重塑反应性挑战:一个框架锚定的解释框架来解释新手教师对学生思维的注意力和反应的不规则性

IF 2.3 1区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Cognition and Instruction Pub Date : 2020-02-26 DOI:10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156
J. Richards, Andrew Elby, Melissa J. Luna, Amy D. Robertson, D. Levin, Colleen Gillespie Nyeggen
{"title":"重塑反应性挑战:一个框架锚定的解释框架来解释新手教师对学生思维的注意力和反应的不规则性","authors":"J. Richards, Andrew Elby, Melissa J. Luna, Amy D. Robertson, D. Levin, Colleen Gillespie Nyeggen","doi":"10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Mathematics and science education researchers focused on teacher education emphasize attention and responsiveness to student thinking as central to effective classroom practice. Being responsive to student thinking involves attending to the substance of students’ ideas—the meaning students are making—and pursuing that thinking, adjusting the flow of instruction as needed. Yet, attention and responsiveness to student thinking is irregular and generally rare among novice teachers. In this theoretical paper, we argue that the irregularity of attention and responsiveness to student thinking, including variability within individual teachers’ practice, can be explained by a framework grounded in teachers’ localized framings of their classroom activity—their sense of “what is it that’s going on here.” Using analyses of classroom episodes across contexts and timescales to illustrate our claims, we demonstrate how a framing-anchored framework can coordinate and improve upon three common explanations for the irregularity of novice teachers’ attention and responsiveness to student thinking: underdeveloped skills and/or knowledge for attending and responding, “transmissionist” beliefs about learning, and institutional constraints (and teachers’ perceptions thereof). Building on this argument, we suggest that teacher educators can work with novice teachers’ framings of their classroom activities as a generative anchor for supporting attention and responsiveness to student thinking in classroom settings.","PeriodicalId":47945,"journal":{"name":"Cognition and Instruction","volume":"38 1","pages":"116 - 152"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reframing the Responsiveness Challenge: A Framing-Anchored Explanatory Framework to Account for Irregularity in Novice Teachers’ Attention and Responsiveness to Student Thinking\",\"authors\":\"J. Richards, Andrew Elby, Melissa J. Luna, Amy D. Robertson, D. Levin, Colleen Gillespie Nyeggen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Mathematics and science education researchers focused on teacher education emphasize attention and responsiveness to student thinking as central to effective classroom practice. Being responsive to student thinking involves attending to the substance of students’ ideas—the meaning students are making—and pursuing that thinking, adjusting the flow of instruction as needed. Yet, attention and responsiveness to student thinking is irregular and generally rare among novice teachers. In this theoretical paper, we argue that the irregularity of attention and responsiveness to student thinking, including variability within individual teachers’ practice, can be explained by a framework grounded in teachers’ localized framings of their classroom activity—their sense of “what is it that’s going on here.” Using analyses of classroom episodes across contexts and timescales to illustrate our claims, we demonstrate how a framing-anchored framework can coordinate and improve upon three common explanations for the irregularity of novice teachers’ attention and responsiveness to student thinking: underdeveloped skills and/or knowledge for attending and responding, “transmissionist” beliefs about learning, and institutional constraints (and teachers’ perceptions thereof). Building on this argument, we suggest that teacher educators can work with novice teachers’ framings of their classroom activities as a generative anchor for supporting attention and responsiveness to student thinking in classroom settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognition and Instruction\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"116 - 152\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognition and Instruction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

摘要专注于教师教育的数学和科学教育研究人员强调,对学生思维的关注和反应是有效课堂实践的核心。对学生思维的反应包括关注学生思想的实质——学生正在创造的意义——并追求这种思维,根据需要调整教学流程。然而,对学生思维的关注和反应是不规律的,在新手教师中通常很少见。在这篇理论论文中,我们认为,注意力和对学生思维的反应的不规则性,包括个别教师实践中的可变性,可以用一个基于教师课堂活动本地化框架的框架来解释——他们对“这里发生了什么”的感觉。“通过对不同背景和时间尺度的课堂事件的分析来说明我们的主张,我们展示了框架锚定框架如何协调和改进新手教师对学生思维的注意力和反应不规律的三种常见解释:参与和反应的技能和/或知识不发达,关于学习的“传播主义”信念,以及制度约束(以及教师对其的看法)。基于这一论点,我们建议教师教育工作者可以将新手教师的课堂活动框架作为生成锚,在课堂环境中支持对学生思维的关注和反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reframing the Responsiveness Challenge: A Framing-Anchored Explanatory Framework to Account for Irregularity in Novice Teachers’ Attention and Responsiveness to Student Thinking
Abstract Mathematics and science education researchers focused on teacher education emphasize attention and responsiveness to student thinking as central to effective classroom practice. Being responsive to student thinking involves attending to the substance of students’ ideas—the meaning students are making—and pursuing that thinking, adjusting the flow of instruction as needed. Yet, attention and responsiveness to student thinking is irregular and generally rare among novice teachers. In this theoretical paper, we argue that the irregularity of attention and responsiveness to student thinking, including variability within individual teachers’ practice, can be explained by a framework grounded in teachers’ localized framings of their classroom activity—their sense of “what is it that’s going on here.” Using analyses of classroom episodes across contexts and timescales to illustrate our claims, we demonstrate how a framing-anchored framework can coordinate and improve upon three common explanations for the irregularity of novice teachers’ attention and responsiveness to student thinking: underdeveloped skills and/or knowledge for attending and responding, “transmissionist” beliefs about learning, and institutional constraints (and teachers’ perceptions thereof). Building on this argument, we suggest that teacher educators can work with novice teachers’ framings of their classroom activities as a generative anchor for supporting attention and responsiveness to student thinking in classroom settings.
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
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
12.10%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Among education journals, Cognition and Instruction"s distinctive niche is rigorous study of foundational issues concerning the mental, socio-cultural, and mediational processes and conditions of learning and intellectual competence. For these purposes, both “cognition” and “instruction” must be interpreted broadly. The journal preferentially attends to the “how” of learning and intellectual practices. A balance of well-reasoned theory and careful and reflective empirical technique is typical.
期刊最新文献
Teacher Cultivation of Classroom Statistical Modeling Practice: A Case Study Learning Inside the School, but Outside the Curriculum: An Extreme Case of Interest-Driven Learning in Alternative STEAM Learning Infrastructure for Schools The Intertwining of Children’s Interests and Micro-Practices at a Science Museum: Case Study of Three Children The Problem With Perspective: Students’ and Teachers’ Reasoning About Credibility During Discussions of Online Sources Collaborative Troubleshooting in STEM: A Case Study of High School Students Finding and Fixing Code, Circuit and Craft Challenges in Electronic Textiles
×
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