Introduction: Studying interaction and instructional patterns in classrooms

Teaching and Learning in Lower Secondary Schools in the Era of PISA and TIMSS

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 1-14

  Klette, Kirsti ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84943592702     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-17302-3_1     Document Type: Chapter

References (59)

1. Alexander, R. (2000). Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell.
2. Alexander, R. (2006). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. Cambridge: Dialo-gos.
3. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience. In: Commission on behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council.
4. Brophy, J. (2000). Teaching. Educational practices series-1. International Bureau of Education, Geneva (Switzerland); International Academy of Education, Brussels (Belgium). Http://www.ibe.unesco.org
5. Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students to learn (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Campbell, J. (2004). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
7. Carlgren, I., Klette, K., Myrdal, S., Schnack, K., & Simola, H. (2006). Changes in Nordic teaching practices: From individualised teaching to teaching of individuals. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 301-326.
8. Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
9. Clark, R. C., & Mayer, E. L. (2003). E-learning and the science of instruction. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Pfeiffer.
10. Clarke, D., Keitel, C., & Shimizu, Y. (Eds.). (2006). Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries: The insider’s perspective. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
11. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & McClain, K. (Eds.). (2000). Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Dalland, C. P., & Klette, K. (2012/2014). Work-plan heroes: Student strategies in lower secondary Norwegian classrooms. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58, 400-423.
13. Denham, C., & Lieberman, A. (Eds.). (1980). Time to learn. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
14. Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 392-431). New York: Macmillan.
15. Driver, R., et al. (1994). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children’s ideas. London: Routledge.
16. Duffy, G., & Hoffman, J. V. (1999). In pursuit of an illusion: The flawed search for a perfect method. Reading Teaching, 53, 10-16.
17. Dysthe, O. (1995). Det flerstemmige klasserommet. Skriving og samtalefor a l&re.Oslo: Ad Nota Gyldendal. [The multivoiced classroom] Oslo: Ad Notam/Gyldendal 1995, 246 sider. (Svensk omsetting: Det flerstdmmiga klassrummet, Lund: Studentlitteratur 1996, Dansk omsetting: Det flerstemmige klasserommet, KLIM 1997).
18. Edvards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Methuen.
19. Emanuelsson, J., & Sahlstrom, F. (2008). The price of participation: Teacher control versus student participation in classroom interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52, 205-223.
20. Ericksson, F. (2006). Definition and analysis of data from videotape: Some research procedures and their rationales. In C. Gregory, J. L. Green, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in educational research (pp. 177-192). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
21. Fischer, H., & Neumann, K. (2012). Video analysis as a tool for understanding science instruction. In J. Dillon & D. Jorde (Eds.), The world of science education (pp. 115-140). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
22. Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. Iii, pp. 403-422). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Hanushek, E. A., & Woessman, L. (2011). The economics of international differences in educational achievement. In: Handbook of the economics of education (vol. 2, pp 89-200). Elsevier B.V.
24. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.
25. Hiebert, J., & Stigler, J. W. (2004). A world of difference: Classrooms abroad provide lessons in teaching math and science. Journal of Staff Development, 25(4), 10-15.
26. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession. Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3-15.
27. Janik, T., Seidel, T., & Najvar, P. (2009). Introduction: On the power of video studies. In T. Janik & T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 7-23). Münster: Waxmann Publishing.
28. Juzwik, M., Nystrand, M., Kelly, S., & Sherry, M. (2008). Oral narrative genres as dialogic resources for classroom literature study: A contextualized case study of conversational narrative discussion. American Educational Research Journal, 45(4), 1111-1154. 8.
29. Kjaernsli, M., & Roe, A. (2010). Pisa 2009 - Findings. In M. Kjmrnsli & A. Roe (Eds.), National PISA report2009. Oslo: Oslo University Press.
30. Kjaernsli, M., Lie, S., Olsen, R. V., Roe, A., & Turmo, A. (2004). National PISA report 2003. Oslo: Oslo University Press.
31. Klette, K. (2007). Trends in research on teaching and learning in schools: Didactics meets classroom studies. European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 147-161.
32. Klette, K. (2009). Challenges in strategies for complexity reduction in video studies. Experiences from the PISA+ study. In T Janik & T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 61-83). Münster: Waxmann Publishing.
33. Klette, K., et al. (2005). Pisa C coding manual: Categories for video analyses of classroom activities with a focus on the teacher. Http://www.uv.uio.no/ils/forskning/prosjekter/pisapluss/kodeskjema/
34. Klieme, E., Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2009). The Pythagoras study: Investigating effects on teaching and learning Swizz and German mathematics classrooms. In T. Janik & T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 137-160). Münster: Waxmann Publishing.
35. Leinhardt, G. (2004). Instructional explanations: A commonplace for teaching and location for contrast. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 333-357). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
36. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. New York: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
37. Lipowski, F., Rakoczy, K., Drollinger-Vetter, B., Klieme, E., Reusser, K., & Pauli, C. (2009). Quality of geometry instructions and its short-term impact on students’ understanding of the Pythagorean theorem. Learning and Instruction, 19(1), 527-537.
38. McKenzie, P., Santiago, P., Sliwka, P., & Hiroyuki, H. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris: OECD.
39. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
40. Newmann, F. M., Lopez, G., & Bryk, A. S. (1998). The quality of intellectual work in Chicago schools: A baseline report. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Available at Consortium on Chicago School Research.
41. Nuthall, G. (2005). The cultural myths and realities of classroom teaching and learning: A personal journey. Teacher College Record, 107(5), 895-934.
42. Nystrand, M. (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
43. O’Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1993). Aligning academic task and participation status through revoicing: Analysis of a classroom discourse strategy. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 24(4), 318-335.
44. Odegaard, M., & Klette, K. (2012). Teaching activities and language use in science classrooms: Scales and analytical categories as pillars for possible interpretations. In J. Dillon & D. Jorde (Eds.), The world of science education (Vol. 4, pp. 181-202). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
45. Odegaard, M., & Arnesen, N. E. (2006). Categories for video analysis of science classroom activities. Oslo: University of Oslo. Http://www.uv.uio.no/ils/forskning/prosjekter/pisapluss/kodeskjema/
46. Odegaard M., Arnesen, N., & Bergem, O. K. (2007). Categories for video analyses of mathematics classrooms.http://www.uv.uio.no/ils/forskning/prosjekter/pisa-pluss/kodeskjema/
47. Roe, A., & Taube, K. (2012). To read or not to read - That is the question. Reading engagement and reading habits in a gender perspective. In N. Egelund (Ed.), Northern lights on PISA 2009 -Focus on reading. Temanord 2012: 501. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of ministers.
48. Roth, K. J. (2009). Elementary science teaching. In N. G. Ledermann & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 361-393). Routledge.
49. Roth, K. J., Drucker, S. L., Garnier, G. H., Lemmens, M., Chen, C., Kawanaka, T., Rasmussen, D., Trubacova, S., Warvi, D., Okomato, Y., Gonzales, P., Stigler, J., & Galimore, R. (2006). Teaching science in five countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study statistical analysis report (NCES 2006-011). Us Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
50. Seidel, T, & Prenzel, M. (2006). Stability of teaching patterns in physics instruction: Findings from a video study. Learning and Instruction, 16, 228-240.
51. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the PastDecade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454-499.
52. Seidel, T., Prenzel, M., & Koberg, M. (Eds.). (2005). How to run a video study: Technical report of the IPN video study. Münster: Waxmann Verlag.
53. Sfard, A. (2000). On reform movement and the limits of mathematical discourse. Mathematical thinking and learning, 2(3), 157-189.
54. Sfard, A., Nesher, P., Streefland, L., Cobb, P., & Mason, J. (1998). Learning mathematics through conversation: Is it as good as they say? For the Learning of Mathematics, 18(1), 41-51.
55. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press.
56. Timperley, H., & Alton-Lee, A. (2008). Reframing teacher professional learning. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 328-369.
57. Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Wahlberg, H. J. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Review of Educational Research,63, 249-294.
58. Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89-122.
59. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a socio-cultural practice and theory of education. Toronto: Cambridge University Press.