Producing knowledge for improvement: the 3A procedure as a tool for research on teaching and learning
Abstrakt
The paper argues for a specific approach in research on (the quality of) the processes of teaching and learning. While different research methodologies are used to analyse static phenomena, in this paper an approach is proposed that concentrates on the processes that take place within the classroom, especially on the ways in which students develop their understanding and their competences through those instructional activities that have them work with the content (the content-focused approach). Specifically, the paper aims to introduce a research approach that has been developed as a response to some identified challenges of prevailing methods in research on teaching and learning. The 3A procedure is introduced as a specific research methodology for analysing real-life teaching and learning situations in the classroom (captured on video).
We start by noting some challenges that current research on teaching and learning is facing and indicate how these challenges are met in the proposed research approach. In the second part we briefly mention some of the well-known methodologies that provided inspirations in the development of the proposed approach. Then the 3A procedure is presented and briefly discussed. It consists in three distinct steps of (1) annotating, (2) analysing and (3) altering a particular teaching and learning situation. To illustrate the approach, an example is provided of an analysis of a genuine teaching and learning situation. In the discussion, we argue that the use of the proposed methodology can bring systematic, empirically grounded and theoretically argued knowledge that will contribute to the understanding of instructional quality. Such analyses also help in developing a shared language for describing and interpreting teaching. This kind of knowledge (pedagogical knowledge for improvement) – represented in the form of case studies – should become the ground for the building of a knowledge base for teaching and could be used when striving to improve teaching practices.
Keywords
instructional quality, knowledge, conceptual-structure, teaching and learning situations, pedagogical knowledge, knowledge for improvement
Reference
Amade-Escot, C. (2005). Using the Critical Didactic Incidents Method to analyze the content taught. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 24(2), 127–148.
https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.24.2.127
Bell, P., Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Design-based research in education. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environment for science education (pp. 73–85). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Gruschka, A. (2013). Verstehen fördern, Verstehen verhindern. In K. P. Liessmann & K. Lacina (Eds.), Sackgassen der Bildungsreform (pp. 25–36). Wien: Facultas.
Janík, T., Slavík, J., Mužík, V., Trna, J., Janko, T., Lokajíčková, ... Zlatníček, P. (2013). Kvalita (ve) vzdělávání [Quality in/of Education]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
Janík, T. (2010). Stav a výhledy českého pedagogického výzkumu [The status and outlook of Czech educational research]. Pedagogická orientace, 20(2), 5–22.
Janík, T. (2016). Aktuelle Entwicklungen im Bildungsbereich in der Tschechischen Republik: Curriculum – Unterricht – Lehrerbildung. Münster: Waxmann.
Kolodner, J. L. (2006). Case-based reasoning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 225–242). Cambridge: CUP.
Komorek, M., & Kattmann, U. (2008). The model of educational reconstruction. In S. Mikelskis-Seifert, U. Ringelband, & M. Brückmann (Eds.), Four decades of research in science education – from curriculum development to quality improvement (pp. 171–188). Münster: Waxmann.
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2011). Managing teacher education relevant for practice: the pedagogy of realistic teacher education. Orbis scholae, 5(2), 31–50.
Kulka, T. (1989). Art and science: An outline of a Popperian aesthetics. British Journal of Aesthetics, 29(3), 122–148.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjaesthetics/29.3.197
Leach, J., Ametller, J., & Scott, P. (2010). Establishing and communicating knowledge about teaching and learning scientific content: The role of design briefs. In K. Kortland & K. Klaassen (Eds.), Designing theory-based teaching-learning sequences for science education (pp. 7–23). Utrecht: CD-Press.
Long, M. H. (1980). Inside the 'black box': methodological issues in classroom research on language learning. Language Learning, 30(1), 1–42.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1980.tb00149.x
Midtsundstad, J. H. (2015). Bildung – At risk in school organisation? In S. Hillen & C. Aprea (Eds.), Instrumentalism in education – where is Bildung left? (pp. 29–41). Münster: Waxmann.
Minaříková, E., Píšová, M., Janík, T., & Uličná, K. (2015). Video clubs: EFL teachers' selective attention before and after. Orbis scholae, 9(2) 55â75.
Norman, G., Eva, K., Brooks, L., & Hamstra, S. (2006). Expertise in medicine and surgery. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 339–353). New York: CUP.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816796.019
Peschl, M. F. (2006). Modes of knowing and modes of coming to know. Knowledge creation and knowledge co-construction as socioepistemological engineering in educational processes. Constructivist Foundations, 1(3), 111–123.
Prenzel, M. (2009). Von der Unterrichtsforschung zur Exzellenz in der Lehrerbildung. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 27(3), 327–345.
Prenzel, M. (2012). Empirische Bildungsforschung morgen: Reichen unsere bisherigen Forschungsansätze aus? In M. Gläser-Zikuda, T. Seidel, C. Rohlfs, A. Gröschner, & S. Ziegelbauer (Eds.), Mixed Methods in der empirischen Bildungsforschung (pp. 273–285). Münster: Waxmann.
Putnam, H. (1981). Reason, truth and history. Cambridge: CUP.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625398
Reusser, K. (2001). Unterricht zwischen Wissensvermittlung und Lernen lernen. In C. Finkbeiner & G. W. Schnaitmann (Eds.), Lehren und Lernen im Kontext empirischer Forschung und Fachdidaktik. Donauwörth: Auer Verlag.
Rock, T. C., & Wilson, C. (2005). Improving teaching through Lesson Study. Teacher Education Quarterly, 32(1), 77–92.
Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2005). Using video to support teachers' ability to notice classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475–491.
Shuell, T. J. (1996). Teaching and learning in a classroom context. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 726–764). New York: Macmillan.
Shulman, L. S. (1996). 'Just in case...': Reflections on learning from experience. In J. A. Colbert, P. Desberg, & K. Trimble (Eds.), The case for education: Contemporary approaches for using case methods (pp. 197–217). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Slavík, J., Janík, T., Najvar, P., & Knecht, P. (2017). Transdisciplinární didaktika: o učitelském sdílení znalostí a zvyšování kvality výuky napříč obory [Transdisciplinary didactics: on teachers' sharing knowledge and improving instructional quality across disciplines]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.
van Dijk, E. M., & Kattman, U. (2007). A research model for the study of science teachers' PCK and improving teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 885–897.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.05.002
Wenger, E. (2004). Communities of practice: a brief introduction. Retrieved from http://www.ewenger.com/theory/communities_of_practice_intro_WRD.doc
Wipperfürth, M. (2015). Professional vision in Lehrernetzwerken: Berufssprache als ein Weg und ein Ziel von Lehrerprofessionalisierung. Münster: Waxmann.
Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: The Guilford Press.
