Portable videotape recorders have enabled immediate and repetitive replay of simulated and actual classroom settings. The use of videotapes in teacher training is rapidly expanding as a procedure which facilitates an understanding of the teaching learning act by making practical examples available for analysis through use of both immediate and repetitive replay. This article describes an investigation in which teachers in training were videotaped as they taught a simple representative concept—hexagon—to both normal and retarded children.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenD. W., & FortuneJ. C. (1966). An analysis of microteaching: A new procedure in teacher education. Palo Alto, Calif.: Stanford University, School of Education. (Mimeo)
2.
AllenD. W., & YoungD. B. (1966). Television recordings: A new dimension in teacher education. Palo Alto, Calif.: Stanford University, School of Education. (Mimeo)
3.
BellackA. A., et al. (1965). The language of the classroom. Part 2. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Institute of Psychological Research.
4.
BeltD. (1967). Micro-teaching: Observed and critiqued by a group of trainees vs one instructor and one trainee. In American Educational Research Association, Advance program for the 1967 annual meeting. Wash., D.C.: AERA, p. 26.
5.
BiddleB. J. (1967). Methods and concepts in classroom research. Review of Educational Research, 37, 337–357.
6.
CyphertF. (1967). The most desirable tool for a specific job. In American Educational Research Association, Advance program for the 1967 annual meeting. Wash., D.C.: AERA, p. 25.
7.
DoverspikeJ. (1963). Utilization of closed-circuit television in the guidance laboratory. In Association for Higher Education, New media in higher education. Wash., D.C.: The Association, pp. 50–51.
8.
DunnL. M. (1964). What's special about special education?Nashville, Tenn.: Peabody College, IMRID. (Mimeo)
9.
FargoG., & CrowellD. (1966). Screening for learning problems: A new use for educational television. Audiovisual Instruction, 11, 762–766.
10.
FargoG., FuchigamiR., & GordonJ. (1966). An investigation of selected variables in the teaching of specified objectives to mentally retarded students. Honolulu, Ha.: University of Hawaii.
11.
FlandersN. A. (1964). Interaction analysis in the classroom: A manual for observers. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan, School of Education.
12.
FultonW. R. (1963). Observation of teaching: Direct vs vicarious experience. In Association for Higher Education, New media in higher education. Wash., D.C.: The Association, pp. 78–79.
13.
GageN., & BushR. (1965, November). Newsletter of the American Education and Research Association.
14.
GallagherJ., & AschnerM. J. (1963). A preliminary report on analysis of classroom instruction. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 9, 183–184.
15.
JenkinsE. C. (1966). The efficacy of videotapes and direct observation for teaching observational skills. Honolulu, Ha.: University of Hawaii.
16.
KaganN., KrathwohlD., & FarquharW. (1965). IPR-Interpersonal Process Recall: Simulated recall by videotape. Educational Research Series No. 24. East Lansing, Mich.: Michigan State University, Bureau of Educational Research Services.
17.
RogersW. R., & LewisR. B. (1963). TV utilization in the observation program for teacher education. In Association for Higher Education, New media in higher education. Wash., D.C.: The Association, pp. 46–47.
18.
SmithB. O., et al. (1965). A study of the logic of teaching. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois, Bureau of Educational Research.
19.
StrollerN., & LessesG. S. (1963). The use of television for improving measures of student teaching performance. Phase II. A comparison of methods of observation in preservice teacher training. N.Y.: Hunter College.
20.
TabaH. (1965). Opportunities for creativity in the education of exceptional children. Exceptional Children, 29, 247–256.
