Video analysis as a tool for understanding science instruction

Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Retrosspective and Prospecctive

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 115-139

  Fischer, Hans E ^a   Neumann, Knut ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85014998605     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-6091-900-8     Document Type: Chapter

References (84)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2004). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2. American Psychological Association. (51). Technical recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques. Psychological Bulletin, (2).
3. Anderson, L. (1981). Instruction and Time-on- Task: a Review. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 13(4), 289-303. doi:10.1080/0022027810130402
4. Anderson, R. D. (1983). A Consolidation and Appraisal of Science Meta-Analyses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(5), 497-509.
5. Aufschnaiter, C. von, Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131. doi:10.1002/tea.20213
6. Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W., & Weiber, R. (2006). Multivariate Analysemethoden: Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung (Vol. 11). [Multivariate analysis: an applied oriented introduction] Berlin: Springer.
7. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A. (2010). Teachers' Mathematical Knowledge, Cognitive Activation in the Classroom, and Student Progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133-180. doi:10.3102/0002831209345157
8. Berg, B. L. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/51223512
9. Bromme, R. (2008). Lehrerexpertise. In W. Schneider & M. Hasselhorn (Eds.), Handbuch der pädagogischen Psychologie (pp. 159-167). [Handbook of pedagogical psychology] Göttingen ;, Bern, Wien, Paris, Oxford, Prag, Toronto, Cambridge, MA, Amsterdam, Kopenhagen: Hogrefe.
10. Bromme, R. (1997). Kompetenzen, Funktionen und unterrichtliches Handeln der Lehrer. In F. E. Weinert (Ed.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie: Vol. 3. Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule (pp. 177-212). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
11. Brophy, J. E., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behaviour and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 328-375). New York: Macmillan.
12. Chao, I., & Jen, T. (2007). Policy Evaluation on Technology Integrated Instructions of Junior High Math and Science Teaching in Taiwan. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2007 (pp. 2204-2211). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
13. Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. M. (1986). Teachers' Tought Processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
14. Clarke, D. J., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947-967.
15. Clausen, M. (2000). Wahrnehmung von Unterricht, Übereinstimmung, Konstruktvalidität und Kriteriumsvalidität in der Forschung zur Unterrichtsqualität (Dissertation). [Perceiving lessons, accordance, construct validity and criterion validity in research on quality of instruction] Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin.
16. Duschl, R. (2008). Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social Learning Goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291. doi: 10.3102/ 0091732X07309371
17. Einsiedler, W. (1997). Unterrichtsqualität und Leistungsentwicklung: Literaturüberblick. In F. E. Weinert & A. Helmke (Eds.), Entwicklung im Grundschulalter (pp. 225-240). Weinheim: PVU.
18. Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 179-186.
19. Erickson, F. (1982). Audiovisual Records as a Primary Data Source. Sociological Methods & Research, 77(2), 213-232. doi:10.1177/0049124182011002008
20. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
21. Fraser, B. J., Walberg, H. J., Welch, W. W., & Hattie, J. A. (1987). Syntheses of Educational Productivity Research. International Journal of Educational Research, U, 145-252.
22. Gage, N. L. (1969). Teaching methods. In R. L. Ebel, V. H. Noll, & R. M. Bauer (Eds.), Encyclopedia of educational research (4th ed., pp. 1446-1458). New York: Macmillan.
23. Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1970). Merkmale der Lehrerpersönlichkeit. In K. Ingenkamp (Ed.), Handbuch der Unterrichtsforschung (pp. 1353-1526). Weinheim: Beltz.
24. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. [S.l.]: Sociology Press. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/72762268
25. Goodman, L. A., & Kruskal, W. (1979). Measures of association for cross classification. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/503191003
26. Grimshaw, A. D. (1982). Sound-Image Data Records for Research on Social Interaction: Some Questions and Answers. Sociological Methods & Research, 11(2), 121-144. doi:10.1177/ 0049124182011002002
27. Hair, J.F., Black, W. C. Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006), Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
28. Hardy, M., & Bryman, A. (2004). Handbook of data analysis: Sage. Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?id=kV0aK9DcuukC
29. Helmke, A. (2006). Unterrichtsqualität: Erfassen, Bewerten, Verbessern (4th ed.). Seelze: Kallmeyersche Verlagsbuchhandlung GmbH.
30. Hiebert, J. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Washington, DC: U.S. Gov. Print. Off. Retrieved from http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS31989
31. Hox, J. J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: techniques and applications: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?id=LEfj0Nu2D8UC
32. Hugener, I., Pauli, C., Reusser, K., Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., & Klieme, E. (2009). Teaching patterns and learning quality in Swiss and German mathematics lessons. Learning and Instruction, 19(1), 66-78. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.02.001
33. Jacobs, J., Garnier, H., Gallimore, R., Hollingsworth, H., Givvin, K. B., Rust, K. (2003). TIMSS 1999 Video Study Technical Report: Volume 1: Mathematics Study. Waschington, DC: National Center of Education Statistics.
34. Jacobs, J. K., Kawanaka, T., & Stigler, J. W. (1999). Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches to the analysis of video data on classroom teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 717-724.
35. Jong, O. de, & van Driel, J. (2004). Exploring the developement of student teachers PCK of the multiple meanings of chemistry topics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(4), 477-491.
36. Kaplan, D. (2004). The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/53970601
37. Krauss, S., Brunner, M., Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Neubrand, M., & Jordan, A. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 716-725.
38. Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content analysis. An Introduction to its Methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage.
39. Lederman, N. G., & Latz, M. S. (1995). Knowledge structures in the preservice teacher: Sources, development, interactions, and relationships to teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 6(1), 1-19.
40. Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., Vetter, B., Klieme, E., Reusser, K., & Pauli, C. (2005). Quality of geometry instruction and its impact on the achievement of students with different characteristics. American Educational Research Association
41. Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., Pauli, C., Drollinger-Vetter, B., Klieme, E., & Reusser, K. (2009). Quality of geometry instruction and its short-term impact on students' understanding of the Pythagorean Theorem. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 527-537. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/B6VFW-4V5GCR7-1/2/8e40bb2c0c91432167cec213c5b9a8c7
42. Lubienski, S. T., & Lubienski, C. (2006). School Sector and Academic Achievement: A Multilevel Analysis of NAEP Mathematics Data: American Educational Research Journal. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 651-698.
43. Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2004). Robustness issues in multilevel regression analysis. Statistica Neerlandica, 58, 127-137.
44. Mayring, P. (1995). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (5th ed.). Weinheim: Dt. Studien-Verl.
45. Mayring, P. (2007). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken (Vol. 9). Basel: Beltz.
46. McCurry, D. (2000). Technology for Critical Pedagogy: Beyond Self-Reflection with Video. In D. A. Willis, J. D. Price, & J. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2000. Abstracts (pp. 6-11). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computer in Education (AACE).
47. Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and Values in Test Validation: The Science and Ethics of Assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5-11. doi:10.3102/0013189X018002005
48. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Buckingham: Open University Press. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/182530398
49. Norman K. Denzin, & Yvonna S. Lincoln. (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research: Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?id=X85J8ipMpZEC
50. Oevermann, U., Allert, T., Konau, E., & Krambeck, T. (1979). Die Methodologie einer "objektiven Hermeneutik" und ihre allgemeine forschungslogische Bedeutung in den Sozialwissenschaften. In H.-G. Soeffner (Ed.), Interpretative Verfahren in den Sozial- und Textwissenschaften (pp. 353-434). Stuttgart: Metzler.
51. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow's World. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved from http://public.eblib.com/EBLPublic/ PublicView.do?ptiID=359823
52. Oser, F., Dick, A., & Patry, J. (1992). Effective and responsible teaching: The new synthesis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
53. Peterson, K., Kauchak, D., & Yaakobi, D. (1980). Science students' role-specific self-concept: Course, success, and gender. Science Education, 64(2), 169-174. doi:10.1002/sce.3730640206
54. Peterson, P. L., Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., & Loef, M. (1989). Teachers' pedagogical content beliefs in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 6(1), 1-40.
55. Prenzel, M. (Ed.). (2004). PISA 2003: Der Bildungsstand der Jugendlichen in Deutschland - Ergebnisse des zweiten internationalen Vergleichs. Münster, München, Berlin: Waxmann. Retrieved from http://swbplus.bsz-bw.de/bsz114861056kla.htm
56. Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Drollinger-Vetter, B., Lipowsky, F., Pauli, C., & Reusser, K. (2007). Structure as a quality feature of instruction. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies in the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG Priority Programme (pp. 101-120). Münster: Waxmann.
57. Reyer, T. (2005). Qualitative Video-Analysis Applied to Classroom Studies - A First-Steps Workshop. In H. E. Fischer (Ed.), Developing Standards in Research on Science Education. The ESERA Summer School 2004. Proceedings of the Conference on Developing Standards in Research on Science Education - the 7th ESERA Summer School, Mülheim, Germany, 28 August - 4 September 2004 (pp. 39-45). London: Taylor&Francis.
58. Roth, K. J., Druker, S. L., Garnier, H. E., Lemmens, M., Chen, C., Kawanaka, T., (2006). Teaching science in five countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study statistical analysis report. (NCES 2006-011). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov.
59. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner (1st). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/22142478
60. Seidel, T., Prenzel, M., & Kobarg, M. (Eds.). (2005). How to run a video study. Münster: Waxmann.
61. Seidel, T., Rimmele, R., & Prenzel, M. (2005). Clarity and coherence of lesson goals as a scaffold for student learning. Learning and Instruction. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.08.004
62. Seidel, T., Rimmele, R., & Prenzel, M. (2003). Gelegenheitsstrukturen beim Klassengespräch und ihre Bedeutung für die Lernmotivation. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 31(2), 142-165.
63. Seidel, T., Prenzel, M., Rimmele, R., Herweg, C., Kobarg, M., & Schwindt, K. (2007). Science teaching and learning in German physics classrooms. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies in the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG Priority Programme (pp. 79-99). Münster: Waxmann.
64. Seidel, T., & Prenzel, M. (2005). How to run a video study. Technical report of the IPN Video Study. (Kobarg, M., Ed.). Münster: Waxmann.
65. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
66. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
67. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat. org/oclc/474779852
68. Staub, F., & Stern, E. (2002). The nature of teachers' pedagogical content beliefs matters for students' achievement gains: quasi-experimental evidence from elementary mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 344-355.
69. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding and Improving Mathematics Instruction: An Overview of the TIMSS Video Study. Phi Delta Kappa, 79(1), 7-21.
70. Stigler, J., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS videotape classroom study. Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth-grade mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan and the United States. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
71. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory: Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?id=wTwYUnHYsmMC
72. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/38732106
73. Titscher, S., & Jenner, B. (2000). Methods of text and discourse analysis: Sage. Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?id=qpaVYyn5Jj8C
74. Treumann, K. P. (1998). Triangulation als Kombination qualitativer und quantitativer Forschung. [Triangulation as combination of qualitative and quantitative research] In J. Abel, R. Möller, & K. P. Treumann (Eds.), Grundriß der Pädagogik: Vol. 2. Einführung in die Empirische Pädagogik. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.
75. Turner, J., & Meyer, D. (2000). Studying and Understanding the Instructional Contexts of Classrooms: Using our Past to Forge our Future. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 69-85. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3502_2
76. von Aufschnaiter, S., & Welzel, M. (Eds.). (2001). Nutzung von Videodaten zur Untersuchung von Lehr-Lern-Prozessen: aktuelle Methoden empirischer pädagogischer Forschung. [Using video data for analysing teaching and learning: recent methods of empirical pedagogical research] Münster: Waxmann.
77. Wackermann, R., Trendel, G., & Fischer, H. E. (2010). Evaluation of a Theory of Instructional Sequences for Physics Instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 32(7), 963-985. doi:10.1080/09500690902984792
78. Walberg, H. J. (1981). A psychological theory of educational productivity. In F. H. Farley & N. Gordon (Eds.), Psychology and education: The state of the union ((pp. 81-108). Berkeley: McCutchan.
79. Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Review of Educational Research, 63, 249-294.
80. Wever, B. de, Vankeer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2007). Applying multilevel modelling to content analysis data: Methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 436-447.doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.04.001
81. Wong, A., Young, D., & Fraser, B. (1997). A Multilevel Analysis of Learning Environments and Student Attitudes. Educational Psychology, 17(4), 449-468. doi:10.1080/0144341970170406
82. Xiaoxia, A. (2002). Gender Differences in Growth in Mathematics Achievement: Three- Level Longitudinal and Multilevel Analyses of Individual, Home, and School Influences. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 4(1), 1-22.
83. Yip, D. Y., Tsang, W. K., & Cheung, S. P. (2003). Evaluation of the Effects of Medium of Instruction on the Science Learning of Hong Kong Secondary Students: Performance on the Science Achievement Test. Bilingual Research Journal, 27(2), 295-331. doi:10.1080/15235882.2003.10162808
84. Young, D. J. (1997). A Multilevel Analysis of Science and Mathematics Achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL, March 24-26).