通过数字应用能力和教师实践进行反馈

IF 3.3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Science Education and Technology Pub Date : 2024-05-07 DOI:10.1007/s10956-024-10117-9
Nilay Muslu, Marcelle A. Siegel
{"title":"通过数字应用能力和教师实践进行反馈","authors":"Nilay Muslu, Marcelle A. Siegel","doi":"10.1007/s10956-024-10117-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Assessment feedback is an essential way to promote student learning. Students and teachers may benefit from educational technologies during the feedback process. The purpose of this study was to identify the feedback dimensions that were fulfilled by iPad applications (apps) and to compare teacher practice to the affordances of apps. Typological data analysis was used to perform this qualitative case study. We analyzed seven apps (<i>QR Code Reader, Schoology, Kahoot!, Nearpod,</i> <i>Socrative, ZipGrade,</i> and <i>The Physics Classroom</i>) that a high school physics teacher used to provide feedback in a technology-enhanced classroom. Data sources included classroom video recordings and the websites of these apps. To facilitate the analysis of the data, we enhanced the feedback dimensions identified by Hatzipanagos and Warburton (2009). Our analysis highlighted the diverse capabilities of these apps with regard to supporting the following dimensions of effective feedback: dialogue, visibility, appropriateness, community, power, learning, timeliness, clearness, complexity, reflection, and action. We found that through additional discussion and interactions with students, the teacher could support dimensions that an app did not support. This study not only underscores the critical interplay between technological tools and teacher practices with regard to crafting effective feedback mechanisms but also offers practical recommendations for educators seeking to optimize technology-enhanced feedback in classroom settings. Future research is encouraged to explore the technology implementation experiences of less experienced teachers. Examining teachers working at various school levels and from various countries can offer valuable insights.</p>","PeriodicalId":50057,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Education and Technology","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feedback Through Digital Application Affordances and Teacher Practice\",\"authors\":\"Nilay Muslu, Marcelle A. Siegel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10956-024-10117-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Assessment feedback is an essential way to promote student learning. Students and teachers may benefit from educational technologies during the feedback process. The purpose of this study was to identify the feedback dimensions that were fulfilled by iPad applications (apps) and to compare teacher practice to the affordances of apps. Typological data analysis was used to perform this qualitative case study. We analyzed seven apps (<i>QR Code Reader, Schoology, Kahoot!, Nearpod,</i> <i>Socrative, ZipGrade,</i> and <i>The Physics Classroom</i>) that a high school physics teacher used to provide feedback in a technology-enhanced classroom. Data sources included classroom video recordings and the websites of these apps. To facilitate the analysis of the data, we enhanced the feedback dimensions identified by Hatzipanagos and Warburton (2009). Our analysis highlighted the diverse capabilities of these apps with regard to supporting the following dimensions of effective feedback: dialogue, visibility, appropriateness, community, power, learning, timeliness, clearness, complexity, reflection, and action. We found that through additional discussion and interactions with students, the teacher could support dimensions that an app did not support. This study not only underscores the critical interplay between technological tools and teacher practices with regard to crafting effective feedback mechanisms but also offers practical recommendations for educators seeking to optimize technology-enhanced feedback in classroom settings. Future research is encouraged to explore the technology implementation experiences of less experienced teachers. Examining teachers working at various school levels and from various countries can offer valuable insights.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Science Education and Technology\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Science Education and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10117-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Science Education and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10117-9","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

评估反馈是促进学生学习的重要途径。在反馈过程中,学生和教师都可以从教育技术中获益。本研究的目的是确定 iPad 应用程序(Apps)可满足的反馈维度,并将教师的实践与应用程序的功能进行比较。这项定性案例研究采用了类型学数据分析方法。我们分析了一位高中物理教师在技术强化课堂中用于提供反馈的七款应用程序(QR Code Reader、Schoology、Kahoot!、Nearpod、Socrative、ZipGrade 和 The Physics Classroom)。数据来源包括课堂录像和这些应用程序的网站。为了便于分析数据,我们增强了 Hatzipanagos 和 Warburton(2009 年)确定的反馈维度。我们的分析强调了这些应用程序在支持有效反馈的以下方面的不同能力:对话、可见性、适当性、社区、权力、学习、及时性、清晰度、复杂性、反思和行动。我们发现,通过与学生的额外讨论和互动,教师可以支持应用程序不支持的方面。这项研究不仅强调了技术工具与教师实践之间的重要互动关系,有助于建立有效的反馈机制,而且还为教育工作者在课堂教学中优化技术强化反馈提供了切实可行的建议。我们鼓励未来的研究探索经验不足的教师的技术实施经验。对不同学校和不同国家的教师进行研究,可以提供有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Feedback Through Digital Application Affordances and Teacher Practice

Assessment feedback is an essential way to promote student learning. Students and teachers may benefit from educational technologies during the feedback process. The purpose of this study was to identify the feedback dimensions that were fulfilled by iPad applications (apps) and to compare teacher practice to the affordances of apps. Typological data analysis was used to perform this qualitative case study. We analyzed seven apps (QR Code Reader, Schoology, Kahoot!, Nearpod, Socrative, ZipGrade, and The Physics Classroom) that a high school physics teacher used to provide feedback in a technology-enhanced classroom. Data sources included classroom video recordings and the websites of these apps. To facilitate the analysis of the data, we enhanced the feedback dimensions identified by Hatzipanagos and Warburton (2009). Our analysis highlighted the diverse capabilities of these apps with regard to supporting the following dimensions of effective feedback: dialogue, visibility, appropriateness, community, power, learning, timeliness, clearness, complexity, reflection, and action. We found that through additional discussion and interactions with students, the teacher could support dimensions that an app did not support. This study not only underscores the critical interplay between technological tools and teacher practices with regard to crafting effective feedback mechanisms but also offers practical recommendations for educators seeking to optimize technology-enhanced feedback in classroom settings. Future research is encouraged to explore the technology implementation experiences of less experienced teachers. Examining teachers working at various school levels and from various countries can offer valuable insights.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Journal of Science Education and Technology EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
45
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Science Education and Technology is an interdisciplinary forum for the publication of original peer-reviewed, contributed and invited research articles of the highest quality that address the intersection of science education and technology with implications for improving and enhancing science education at all levels across the world. Topics covered can be categorized as disciplinary (biology, chemistry, physics, as well as some applications of computer science and engineering, including the processes of learning, teaching and teacher development), technological (hardware, software, deigned and situated environments involving applications characterized as with, through and in), and organizational (legislation, administration, implementation and teacher enhancement). Insofar as technology plays an ever-increasing role in our understanding and development of science disciplines, in the social relationships among people, information and institutions, the journal includes it as a component of science education. The journal provides a stimulating and informative variety of research papers that expand and deepen our theoretical understanding while providing practice and policy based implications in the anticipation that such high-quality work shared among a broad coalition of individuals and groups will facilitate future efforts.
期刊最新文献
Effect of Simulation-Supported Prediction Observation Explanation Activities on Students’ Conception of Learning Physics Related to Solid and Liquid Pressure A Study of Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) in the Blended Synchronous Science Classroom Framing Geohazard Learning as Risk Assessment Using a Computer Simulation: A Case of Flooding When Tutors Simultaneously Instruct Students from the Primary, Middle, and High School Levels in Online One-on-One Tutoring: Investigating the Interaction Dynamics Using AI, ENA, and LSA Methods “Effects of Educational Robotics on Kindergarteners’ Collaboration, Communication, Critical Thinking, and Creativity: A Meta-Analysis”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1