2017
DOI: 10.2378/peu2017.art13d
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Empirische Arbeit: Persönlichkeitsfaktoren und Kompetenzentwicklung in der Lehrerbildung. Zusammenhänge zwischen NEO-FFI, AVEM und Pädagogischem Wissen bei Lehramtsstudierenden

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In this respect, S-type teacher education students recorded the lowest number of hours per week devoted to studying and the lowest level of increase in basic pedagogical knowledge, while A types recorded the highest in both cases. The findings related to both B and G types were relatively inconclusive (Rumpler, 2013;Römer et al, 2017). Further, S-and B-type students had a less pronounced learning goal orientation and showed a less intensive use of learning strategies compared to G and A types (Künsting et al, 2012), who also had the highest level of selfperceived academic achievement (Aster-Schenck et al, 2010;Voltmer et al, 2012).…”
Section: Learning and Academic Achievementmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this respect, S-type teacher education students recorded the lowest number of hours per week devoted to studying and the lowest level of increase in basic pedagogical knowledge, while A types recorded the highest in both cases. The findings related to both B and G types were relatively inconclusive (Rumpler, 2013;Römer et al, 2017). Further, S-and B-type students had a less pronounced learning goal orientation and showed a less intensive use of learning strategies compared to G and A types (Künsting et al, 2012), who also had the highest level of selfperceived academic achievement (Aster-Schenck et al, 2010;Voltmer et al, 2012).…”
Section: Learning and Academic Achievementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, A–and B-type individuals displayed higher levels of neuroticism than G and S types; reversely, extraversion was more prominent in G-type individuals than in those assigned to the less desirable patterns. Conscientiousness, on the other hand, was scored high in both G–and A-type students, and low in B and S types ( Cramer, 2012 ; Künsting et al, 2012 ; Reichl et al, 2014 ; Römer et al, 2017 ; Lüftenegger et al, 2019 ). Further, G- and S-type students were more resilient and displayed higher levels of mindfulness and self-efficacy than A and B types, who, on the other hand, tended to be more pessimistic, irritable and less tolerant of uncertainty than their G–and S-type counterparts ( Dietrich et al, 2015 ; Meiseneder, 2015 ; Awenius, 2019 ; Bauer, 2019 ).…”
Section: Wcep and Their Correlates In University Students–what We Kno...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Viele Lehrpersonen und auch bereits viele Lehramtsstudierende weisen eher ungünstige Bewältigungsmuster auf (z.B. Albisser, Kirchhoff, Meier & Grob, 2006;Künsting, Billich-Knapp & Lipowsky, 2012;Roloff Henoch, Klusmann, Lüdtke & Trautwein, 2015a;Römer, Rothland & König, 2017;Rothland, 2013;Schaarschmidt, 2005), welche allerdings durch Beratung und Training in günstiger Weise verändert werden können (Abujatum, Arold, Knispel, Rudolf & Schaarschmidt, 2007;Çelebi, Krahé & Spörer, 2014). Günstige Bewältigungsmuster zeichnen sich dadurch aus, dass sich Engagement und Distanzierung die Waage halten und mit eher positivem emotionalem Erleben der Arbeitssituation einhergehen (Schaarschmidt & Fischer, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionunclassified