This study explored how peer and professor facilitations are related to teachers’ behaviors during video-case discussions. Fourteen inservice teachers produced 1,787 turns of conversation during 12 video-case discussions that were video-recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed with statistical discourse analysis. Professor facilitations (sharing experiences; affirming ideas; and asking for critical thinking, information, observations, and connections) and peer facilitations (recall, critical thinking, connections, and affirmations) in recent conversation turns were linked to teachers’ current turn behaviors, including recalling information, critical thinking, and making connections to content in video cases. These results suggest that modeling, scaffolding, and co-construction among professors and peers support specific teacher behaviors during video-case discussions.
AbellS.CennamoK. (2004). Videocases in elementary science teacher preparation. In BrophyJ. (Ed.), Using video in teacher education (Advances in research on teaching) (Vol. 10, pp. 103-129). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
2.
AndersP.HoffmanJ.DuffyG. (2000). Teaching teachers to teach reading: Paradigm shifts, persistent problems, and challenges. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 719-742). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
ApplegateM.QuinnK.ApplegateA. (2008). The critical reading inventory: Assessing students’ reading and thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
4.
AryaP.ChristT. (in press). An exploration of how professors’ facilitation is related to literacy teachers’ meaning construction process during video-case discussions. Journal of Reading Education.
5.
AryaP.ChristT.ChiuM. M. (2013). Links between characteristics of collaborative peer video analysis events and literacy teachers’ outcomes. Manuscript submitted for publication.
6.
BallD.CohenD. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In Darling-HammondL.SykesG. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 3-31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
7.
BearD.InvernizziM.TempletonS.JohnstonF. (2011). Worlds their way (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
8.
BenjaminiY.KriegerA.YekutieliD. (2006). Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika, 93(3), 491-507.
9.
BensonB. (1997). Scaffolding: Coming to terms. English Journal, 86(7), 126-127.
10.
BerryA.LoughranJ. (2002). Developing an understanding of learning to teach in teacher education. In LoughranJ.RussellT. (Eds.), Improving teacher education practices through self-study (pp. 13-29). London, England: Routledge-Falmer.
11.
BolingE.AdamsS. (2008). Supporting teacher educators’ use of hypermedia video-based programs. English Education, 40(4), 314-339.
12.
BrophyJ. (Ed.). (2004). Using video in teacher education. Bradford, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
13.
BrykA.RaudenbushS. (1992). Hierarchical linear models. London, England: SAGE.
14.
CarlsonH.FalkD. (1991). Effectiveness of interactive videodisc instructional programs in elementary teacher education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 19(2), 151-163.
15.
Chaney-CullenT.DuffyT. (1999). Strategic teaching framework: Multimedia to support teacher change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(1), 1-40.
16.
ChenG.ChiuM. M.WangZ. (2012). Predicting social cues during online discussions: Effects of evaluations and knowledge content. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1497-1509.
17.
ChiuM. M. (2008). Flowing toward correct contributions during groups’ mathematics problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(3), 415-463.
18.
ChiuM. M.KhooL. (2003). Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 506-523.
19.
ChiuM. M.KhooL. (2005). A new method for analyzing sequential processes: Dynamic multi-level analysis. Small Group Research, 36(5), 600-631.
20.
ChristT.AryaP.ChiuM. M. (2012). Collaborative peer video analysis: Insights about literacy assessment & instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 44(2), 171-199.
21.
ChristT.AryaP.ChiuM. M. (in press). Teachers reports of learning and application to pedagogy based on engagement in collaborative peer video analysis. Teaching Education.
22.
ClarkeD.HollingsworthH. (2000). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947-967.
ColeM. (1996). Culture in mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
ColeM.WertschJ. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39(5), 250-256.
26.
CopelandW.DeckerD. (1996). Video cases and the development of meaning making in preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(5), 467-481.
27.
Cumming-PotvinW.RenshawP.Van KraayenoordC. (2003). Scaffolding and bilingual shared reading experiences: Promoting primary school students’ learning and development. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 26(2), 54-68.
28.
DonatoR. (2004). Aspects of collaboration in pedagogical discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 284-302.
29.
DunnL.DunnD. (2007). The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (4th ed.). Bloomington, MN: Pearson.
30.
FerdigR.RoehlerL.BolingE.KnezekS.PearsonD.YadovA. (2004). Teaching with video cases on the web. In BrownA.DavisN. (Eds.), The world yearbook of education 2004 (pp. 164-175). London, England: Routledge.
31.
FerdigR.RoehlerL.PearsonP. D. (2002). Scaffolding preservice teacher learning through web-based discussion forums. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 18(3), 87-94.
32.
GoldsteinH. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. Sydney, Australia: Edward Arnold.
33.
GrahamJ. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549-576.
34.
GriffinG. (1999). Changes in teacher education: Looking to the future. In GriffinG. A. (Ed.), The education of teachers (pp. 1-17). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
35.
HarfordJ.MacRuaircG. (2008). Engaging student inservice-teachers in meaningful reflective practice. Teaching and Inservice-teacher Education, 24(7), 1884-1892.
HughesJ.PackardB.PearsonP. D. (2000). The role of hypermedia cases on preservice teachers’ views of reading instruction. Action in Teacher Education, 22(2), 24-38.
39.
IkpezeC. (2007). Small group collaboration in peer-led electronic discourse: An analysis of group dynamics and interactions involving pre-service and in-service teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(3), 383-407.
40.
JuzwikM.SherryM.CaughlanS.HeintzA.Borsheim-BlackC. (2012). Supporting dialogically organized instruction in an English teacher preparation program: A video-based, Web 2.0-mediated response and revision pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 114(3), 1-42.
41.
KennedyP. (2008). Guide to econometrics. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
42.
KibbyM. (1995). Practical steps for informing literacy instruction: A diagnostic decision-making model. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
43.
KingG.ZengL. (2001). Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Analysis, 9, 137-163.
44.
KirschnerP.SwellerJ.ClarkR. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
45.
KocY.PekerD.OsmanogluA. (2009). Supporting teacher professional development through online video case study discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8), 1158-1168.
46.
KorthagenF.KesselsJ.KosterB.LagerwerfB.WubbelsT. (2001). Linking practice and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47.
KorthagenF.LoughranJ.RussellT. (2006). Developing fundamental principles for teacher education programs and practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 1020-1041.
LaveJ. (2004). Stimulating learning in communities of practice. In ResnickL. B.LevineJ. M.TeasleyS. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognitions (pp. 63-79). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
LittleJ. (2002). Locating learning in teachers’ communities of practice: Opening up problems of analysis in records of everyday practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 917-946.
53.
LoughranJ. (1997). Teaching about teaching: Principles and practice. In LoughranJ.RussellT. (Eds.), Teaching about teaching (pp. 57-70). London, England: Falmer Press.
54.
LoughranJ.BerryA. (2005). Modeling by teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 193-203.
55.
LunenbergM.KorthagenF.SwennenA. (2007). The teacher educator as a role model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 586-601.
56.
MacKinnonD. P.LockwoodC. M.WilliamsJ. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99-128.
57.
MatherN.SammonsJ.SchwartzJ. (2006). Adaptations of the names test: Easy-to-use phonics assessments. The Reading Teacher, 60(2), 114-122.
58.
McGrawR.LynchK.KocY.BudakA.BrownC. A. (2007). The multimedia case as a tool for professional development. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10(2), 95-121.
59.
McIntyreD.HaggerH. (1992). Professional Development through the Oxford Internship Model. British Journal of Educational Studies, 40(3), 264-283.
60.
MillerM. (2009). Talking about our troubles. Teacher Educator, 44(3), 143-163.
61.
MoyleK. (2008, November). Can video with professional conversations improve teacher education?Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education International Educational Research Conference, Fremantle, Australia. Retrieved from http://publications.aare.edu.au/07pap/moy07560.pdf
62.
NijstadB.DiehlM.StroebeW. (2003). Cognitive stimulation and interference in idea generating groups. In PaulusP. B.NijstadB. A. (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 137-159). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
63.
PalincsarA.BrownA.CampioneJ. (1993). First grade dialogues for knowledge acquisition and use. In FormanE. A.MinickN.StoneC. A. (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp. 43-57). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
64.
PeaR. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423-451.
65.
PeughJ.EndersC. (2004). Missing data in educational research. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 525-556.
66.
PutnamR.BorkoH. (1997). Teacher learning: Implications of new views of cognition. In BiddleB. J.GoodT. L.GoodsonI. F. (Eds.), The international handbook of teachers and teaching (pp. 1223-1296). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
67.
RogoffB. (1994). Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1(4), 209-229.
68.
SannyR.TealeW. (2008). Using multimedia anchored instruction cases in literacy methods courses. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 9(1), 2-35.
69.
SchonD. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
70.
SeagoN. (2004). Using video as an object of inquiry for mathematics. In BrophyJ. (Ed.), Using video in teacher education (Advances in research on teaching) (Vol. 10, pp. 259-286). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
71.
SherinM.HanS. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 163-183.
72.
SherinM.van EsE. (2005). Using video to support teachers’ ability to notice classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475-491.
73.
SmithM. (2005). Helping preservice teachers develop habits of inquiry: Can it be done?Reading Research and Instruction, 45(1), 39-68.
74.
StoneC. A. (1993). What is missing in the metaphor of scaffolding? In FormanE.MinickN.StoneC. (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp. 169-183). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
75.
StoneC. A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disability, 31(4), 344-364.
76.
ThomasG.WineburgS.GrossmanP.MyhreO.WoolworthS. (1998). In the company of collogues: An interim report on the development of a community of teacher learners. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 21-23.
77.
TrippT.RichP. (2012). The influence of video analysis on the process of teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(5), 728-739.
78.
vandePolJ.VolmanM.BeishuizenJ. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interactions: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296.
79.
van EsE. (2010). A framework for facilitating productive discussions in video clubs. Educational Technology, 50(1), 8-12.
80.
VygotskyL. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
81.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
82.
WoodD.BrunerJ.RossG. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.
83.
WoodE.GeddisA. (1999). Self-conscious narrative and teacher education: Representing practice in professional course work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(1), 107-119.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
