Pre-service teachers’ evidence-based reasoning during pedagogical problem-solving: better together?

Abstract

This study investigates if collaboration and the level of heterogeneity between collaborating partners' problem-solving scripts can influence the extent to which pre-service teachers engage in evidence-based reasoning when analyzing and solving pedagogical problem cases. We operationalized evidence-based reasoning through its content and process dimensions: (a) to what extent pre-service teachers refer to scientific theories or evidence of learning and instruction (content level) and (b) to what extent they engage in epistemic processes of scientific reasoning (process level) when solving pedagogical problems. Seventy-six pre-service teachers analyzed and solved a problem about an underachieving student either individually or in dyads. Compared with individuals, dyads of pre-service teachers referred less to scientific content, but engaged more in hypothesizing and evidence evaluation and less in generating solutions. A greater dyadic heterogeneity indicated less engagement in generating solutions. Thus, collaboration may be a useful means for engaging preservice teachers in analyzing pedagogical problems in a more reflective and evidence-based manner, but pre-service teachers may still need additional scaffolding to do it based on scientific theories and evidence. Furthermore, heterogeneous groups regarding the collaborating partners' problem-solving scripts may require further instructional support to discuss potential solutions to the problem.

The role of collaborative argumentation in future teachers' selection of online information

“…In a study focusing on the potential of (Hendriks, Kienhues & Bromme, 2015) Criteria related to the media Different media per se (e. g., layperson or expert forum) (Zimmermann & Jucks, 2018) Rank of search result in search engine -a search engine's navigability (affordance) (Haas & Unkel, 2017) Other aspects not related to the online information Experiential knowledge sources, such as own teaching experiences (Bråten & Ferguson, 2015) Note: This table represents an excerpt of research studies on criteria shown to be relevant in sourcing online information. collaboration for synthesizing evidence, for example, future teachers who engaged in collaboration analyzed pedagogical problems in a more reflective and evidence-based manner (Csanadi, Kollar & Fischer, 2020). Collaborative engagement also seems to provide a promising setting for sharing, interpreting, and critically examining scientific information in online contexts (Hendriks et al, 2020).…”

“…The dialogic setting can thus stimulate the explicit articulation of dialog partners' ideas by asking them for clarification and critical elaboration on the reasons behind these ideas. It thereby promotes highquality cognitive elaboration processes that are assumed to elicit changes in knowledge structures (Csanadi et al, 2020;Van Boxtel, van der Linden & Kanselaar, 2000). Accordingly, explicit forms of cognitive elaboration processes are often considered indicators for the depth of one's reflection processes (Csanadi et al, 2020;Felton & Kuhn, 2001;.…”

“…It thereby promotes highquality cognitive elaboration processes that are assumed to elicit changes in knowledge structures (Csanadi et al, 2020;Van Boxtel, van der Linden & Kanselaar, 2000). Accordingly, explicit forms of cognitive elaboration processes are often considered indicators for the depth of one's reflection processes (Csanadi et al, 2020;Felton & Kuhn, 2001;. In this vein, a critical reflection of teachers' own sourcing could be characterized by their manner of elaboration.…”

“You Are Not Alone”–Opportunities and Challenges for University Students’ Collaborative Engagement When Dealing With Online Information About COVID-19

“…Thus, studies have indicated that, in contrast to individual reflection settings, collaborative reflection settings may be beneficial in order to promote students' elaboration of their own thinking and challenging of the other's idea (Kuhn and Moore, 2015), their elaborated reasoning of their own sourcing strategies (Zimmermann and Mayweg-Paus, 2021), as well as their analysis and reflection of problems (Csanadi et al, 2020). However, in direct comparisons of individual and collaborative communicative settings wherein students engaged in cognitive reasoning processes, dyads have been shown to spend more time and effort than individuals: Collaboration requires time to explain possible causes of a problem (Csanadi et al, 2020); in collaboration there is a risk that some partners may move more quickly through the phases of the collaboration task, before everyone is ready (Mullins et al, 2011); and in collaborative settings, partners spend more time on managing the task (Zimmermann and Mayweg-Paus, 2021).…”

Special education teachers’ understanding and use of evidence‐informed practice in the inclusion of children with SEN in Kuwait: lessons for teacher education

“…For evidence-based practice for special educational needs to be properly developed in schools, the literature points towards the need for teachers, both at pre-service and inservice stages, to have opportunities to engage in collaborative problem-based reflective enquiry which allows them to flexibly consider how evidence-based approaches can be individually applied within the local classroom context (Csanadi et al, 2021;Hick et al, 2019b;Mintz et al, 2020Mintz et al, , 2021Russo-Campisi, 2017). At the same time, there is also support in the literature for the potential for teachers with specific training and knowledge in the effective inclusion of children with SEN, and in specific evidence-based practices, to support generalist teacher colleagues in achieving high-quality teaching, including the flexible use of evidence-based approaches, tailored to the needs of individual children (Cochran-Smith and Dudley-Marling, 2012;Fitzgerald and Radford, 2020;Hornby, 2020).…”