Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparing pre-service teachers', in-service teachers' and educational researchers' evidence-informed reasoning about classroom situations. Results from a mixed methods investigation
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparing pre-service teachers', in-service teachers' and educational researchers' evidence-informed reasoning about classroom situations. Results from a mixed methods investigation
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparing pre-service teachers', in-service teachers' and educational researchers' evidence-informed reasoning about classroom situations. Results from a mixed methods investigation
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparing pre-service teachers', in-service teachers' and educational researchers' evidence-informed reasoning about classroom situations. Results from a mixed methods investigation
2024
Overview
Pre-service teachers rarely engage in evidence-informed reasoning when they are confronted with problematic classroom situations. We argue that interventions that target pre-service teachers’ acquisition of evidence-informed reasoning skills should be informed by research that compares pre-service teachers’, in-service teachers’, and educational researchers’ evidence-informed reasoning. We asked N = 55 pre-service teachers, in-service teachers, and educational researchers to think aloud about a written classroom scenario and complete a retrospective interview on their evidence-informed reasoning. Results indicate that educational researchers describe problematic events more often than pre- and in-service teachers but do not seem to differ on a number of other reasoning activities. However, educational researchers more often refer to academic knowledge than preand in-service teachers. Pre- and in-service teachers do not seem to differ from each other, neither with respect to their reasoning activities nor concerning their use of academic knowledge. Additional qualitative analyses illustrate these findings. (DIPF/Orig.)
Lehramtsstudierende gehen selten evidenzorientiert vor, wenn sie mit problematischen Unterrichtssituationen konfrontiert sind. Wir argumentieren, dass Interventionen, die auf eine Förderung evidenzorientierter Denkfertigkeiten bei Lehramtsstudierenden abzielen, auf Ergebnissen vergleichender Forschung zu den Denkprozessen von Lehramtsstudierenden, Lehrkräften und Bildungswissenschaftler:innen basieren sollten. Wir baten N = 55 Lehramtsstudierende, Lehrkräfte und Bildungswissenschaftler*innen, über ein schriftliches Unterrichtsszenario laut nachzudenken und an einem retrospektiven Interview zur Rekonstruktion ihrer evidenzorientierten Denkprozesse teilzunehmen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Bildungswissenschaftler:innen Situationen häufiger als Lehramtsstudierende und Lehrkräfte beschreiben, sich von diesen aber nicht in anderen evidenzorientierten Denkprozessen unterscheiden. Jedoch beziehen sich Bildungswissenschaftler:innen in ihren Analysen häufiger auf bildungswissenschaftliches Wissen als Lehramtsstudierende und Lehrkräfte. Lehramtsstudierende und Lehrkräfte unterscheiden sich hinsichtlich ihrer Denkaktivitäten und Verwendung bildungswissenschaftlichen Wissens nicht voneinander. Die Ergebnisse werden durch weiterführende qualitative Analysen illustriert. (DIPF/Orig.)
Subject
