Professional Vision on

its way to University

of Sherbrooke

CIDREE 2015 – Lyon

Florian Meyer, Marc-André Gazé & Isabelle Nizet

Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

Presentation plan

Work 1 : Effect of a training course using

examples of practice on video

Work 2 : Evolution of online interactions while

observing classroom situations on video

during a distance education course

Work 3 : Describing a colleague’s

professional vision

Proposition of integration for future work

Effect of a Training

Course Using Examples

of Practice on VideoWork 1 : 2005-2010

Goals

To evaluate the effect of a training course entailing

examples of practice on video and created within

an online application (Zoom on teaching

expertise).

In particular, the study focused on participating

elementary school teachers’ learning and their

intentions to modify their practice with respect to

the professional competency: “To pilot

teaching/learning situations”.

Method

Step 1

• Semi-structured interview with 10 primary inservice teachers

• Knowledge, Ease with ICT, Expectations, Self efficacy

Step 2

• Autonomous online learning (10 hours within 1 month)

• 22 steps, 17 videos, various activities &a notebook

Step 3

• Semi-structured interview with 10 primary inservice teachers

• Knowledge, Self efficacy, intentions to change & Appreciation

Step 4• Qualitative analysis

Framework (based on Charlier, 1998)

Teacher Self Efficacy

(Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998, p. 228)

Main findings Confirm the positive effect of online video based professional

teacher development applications.

In particular, we observed that the teachers were able to definethe components of the targeted competency more clearly.

The participants confirmed having learned from the video examplesand training and expressed the intention to bring change in theirown practice.

All teachers greatly appreciated the training course and its videos :

opportunity to observe peers to whom they can identify (vicarious effect)

and to explore ways of putting the knowledge into practice in their ownclassrooms.

Participants’ comments and suggestions :

reducing the number of videos and competency elements presented

increasing the complementary educational content accompanying the videos

Evolution of Online

Interactions while

Observing Classroom

Situations on VideoWork 2 : 2013-2016

Goals

To understand the evolution of the capabilities of the students to

analyze videos, according to peer interventions and

interventions of the trainer, or contextual characteristics of the

training.

To understand to what extent the observations and analysis

carried out by teachers and supported by trainers contribute to

some of these cognitive processes and to what extent they

contribute to learning.

To support trainers who need some advice for a better practice.

Qualitative action research

Data

Interviews with trainers

Interactions in forums

5 teacher trainers (all

professors)

2 cycles over 2 years

9 courses of 3 credits

(Fall 11 to Fall 13)

180 Master degree

students (same

program)

Online Learning

Online learning occurs through socio-cognitive conflict,

collaboration, interactions (Henri et Basque, 2003)

Four types of support can be offered by the trainer (role

that can sometimes be played by peer students):

psychological and psychosocial support

methodological and organizational support

educational support

technical support (Dumont, 2007)

Social Construction of Knowledge:

Online Interactions

Gunawardena, Lowe & Anderson (1997) : 5 phases during online discussions:

1. Sharing/comparing of information;

2. Discovery and exploration of dissonance or inconsistency among ideas, concepts or statement;

3. Negotiation of meaning/coconstruction of knowledge

4. Testing and modification of proposed synthesis or co-construction;

5. Agreement statement(s)/applications of newly-constructed meaning.

Types of videos

Janík, Janíková, Knecht, Kubiatko, Najvar,

Najvarová & Šebestová (2009, p. 208)

2 different pedagogical models

Interactions

Interactions in Fabien and Lise’s courses

according to social construction of

knowledge model (Gunawardena et

al., 1997)

Simple video use

Tasks proposed by Lise and Fabien, in the context of these

forums, are not mandatory but merely suggested. This may

explain why the number of interactions is not very high.

But we also question the involvement of the students and what

these guidelines raise in this regard. In these activities, it seems

that the use of videos tend to stay at a level of simple illustration

(Janik et al., 2009) when the students are only asked to identify

some elements and concepts mentionned previously in the

course. A very few students benefit from these videos to progress

in the construction of new knowledge.

Professors’ role

Fabien ans Lise had a small contribution in their forums to

support the advancement of the interactions towards the co-

construction of new knowledge.

It is of course impossible for trainers to intervene in every

discussion thread, it wouldn’t be managable. It is still unfortunate

because the few times Fabien and Lise had the opportunity to

do so, it has often helped to bring interactions to move towards

phases 4 and 5.

Is there any other way than simply interacting in the forums (tasks, ressources…) ?

Knowledge construction

Activities proposed to the students in the rest of the course make

them reuse knowledge built throughout the course, but do not

call explicitly knowledge possibly built during the discussions

made around the videos.

It would be interesting to promote the implementation of these

new co-constructed knowledge during the following activities

and to ask students to explicit this integration.

Describing a

Colleague’s

Professional VisionWork 3 : 2014-2015

+ Flipped classroom

project• Goal : identifying the effect of

an innovation on the practice

of the trainer

• Framework : Scholarship of

Teaching and Learning

(Kreber, 2002)

Method

As a trainer, I first selected a few excerpts that seemed rich among a recording of a total of 6 hours.

20 sequences (between 2 and 10 minute each)

Confrontation during two periods of three hours to analyze each sequence:

Can you describe what was happening in this sequence?

In this sequence, what choices did you make and why?

Can you identify two positive items in this sequence ? Explain why you selected them.

If you had to choose two items to change what would they be and why?

How are your actions different from what you usually do? What actions of students are different? Why do you think it is so?

Explain what kind of changes you would propose to improve these items.

The transcripts were analyzed using the concept of Professional vision that we have enriched allowing us to enter with greater detail into the situation.

Coding examples

Reflection of the trainer

Awareness of posture

Realised that although she

thought she was offering a

dialogic dynamic, she acts as

an expert who gives good

answers in order to comfort

students.

Realised that she needs a

theortical model on which she

could rely to better handle

students inquiry and doubts

She oscillates between control

and coaching. She needs

more enlightened practice

Validation of planned activities to solicit

students' cognitive processes

Realised she managed to do it thanks to a

coherent learning model she used to anticipate

She realised how much she is preoccupied by

the learning processes of the students and how

to support them to make them explicit

Identification of the direct effects: premature

or appropriate activities.

Realised the need of an activity to let students

demonstrate and confirm their understanding.

Application of concepts is too fast, students

need more time to confirm their

understanding

Some observations

Integrated models are not appropriate because they are not

validated models and categories are not mutually exclusive,

however, we believe that they open a door to a PV enrichment.

The posture was really hard to code. Intercoder agreement was

hard to achieve

At certain moments, the trainer does not recognize the situation

and asks a lot about it. How do I code this?

Proposition of

integration to discussFuture work

LEARNING GOALS

PROFESSIONAL VISION

Learner(s)

Facilitator(s)

Culture

Goals

Previous Knowledge

Pedagogical means

(Yung & al.)

Video

Choice

(Janik & al.)

Types

Use

A

B

C

Online Interactions

(Gunawardena & al.)

Vicarious

EffectBandura (1997)

Motivation

Learning

Intention to change practice

EFFECTS

Thoughts

If the selective attention, as well as the knowledge based

reasoning, seem essential to understand the teacher training

process, we believe that online interactions contribute to these

processes and that the trainers play a crucial by, for example, supporting the reflection or the engagement of teachers in their

training.

We also believe that the reasoning would benefit from being

enriched by a reflexive approach bringing teachers to project

into the improvement of their teaching practice relying, for

example, on the vicarious effect.

Thank you very much !

Florian.meyer@usherbrooke.ca

http://pedtice.org

Bibliography Baecher, L. et Kung, S.-C. (2011). Jumpstarting Novice Teachers’

Ability to Analyze Classroom Video: Affordances of an Online

Workshop. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(1),

16–26.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy The Exercise of Control. New York:

W.H. Freeman and Company.

Blomberg, G., Renkl, A., Sherin, M. G., Borko, H., & Seidel, T. (2013).

Five research-based heuristics for using video in pre-service

teacher education . Journal for Educational Research Online, 5(1),

90–114.

Bruner, J. (1996). L’éducation, entrée dans la culture : les

problèmes de l’école à la lumière de la psychologie culturelle.

Paris: Retz.

Charlier, B. (1998). Apprendre et changer sa pratique

d’enseignement. Bruxelles: De Boeck Université.

Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as Learners. London: Jossey-Bass.

Dumont (2007). Les relations enseignant-enseignés : les aspects

psychoaffectifs. In J.-C. Henri, F. et Basque, J. (2003). Conception

d’activités d’apprentissage collaboratif en mode virtuel. In C.

Deaudelin et T. Nault (dir.), Collaborer pour apprendre et faire

apprendre. La place des outils technologiques (p. 29-49). Sainte-

Foy : Presses de l’Université du Québec.

Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A. and Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis

of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction

Analysis Model For Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in

Computer Conferencing. Educational Computing Research, 17(4),

397–430.

Janík, T., Janíková, M., Knecht, P., Kubiatko, M., Najvar, P.,

Najvarová, V., et Šebestová, S. (2009). Exploring Different Ways of

Using Video in Teacher Education: Examples from CPV Video Web.

In Tomas Janík et T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in

investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 207–224).

Munich, Allemagne: Waxmann Publishing.

Kreber, C. (2002). Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and

the scholarship of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 27(1), 5-

23.

Malo, A. (2000). Savoirs de formation et savoir d’expérience : un

processus de transformation. Éducation et francophonie, 28(2),

216-235.

Manderscheid et C. Jeunesse (dir.), L'enseignement en ligne : À

l'université et dans les formations professionnelles. Pourquoi ?

Comment ? (p. 58-90). Bruxelles : De Boeck.

Martinet, M. A., Raymond, D. et Gauthier, C. (2001). La formation à

l’enseignement. Les orientations. Les compétences

professionnelles. (Document officiel). Québec: Ministère de

l’Éducation, Gouvernement du Québec.

Bibliography

Meyer, F. (2010). Effets d’un dispositif de formation exploitant des vidéos d’exemples de pratiques sur le développement d’une

compétence professionnelle chez des enseignants du primaire. Thèse de doctorat en éducation, Université de Montréal,

Montréal.

Meyer, F., Lampron, R. et Gazé, M.-A. (2014). Four pedagogical models using video as a tool for learning in a distance teacher

training program context. Form@Re - Open Journal Per La Formazione In Rete.

Mucchielli, A. (2009). Dictionnaire des méthodes qualitatives en sciences humaines et sociales. Paris: Armand Colin.

Rich, P. J. et Hannafin, M. (2009). Video Annotation Tools Technologies to Scaffold, Structure, and Transform Teacher Reflection.

Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 52–67.

Santiago, R., Leh, A. et Nakayama, M. (2011). Designing Effective Online Group Discussions. Proceedings of the European

Conference on e-Learning, 731–738.

Sherin, M. G. (2007). The development of teachers’ professional vision in video clubs. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. Derry

(Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 383-395). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk et Hoy, A. (1998). Teacher Efficacy : its Meaning and Measure. Review of Educational Research,

68(2), 202-248.

van Es, E. A. (2012). Examining the Development of a Teacher Learning Community: The Case of a Video Club. Teaching and

Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 28(2), 182–192.

van Es, E. A. et Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 24(2), 244–276.

Wang, M. et Kang, M. (2006). Cybergogy for engaged learning : a framework for creating learner engagement through

information and communication technology. In D. Hung et M. S. Khine (dir.), Engaged Learning with Emerging Technologies (p.

225-253). Dordrecht: Springer.

Yung, B. H. W., Yip, V. W. Y., Lai, C. et Lo, F. Y. (2010). Towards a model of effective use of video for teacher professional

development. Communication presented at The International Seminar. York, UK, February.