You are here:

Collected from the cutting room floor: An examination of teacher education approaches to digital video editing as a tool for shifting classroom practices.
ARTICLE

, , SUNY, United States ; , Penn State, United States ; , SUNY, United States

CITE Journal Volume 11, Number 1, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

Four separate approaches to employing digital video editing were examined with preservice and in-service teachers in an attempt to find common themes. Though selected from a variety of teacher preparation content areas (special education, literacy, and science). each approach shared several common attributes. Among them were the purposeful disruption of traditional teaching, the promotion of rigorous participation in analysis of effective teaching strategies, and the building of learning communities through apprenticeship models. Implications for teaching, teacher preparation, and research are discussed.

Citation

Yerrick, R., Thompson, M., MacDonald, S. & McLaughlin, S. (2011). Collected from the cutting room floor: An examination of teacher education approaches to digital video editing as a tool for shifting classroom practices. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 11(1), 118-148. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 23, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Abell, S.K., & Bryan, L.S. (1997). Reconceptualizing the elementary science methods course using a reflection orientation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 153-166.
  2. Abell, S.K., Bryan, L.A., & Anderson, M.A. (1998), Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reflective thinking using integrated media case-based instruction in elementary science teacher preparation. Science Education, 82, 491-509
  3. Anning, A. (1988). Teachers' theories about children's learning. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Teachers' professional learning (pp. 128-145). London, England: Falmer.
  4. Ball, D.L. (1990). The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. The Elementary School Journal, 90, 449-466.
  5. Becker, H.J., & Riel, M.M. (2000). Teacher professional engagement and constructivecompatible computer usage (Report No. 7). Irvine, CA: Teaching, Learning, and Computing.
  6. Bereiter, C. (1994). Implications of postmodernism for science, or, Science as progressive discourse. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 3-12
  7. Bryan, L.A., & Abell, S.K. (1999). Development of professional knowledge in learning to teach elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 121–139.
  8. Calandra, B., Brantley-Dias, L., & Dias, M. (2006). Using digital video for professional development in urban schools: A preservice teacher's experience with reflection. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 22(4), 137-144.
  9. Carlsen, W.S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. Review of Educational Research. 61, 157-178.
  10. Carlsen, W.S. (1993). Teacher knowledge and discourse control: Quantitative evidence from novice biology teachers' classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5), 471-481.
  11. Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  12. Clarke, A. (1994). Student-teacher reflection: Developing and defining a practice that is uniquely one's own. International Journal of Science Education, 16(5), 497-509.
  13. Clark, C.M., & Peterson, P.L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255–296). New York, NY: Macmillan.
  14. Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Reinventing student teaching. Journal of Teacher Education March, 42(2), 104-118.
  15. Davis, E.A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face [Review]. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607-651.
  16. Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280–298.
  17. Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York, NY: New Press.
  18. Driver, R. (1990). Children’s ideas in science. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
  19. Eick, C.J., & Reed, C.J. (2001). What makes an inquiry-oriented science teacher? The influence of learning histories on student teacher role identity and practice. Science teacher education, 86, 401-416.
  20. Ginsburg, M., & Clift, R. (1990). Hide and seek: Researching the hidden curriculum of preservice teacher education. In W.R. Houston, (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
  21. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606-633.
  22. Hill, H.C., Rowan, B., & Loewenberg Ball, D. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement, American Educational Research Journal, 42, 371-406.
  23. Hollingsworth, S. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 160-189.
  24. International Society for Technology in Education. (2007). National educational technology standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/netsfor-students/nets-student-standards-2007.aspx
  25. Lampert, M, & Ball, D.L. (1998). Mathematics, teaching, and multimedia: Investigations of real practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  26. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. New York, NY: Ablex.
  27. Loewenberg Ball, D. (1990). Prospective elementary and secondary teachers’ understanding of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 132-114.
  28. Munby, H., & Russell, T. (1992). Frames of reflection: An introduction. In T. Russell& H. Munby (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection (pp. 1-8). New York,
  29. The National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America's future. Retrieved from http://www.nctaf.org/resources/archives
  30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2005). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Retrieved from http://nctm.org/standards/content.aspx?id=16909
  31. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
  32. Nieto, S. (2000); Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
  33. Osborne, R., & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children’s science. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  34. Osborne, R.J., & Wittrock, M.C. (1983), Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67, 489-508.
  35. Pflaum, W.D. (2001). The technology fix: The promise and reality of computers in our schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  36. Rakes, G.C., Flowers, B.F., Casey, H.B., & Santana, R. (2001). An analysis of instructional technology use and constructivist behaviors in K-12 teachers. International Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1), 55-64. Retrieved from http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/ijet/v3n1/rakes/index.html
  37. Richardson, V. (1996) Preservice teachers beliefs. In J. Raths & A. Raths McAninch, (Eds.), Teacher beliefs and classroom performance: the impact of teacher education (pp. 1-22). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing..
  38. Roth, W.-M. (2003). Scientific literacy as an emergent feature of collective human praxis. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 9-23.
  39. Runge, A., Spiegel, A., Pytlik, L., Dunbar, S., Fuller, R., Sowell, G., & Brooks,D. (1999). Hands-on computer use in science classrooms: the skeptics are still waiting. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 33-44.
  40. Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Washington DC: Basic Books Inc.
  41. Solomon, J., & Aikenhead, G.S. (Eds.) (1994). STS education: International perspectives on reform. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 11(2)
  42. Sweeney, A.E., Bula, O.A., & Cornett, J.W. (2001), The role of personal practice theories in the professional development of a beginning high school chemistry teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 408-441.
  43. Trimmel, M., & Bachmann, J. (2004). Cognitive, social, motivational and health aspects of students in laptop classrooms. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(2), 151-158.
  44. Van Driel, J.H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2002), Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers' practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 137-158
  45. Van Zee, E.H., & Roberts, D. (2001), Using pedagogical inquiries as a basis for learning to teach: Prospective teachers' reflections upon positive science learning experiences. Science Education, 85, 733-757.
  46. Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 165-205
  47. Yerrick, R., & Hoving, T. (2003). One foot in the dock and one foot on the boat: Preservice science teachers' interpretations of field-based science methods in culturally diverse contexts. Journal of Science Education 87, 390-418.
  48. Yerrick, R., Parke, H., & Nugent, J. (1997). Struggling to promote deeply rooted change: The filtering effect of teachers’ beliefs on understanding transformational views of teaching science. Science Education, 81, 137-159.
  49. Yerrick, R., Ross, D., & Molebash, P. (2005). Too close for comfort: Real-time science teaching reflections via digital video editing. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 6, 351-375.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Teaching Teachers for the Future: Building the Educational Technology Capacity of Pre-service Teachers in Australian Universities, Part 2

    Chris Campbell, The University of Queensland, Australia; Peter Albion, University of Southern Queensland, Australia; Matthew Kearney, Damian Maher & Kimberley Pressick-Kilborn, University of Technology Sydney, Australia; Jason Zagami, Griffith University, Australia

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012 (Mar 05, 2012) pp. 2241–2248

  2. Driving Pre-Service Science Teachers’ TPACK Development Through Their Generative Use Of Digital Video

    Matthew Kearney, Kimberly Pressick-Kilborn & Damian Maher, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia, Australia

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012 (Mar 05, 2012) pp. 1381–1388

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.