024-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Feedback plays an indispensable role in pre-service teachers’ microteaching practice. It provides essential information about their microteaching performance, which is of great significance in their reflection and improvement. As AI and teaching analytics advance, feedback is no longer exclusively human-generated. AI technologies are increasingly capable of delivering feedback on microteaching performance. Yet, the effects of differing feedback types on the microteaching practices of pre-service teachers are not well documented. This study examines the impact of three types of feedback—observation-based, teaching analytics-based, and combined (a combination of both)—on pre-service teachers’ microteaching performance, scope of reflection, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction through an experimental research design. Sixty-five pre-service teachers voluntarily participated and were randomly assigned to three groups: observation-based feedback (<i>N</i> = 21), teaching analytics-based feedback (<i>N</i> = 23), and combined feedback (<i>N</i> = 21). The findings indicate that combined feedback was most effective in enhancing pre-service teachers’ scope of teaching reflection, perceived usefulness of feedback, and satisfaction, but not on microteaching performance. However, when only teaching analytics-based feedback was provided, pre-service teachers perceived it as least useful and were least satisfied. The study discusses the implications of different types of feedback in teacher education.</p>","PeriodicalId":51494,"journal":{"name":"Education and Information Technologies","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Information Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13024-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Feedback plays an indispensable role in pre-service teachers’ microteaching practice. It provides essential information about their microteaching performance, which is of great significance in their reflection and improvement. As AI and teaching analytics advance, feedback is no longer exclusively human-generated. AI technologies are increasingly capable of delivering feedback on microteaching performance. Yet, the effects of differing feedback types on the microteaching practices of pre-service teachers are not well documented. This study examines the impact of three types of feedback—observation-based, teaching analytics-based, and combined (a combination of both)—on pre-service teachers’ microteaching performance, scope of reflection, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction through an experimental research design. Sixty-five pre-service teachers voluntarily participated and were randomly assigned to three groups: observation-based feedback (N = 21), teaching analytics-based feedback (N = 23), and combined feedback (N = 21). The findings indicate that combined feedback was most effective in enhancing pre-service teachers’ scope of teaching reflection, perceived usefulness of feedback, and satisfaction, but not on microteaching performance. However, when only teaching analytics-based feedback was provided, pre-service teachers perceived it as least useful and were least satisfied. The study discusses the implications of different types of feedback in teacher education.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Education and Information Technologies (EAIT) is a platform for the range of debates and issues in the field of Computing Education as well as the many uses of information and communication technology (ICT) across many educational subjects and sectors. It probes the use of computing to improve education and learning in a variety of settings, platforms and environments.
The journal aims to provide perspectives at all levels, from the micro level of specific pedagogical approaches in Computing Education and applications or instances of use in classrooms, to macro concerns of national policies and major projects; from pre-school classes to adults in tertiary institutions; from teachers and administrators to researchers and designers; from institutions to online and lifelong learning. The journal is embedded in the research and practice of professionals within the contemporary global context and its breadth and scope encourage debate on fundamental issues at all levels and from different research paradigms and learning theories. The journal does not proselytize on behalf of the technologies (whether they be mobile, desktop, interactive, virtual, games-based or learning management systems) but rather provokes debate on all the complex relationships within and between computing and education, whether they are in informal or formal settings. It probes state of the art technologies in Computing Education and it also considers the design and evaluation of digital educational artefacts. The journal aims to maintain and expand its international standing by careful selection on merit of the papers submitted, thus providing a credible ongoing forum for debate and scholarly discourse. Special Issues are occasionally published to cover particular issues in depth. EAIT invites readers to submit papers that draw inferences, probe theory and create new knowledge that informs practice, policy and scholarship. Readers are also invited to comment and reflect upon the argument and opinions published. EAIT is the official journal of the Technical Committee on Education of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in partnership with UNESCO.