1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0732-3123(99)00035-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Detailed Analysis of an Established Teacher's Non-Traditional Lesson

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0
4

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
17
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, learning was studied at a discursive level where the shifts/modifications in these discourses were taken as the instances of learning. It is this discursive approach that distinguishes this study from other studies that have investigated teacher practices with an acquisitionist epistemology focusing mainly on what teachers can and cannot do within their mathematical practices (e.g., Ball, Lubienski, & Mewborn, 2001;Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993;Franke, Carpenter, Levi, & Fennema, 2001;Schöenfeld, Minstrell, & Van Zee, 2000;Stigler & Hiebert, 1999); or teacher learning from self-study or own practice (e.g., Austin & Senese, 2004;Hoban, Butler, & Lesslie, 2007;Ticha & Hospesova, 2006). Teacher learning from self-study or inquiry of own practice has various benefits for the teacher (Austin &Senese, 2004).Self-study supports the improvement in practice for practitioners who aim to learn about themselves at their workplace (Austin & Senese, 2004;Loughran, 2004), as they reflect on their own conceptions about teaching, learning, and practice by systematically inquiring his practice (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999),where they could communicate with their own terms in the research process (Kieran, Forman, & Sfard, 2001.Self-study would also provide additional insights for teachers about their roles as educators when they watch their videotaped practices to reflect on their practice (Tischa & Hospesova, 2006).…”
Section: Teacher Learning and Discursive Perspectivementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, learning was studied at a discursive level where the shifts/modifications in these discourses were taken as the instances of learning. It is this discursive approach that distinguishes this study from other studies that have investigated teacher practices with an acquisitionist epistemology focusing mainly on what teachers can and cannot do within their mathematical practices (e.g., Ball, Lubienski, & Mewborn, 2001;Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993;Franke, Carpenter, Levi, & Fennema, 2001;Schöenfeld, Minstrell, & Van Zee, 2000;Stigler & Hiebert, 1999); or teacher learning from self-study or own practice (e.g., Austin & Senese, 2004;Hoban, Butler, & Lesslie, 2007;Ticha & Hospesova, 2006). Teacher learning from self-study or inquiry of own practice has various benefits for the teacher (Austin &Senese, 2004).Self-study supports the improvement in practice for practitioners who aim to learn about themselves at their workplace (Austin & Senese, 2004;Loughran, 2004), as they reflect on their own conceptions about teaching, learning, and practice by systematically inquiring his practice (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999),where they could communicate with their own terms in the research process (Kieran, Forman, & Sfard, 2001.Self-study would also provide additional insights for teachers about their roles as educators when they watch their videotaped practices to reflect on their practice (Tischa & Hospesova, 2006).…”
Section: Teacher Learning and Discursive Perspectivementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Este modelo cognitivo -que apresentamos na Figura 1 -baseado nos de Monteiro (2006), Monteiro et al (2008), Schoenfeld (1998aSchoenfeld ( , 2000 e Schoenfeld et al (2000), parte da prática, sendo construído a partir dela. O modelo baseia-se na divisão de cada aula, tomada como um todo, em partes fenomenologicamente coerentes (Schoenfeld, 1998a(Schoenfeld, , 1998b, denominadas episódios, correspondendo cada um deles a um determinado objectivo específico.…”
Section: Elementos Constituintes Do Modelounclassified
“…Elaboramos, para o efeito, um modelo cognitivo que permite uma simplificação do processo de ensino -pois, como modelo que é, centra-se apenas em algumas das variáveis envolvidas -, possibilitando uma análise mais profícua do mesmo. Para a sua elaboração baseamo-nos nos modelos apresentados por Monteiro (2006), Monteiro, Carrillo e Aguaded (2008), Schoenfeld (1998aSchoenfeld ( , 2000 e Schoenfeld, Ministrell e Zee (2000).…”
unclassified
“…Following Shulman (1986bShulman ( , 1987, Schoenfeld (1998) and Schoenfeld et al (2000), the theoretical framework characterises this knowledge into three types (subject knowledge, general pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge), with incorporations from Santos (1991) andCañal (2004). Content Knowledge (CK) concerns the facts, terminology, and key concepts of the subject and specific topics within the subject.…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…He proposes an instrument composed of three columns, the first specifying information about goals, knowledge and beliefs, along with the triggering and terminating events of each episode, the second providing an overview of the teacher's actions from a general perspective, and the final column giving a very detailed description of each action performed by the teacher. This paper presents an instance of such modelling through the application of a Modelling Instrument (MI) (AUTHOR 1 2006, AUTHOR 1 et al 2007, 2008a, derived from adaptations to Schoenfeld (1998aSchoenfeld ( ,b, 2000, in addition to studies by Aguirre and Speer (1999), Schoenfeld et al (2000), Zimmerlin and Nelson (2000), Sherin et al (2000), Shulman (1986Shulman ( , 1987, AUTHOR 2 (1998), Climent (2002), Cañal (2004 and Santos (1991). The adaptations to Schoenfeld's instrument take two forms.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%