MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1525070709

Using Anchored Instruction to Teach Preservice Teachers to Integrate Technology in the Curriculum

2001· article· en· W1525070709 sur OpenAlexaff
Mumbi Kariuki, Mesut Duran

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Journal of Technology and Teacher Education · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueOnline and Blended Learning
Établissements canadiensNipissing University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCurriculumMathematics educationClass (philosophy)RestructuringTeacher educationEducational technologyTeaching methodComputer sciencePedagogyPsychology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This case study addresses the use of the to restructure educational computing courses to enhance future teachers' learning of technology applications in the classroom. A cohort group of 22 preservice teachers from a typical teacher education institution in Southeastern Ohio was involved in the study. The preservice teachers were enrolled in both a curriculum development class and an educational computing class in the winter 2000 academic quarter. The instructors for both courses collaborated their teaching efforts whereby the preservice teachers used the educational computing class to research, record, and document their experiences in the curriculum development class. The theme of the curriculum development class was therefore used as an for the educational computing class. Data collection and analysis were conducted on a continuous basis throughout the academic quarter. The findings indicate the effectiveness of anchored for preservice teachers to learn about, and teach with advanced technology tools in their future practice. The authors recommend increased efforts to apply anchored approach in educational computing courses. Preparing technology-proficient teachers to meet the needs of 21st century learners has emerged as a critical challenge facing teacher preparation programs. Although institutions of higher education vary in their specific responses to this challenge, most institutions require at least one educational computing course as a core component of their teacher preparation programs. The goal of such courses includes individual development of both confidence and competency in the use of information technology in various learning environments. Even though the structure and content of educational computing courses vary from one institution to another (Leh, 1998) such courses have usually been taught in a didactic manner where the instructor demonstrates the technology tools and then ask students to replicate a product (Ferguson, 2001). While learning technology skills is necessary, it is crucial to model to preservice teachers the way technology integration can look like. One alternative approach to the design of educational computing courses involves using a theme or anchor around which various learning activities take place. This approach has been referred to as instruction (Bransford, Sherwood, Hasselbring, Kinzer, & Williams, 1990). This model provides learners with an authentic, situated, and social learning environment which encourages problem solving (Shih, 1997). The anchored approach has been used in a variety of disciplines such as language arts, social studies, math, science, and special education. In recent years, there has been a growing interest among educational technology instructors to apply the anchored approach in educational computing courses to more effectively prepare preservice teachers to use advanced-technology tools in their future practice (Bauer, Ellefsen, & Hall, 1994; Bauer & Summerville, 1996; Bauer, 1998; Baumbach, Brewer, & Bird, 1995; Ferguson, 2001; Miller, Morano, Smith, & Mayes, 2002; Williams, 2002). This article reports a case study in which the anchored approach was applied to restructure an existing educational computing course to enhance future teachers' learning of technology applications in the classroom. First, the article discusses the pedagogical foundations of anchored and its application in educational computing courses. Second, the article describes the experiences of a cohort group of 22 preservice teachers who used their curriculum development course activities as an anchor in their educational computing class. Third, the article reflects on the lessons learned by the preservice teachers and their educational computing course instructor from this collaborative experience. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,772
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,370

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,359
Écart entre enseignants0,339 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeAutre devis
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations31
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Journal of Technology and Teacher EducationMême sujetOnline and Blended LearningTravaux en français237 207