Towards a framework for effective instructional explanations in science teaching

Kulgemeyer, Christoph

doi:10.1080/03057267.2018.1598054

Cited by 38 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On Perusall, the student teachers were given an article to read about effective instructional explanations (cf. Kulgemeyer, 2018). The teacher educators, mentor teacher as well as the student teachers could comment or ask questions by annotating the text.…”

Section: The Learning Cycle Employed Within Perusallmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing the wicked problem of feedback during the teaching practicum

Nel,

Marais

2021

pie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COVID-19 affected the teaching practicum placement of approximately 650 fourth year BEd Foundation Phase student teachers at University N in April and July 2020. The teaching practicum is seen as a purposeful, organised, supervised, mentored and assessed educational activity required for the completion of a teacher education programme. During the teaching practicum, the provision of feedback from teacher educators as well as mentor teachers forms an integral part of the learning process and enriches student teachers' learning experiences. However, student dissatisfaction with feedback during the teaching practicum presents a "wicked" problem that requires a strategic partnership approach between the university and partnership schools as well as between the triad partners of teacher educator, mentor teacher and student teacher. The purpose of this exploratory case study is to provide an overview of student teachers' perspectives on the innovative use of a social annotation platform to ensure greater collaboration on the "wicked" problem of feedback by all partners during the "learning from practice" component of the teaching practicum. The results indicated that student teachers, teacher educators as well as mentor teachers were actively engaged "on the same page" with constructive dialogic feedback that assisted student teachers to make crucial adjustments to the core practice of explaining/modelling content.

show abstract

Section: The Learning Cycle Employed Within Perusallmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing the wicked problem of feedback during the teaching practicum

Nel,

Marais

2021

pie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Explaining has often been described as a core element of teaching as it is a basic skill that enables communication with students (Geelan, 2012; Kulgemeyer, 2018; Wittwer & Renkl, 2008). Explaining with the goal of “engendering comprehension” (Gage, 1968) is the communicative process of proposing explanations and adapting them according to the students' prerequisites and their comprehension (Kulgemeyer & Schecker, 2013).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kulgemeyer (2018) presents a systematic literature review of factors that influence the effectiveness of an instructional explanation in the classroom. The communicative process of explaining has been researched in science education (e.g., Geelan, 2012; Sevian & Gonsalves, 2008) and educational psychology (e.g., Roelle, Berthold, & Renkl, 2014; Wittwer & Renkl, 2008).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, (a) adaptation to prior knowledge and (b) the four tools for adaption have emerged from a systematic review of empirical literature from science education and educational psychology as two out of seven core ideas of effective instructional explanation (Kulgemeyer, 2018). In this study, we use the seven core ideas from the framework for instructional quality in science explaining situations.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Professional knowledge affectsaction‐relatedskills: The development ofpreservicephysics teachers' explaining skills during a field experience

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Professional knowledge is an important source of science teachers' actions in the classroom (e.g., personal professional content knowledge [pedagogical content knowledge, PCK] is the source of enacted PCK in the refined consensus model [RCM] for PCK). However, the evidence for this claim is ambiguous at best. This study applied a cross‐lagged panel design to examine the relationship between professional knowledge and actions in one particular instructional situation: explaining physics. Pre‐ and post a field experience (one semester), 47 preservice physics teachers from four different universities were tested for their content knowledge (CK), PCK, pedagogical knowledge (PK), and action‐related skills in explaining physics. The study showed that joint professional knowledge (the weighted sum of CK, PCK, and PK scores) at the beginning of the field experience impacted the development of explaining skills during the field experience (β = .38**). We interpret this as a particular relationship between professional knowledge and science teachers' action‐related skills (enacted PCK): professional knowledge is necessary for the development of explaining skills. That is evidence that personal PCK affects enacted PCK. In addition, field experiences are often supposed to bridge the theory‐practice gap by transforming professional knowledge into instructional practice. Our results suggest that for field experiences to be effective, preservice teachers should start with profound professional knowledge.

show abstract

“…According to Rocksén [21], explanations appear in three different contexts: scientific explanations as discourse or linguistic products (e.g., [11,22]), explanations as instructional practice in science lessons (e.g., [23,24]), and explanations within an everyday context (e.g., explaining why I prefer blue shirts to red). For science education, the first two approaches are relevant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Characteristics of Explanations with Element Maps

Wagner¹,

Kok²,

Priemer³

2020

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What are the structural characteristics of written scientific explanations that make them good? This is often difficult to measure. One approach to describing and analyzing structures is to employ network theory. With this research, we aim to describe the elementary structure of written explanations, their qualities, and the differences between those made by experts and students. We do this by converting written explanations into networks called element maps and measure their characteristics: size, the ratio of diameter to size, and betweenness centrality. Our results indicate that experts give longer explanations with more intertwinement, organized around a few central key elements. Students’ explanations vary widely in size, are less intertwined, and often lack a focus around key elements. We have successfully identified and quantified the characteristics that can be a starting point for guiding students towards generating expert-like written explanations.

show abstract

Towards a framework for effective instructional explanations in science teaching

Cited by 38 publications

References 83 publications

Addressing the wicked problem of feedback during the teaching practicum

Addressing the wicked problem of feedback during the teaching practicum

Professional knowledge affectsaction‐relatedskills: The development ofpreservicephysics teachers' explaining skills during a field experience

Measuring Characteristics of Explanations with Element Maps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About