Teachers as Designers: Pre and In-Service Teachers’ Authoring of Anchor Video as a Means to Professional Development

Video Research in the Learning Sciences

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 411-423

  Petrosino, Anthony J ^a   Koehler, Matthew J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85145853692     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203877258-34     Document Type: Chapter

References (27)

1. Beck, R. J., King, A., & Marshall, S. K. (2002). Effects of video case construction on preservice teachers’ observations of teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 70(4), 345-355.
2. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposalwith multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol. 24, pp. 61-100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, S. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
4. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV). (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2-10.
5. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Glaser, C. W., Rieth, H. J., Kinzer, C. K., Colburn, L. K., & Peter, J. (2000). A description of the impact of multimedia anchored instruction on classroom interactions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 14(2), 27-43.
7. Goldman, S. R., Petrosino, A. J., Sherwood, R. D., Garrison, S., Hickey, D., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J.W. (1996). Multimedia environments for enhancing science instruction. In S. Vosniadou, E. De Corte, R. Glaser, & H. Mandl (Eds.), International perspectives on the psychological foundations of technology-based learning environments (pp. 257-284). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
8. Goldman-Segall, R. (1998). Points of viewing children’s thinking: A digital ethnograper’s journey. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Harrington, H. L. (1999). Case analyses as a performance of thought. In M. A. Lundeberg, B. B. Levin, & H. L. Harrington (Eds.), Who learns what from cases and how: The research base for teaching and learning with cases (pp. 29-48). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Hickey, D. T., Moore, A. L., & Pellegrino, J.W. (2001). The motivational and academic consequences of elementary mathematics environments: Do constructivist innovations and reforms make a difference? American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 611-652.
11. Krajcik, J. S., Soloway, E., Blumenfeld, P., & Marx, R.W. (1998). Scaffolded technology tools to promote teaching and learning in science. 1998 ACSD yearbook: Learning and technology.
12. Krajcik, J. S., Czerniak, C., & Berger, C. (2002). Teaching science in elementary and middle school classrooms: A project-based approach (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
13. Lampert, M., & Ball, D. L. (1998). Teaching, multimedia, and mathematics: Investigations of real practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
14. Lundeberg, M. A., Levin, B. B., & Harrington, H. L. (Eds.). (1999). Who learns what from cases and how: The research base for teaching and learning with cases. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2003). Not “what” but “how”: Becoming design-wise about educational technology. In Y. Zhao (Ed.), What teachers should know about technology:Perspectives and practices (pp. 99-122). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
16. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (in press). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record.
17. Petrosino, A. J., & Dickinson, G. (2003). Integrating technology with meaningful content and faculty research: The UTeach Natural Sciences Program. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 3(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol3/iss1/general/article7.cfm
18. President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology, Panel on Educational Technology. (1997). Report to the president on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/NSTC/PCAST/K-12ed.html#exec
19. Sharp, D. L. M., Bransford, J. D., Goldman, S. R., Risko, V. J., Kinzer, C. K., & Vye, N. J. (1995). Dynamic visual support for story comprehension and mental model building by young, at-risk children. Educational Technology Research & Development, 43(4), 25-42.
20. Sherwood, R. D., Kinzer, C. K., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1987). Some benefits of creating macro-contexts for science instruction: Initial findings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(5), 417-435.
21. Shulman, J. H. (Ed.). (1992). Methods in teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
22. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
23. Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 1-30). New York: Teachers College Press.
24. Sykes, G., & Bird, T. (1992). Teacher education and the case idea. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 18, pp. 457-521). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
25. Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
26. Wong, D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Siebenthal, S. (in press). Teacher as filmmaker:iVideos, technology education, and professional development. In M. Girod & J. Steed (Eds.), Technology in the college classroom. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.
27. Zhao, Y. (Ed.). (2003). What teachers should know about technology: Perspectives and practices. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.