教育学分析框架:一个基于视频的工具,用于结合教师、学生和研究人员的观点

IF 1.8 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Research in Science & Technological Education Pub Date : 2021-08-29 DOI:10.1080/02635143.2021.1972960
J. Riordan, M. Hardman, D. Cumbers
{"title":"教育学分析框架:一个基于视频的工具,用于结合教师、学生和研究人员的观点","authors":"J. Riordan, M. Hardman, D. Cumbers","doi":"10.1080/02635143.2021.1972960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background dialogue between the teaching profession and researchers regarding pedagogical strategy is sometimes problematic. Pedagogy research may benefit from incorporating research methods that can investigate teachers’ and pupils’ interpretations. Purpose this research expands the Pedagogy Analysis Framework (Riordan, 2020) by explaining in detail the meso-strategies (tactics) and a macro-strategy (grand strategy) used by participants in three school science lessons about chromatography. The research design builds on previous work by using full lessons and introducing pupil group verbal protocols. In addition, Pedagogy Analysis Notation is introduced to help understand and explain macro-strategic behaviours. Sample one class of thirty 13-year-old pupils and one science teacher. Design and method four research methods were used (lesson video analysis, teacher verbal protocols, pupil group verbal protocols and researcher group interviews). Data were video recorded (managed using NVivo). Fourteen hours of video data were analysed using Grounded Theory Methods by two educational researchers and the class teacher. The interpretivist theoretical perspective (symbolic interactionism) was underpinned by a social constructionist epistemology (hence the methodology is Straussian Grounded Theory). Appropriate criteria for evaluating the emergent grounded theory were used. Data were recorded in 2017. Results the Pedagogy Analysis Framework uses the concepts: means (human and non-human), strategy (a spectrum from micro-strategies (actions), through meso-strategies (tactics) to macro-strategies (grand strategies)), ends (regarding the self, another person or a thing, or a group of people or things), and accidents. Types of tactics identified in these data were: inform (misinform and disinform), question, instruct, use space/time, repeat, train, assess, and interact. Pedagogy Analysis Notation is used to understand and explain ‘the stationary [sic] cupboard’ incident. Conclusion the extended Pedagogy Analysis Framework, combined with the Pedagogy Analysis Notation, improves strategic dialogue between teachers, pupils and educational researchers. This research design facilitates comparison of interpretations of classroom pedagogy by a teacher, pupils and two researchers.","PeriodicalId":46656,"journal":{"name":"Research in Science & Technological Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pedagogy Analysis Framework: a video-based tool for combining teacher, pupil & researcher perspectives\",\"authors\":\"J. Riordan, M. Hardman, D. Cumbers\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02635143.2021.1972960\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Background dialogue between the teaching profession and researchers regarding pedagogical strategy is sometimes problematic. Pedagogy research may benefit from incorporating research methods that can investigate teachers’ and pupils’ interpretations. Purpose this research expands the Pedagogy Analysis Framework (Riordan, 2020) by explaining in detail the meso-strategies (tactics) and a macro-strategy (grand strategy) used by participants in three school science lessons about chromatography. The research design builds on previous work by using full lessons and introducing pupil group verbal protocols. In addition, Pedagogy Analysis Notation is introduced to help understand and explain macro-strategic behaviours. Sample one class of thirty 13-year-old pupils and one science teacher. Design and method four research methods were used (lesson video analysis, teacher verbal protocols, pupil group verbal protocols and researcher group interviews). Data were video recorded (managed using NVivo). Fourteen hours of video data were analysed using Grounded Theory Methods by two educational researchers and the class teacher. The interpretivist theoretical perspective (symbolic interactionism) was underpinned by a social constructionist epistemology (hence the methodology is Straussian Grounded Theory). Appropriate criteria for evaluating the emergent grounded theory were used. Data were recorded in 2017. Results the Pedagogy Analysis Framework uses the concepts: means (human and non-human), strategy (a spectrum from micro-strategies (actions), through meso-strategies (tactics) to macro-strategies (grand strategies)), ends (regarding the self, another person or a thing, or a group of people or things), and accidents. Types of tactics identified in these data were: inform (misinform and disinform), question, instruct, use space/time, repeat, train, assess, and interact. Pedagogy Analysis Notation is used to understand and explain ‘the stationary [sic] cupboard’ incident. Conclusion the extended Pedagogy Analysis Framework, combined with the Pedagogy Analysis Notation, improves strategic dialogue between teachers, pupils and educational researchers. This research design facilitates comparison of interpretations of classroom pedagogy by a teacher, pupils and two researchers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Science & Technological Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Science & Technological Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1972960\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Science & Technological Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1972960","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景教师专业和研究人员之间关于教学策略的对话有时是有问题的。教育学研究可能受益于纳入可以调查教师和学生解释的研究方法。目的本研究通过详细解释参与者在三门关于色谱的学校科学课中使用的微观策略(策略)和宏观策略(大策略),扩展了教育学分析框架(Riordan,2020)。该研究设计以之前的工作为基础,使用完整的课程并引入学生群体言语协议。此外,还引入了教育学分析符号,以帮助理解和解释宏观战略行为。抽取一个由30名13岁学生和一名科学老师组成的班级。设计和方法采用了四种研究方法(课堂视频分析、教师言语协议、学生小组言语协议和研究者小组访谈)。数据是视频记录的(使用NVivo管理)。两名教育研究人员和班主任使用基础理论方法分析了14个小时的视频数据。解释主义的理论视角(符号互动主义)是以社会建构主义的认识论为基础的(因此方法论是斯特劳斯基础理论)。使用了适当的标准来评估紧急接地理论。数据记录于2017年。结果教育学分析框架使用了以下概念:手段(人和非人)、策略(从微观策略(行动)到微观策略(策略)再到宏观策略(大策略))、目的(关于自我、他人或事物、或一群人或事物)和意外。这些数据中确定的策略类型包括:告知(错误信息和虚假信息)、提问、指导、使用空间/时间、重复、训练、评估和互动。教育学分析符号用于理解和解释“固定橱柜”事件。结论扩展的教育学分析框架与教育学分析符号相结合,促进了教师、学生和教育研究人员之间的战略对话。这种研究设计有助于教师、学生和两名研究人员对课堂教学法的解释进行比较。
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
Pedagogy Analysis Framework: a video-based tool for combining teacher, pupil & researcher perspectives
ABSTRACT Background dialogue between the teaching profession and researchers regarding pedagogical strategy is sometimes problematic. Pedagogy research may benefit from incorporating research methods that can investigate teachers’ and pupils’ interpretations. Purpose this research expands the Pedagogy Analysis Framework (Riordan, 2020) by explaining in detail the meso-strategies (tactics) and a macro-strategy (grand strategy) used by participants in three school science lessons about chromatography. The research design builds on previous work by using full lessons and introducing pupil group verbal protocols. In addition, Pedagogy Analysis Notation is introduced to help understand and explain macro-strategic behaviours. Sample one class of thirty 13-year-old pupils and one science teacher. Design and method four research methods were used (lesson video analysis, teacher verbal protocols, pupil group verbal protocols and researcher group interviews). Data were video recorded (managed using NVivo). Fourteen hours of video data were analysed using Grounded Theory Methods by two educational researchers and the class teacher. The interpretivist theoretical perspective (symbolic interactionism) was underpinned by a social constructionist epistemology (hence the methodology is Straussian Grounded Theory). Appropriate criteria for evaluating the emergent grounded theory were used. Data were recorded in 2017. Results the Pedagogy Analysis Framework uses the concepts: means (human and non-human), strategy (a spectrum from micro-strategies (actions), through meso-strategies (tactics) to macro-strategies (grand strategies)), ends (regarding the self, another person or a thing, or a group of people or things), and accidents. Types of tactics identified in these data were: inform (misinform and disinform), question, instruct, use space/time, repeat, train, assess, and interact. Pedagogy Analysis Notation is used to understand and explain ‘the stationary [sic] cupboard’ incident. Conclusion the extended Pedagogy Analysis Framework, combined with the Pedagogy Analysis Notation, improves strategic dialogue between teachers, pupils and educational researchers. This research design facilitates comparison of interpretations of classroom pedagogy by a teacher, pupils and two researchers.
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
Research in Science & Technological Education
Research in Science & Technological Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Ocean wave energy learning project (OWELP): a program to communicate alternative energy technology Development and use of an instrument to measure pseudoscientific beliefs in quantum mechanics: the PSEUDO-QM scale Teachers’ views on the potential of school science clubs for enhancing their learning Turkish adaptation of the science-P reasoning inventory: examining the relationships between epistemological beliefs, gender, and residential area Navigating the AI-Enhanced STEM education landscape: a decade of insights, trends, and opportunities
×
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