Self-regulation in learning (SRL) represents a major topic in educational research. Nevertheless, there remains a gap in the research concerning how teachers can incorporate SRL into the classroom. This study focuses on the Professional Vision for SRL (PfS) method, which aims to bridge the gap between theory and practice so that teachers can teach SRL and students can acquire SRL skills.
Purpose
The goal of the present study was to examine the impact of different scaffolding levels on the development of preservice teachers’ professional vision (PV) for SRL and their ability to teach SRL to students. Participants: Participants were 102 second-year preservice physics teachers at three major research universities.
Research Design
The study included three distinct PV scaffolding levels, in order to examine which types of PV prompts might best scaffold teachers’ progress in mapping and teaching SRL. These prompts included hints for when (time range) to analyze videotaped complex SRL-teaching events, full guidance (popup notifications) for when and what to analyze, and self-guidance (controls) for analyzing without help.
Data Collection and Analysis
I addressed the research questions and hypotheses by performing a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), with posttest performance as the dependent variable and PV prompt type as the independent variable.
Findings
Results showed that over time, all three groups improved on measures of both PV for SRL and SRL teaching. Additionally, we found that hint prompts had a greater positive effect on both measures than guided or self-guided prompts.
Recommendations
The current study recommends broadening the instructional framework of teacher education programs to include PV hints instruction as a means of supporting the practical skills necessary for teaching in dynamic school contexts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtkinsonT., & ClaxtonG. (2000). The intuitive practitioner on the value of not always knowing what one is doing. Buckingham, U.K.: Open University Press.
2.
BaadteC. (2018). Effects of short-term video-based interventions and instructions on teachers’ feedback skills to support students’ self-regulated learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 343, 559—578.
3.
BannertM. (2006). Effects of reflection prompts when learning with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 354, 359—375.
4.
BarnhartT., & van EsE. (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among pre-service science teachers’ ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83—93.
5.
BerlinerD. C. (2000). A personal response to those who bash teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 515, 358—371.
6.
BerlinerD. C. (2001). Learning about and learning from expert teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 355, 463—482.
7.
BlombergG.StürmerK., & SeidelT. (2011). How pre-service teachers observe teaching on video: Effects of viewers’ teaching subjects and the subject of the video. Teaching and Teacher Education, 277, 1131—1140. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.04.008
8.
BoekaertsM. (1996). Self-regulated learning at the junction of cognition and motivation. European Psychologist, 12, 100—112.
9.
BoekaertsM. (1999). Self-regulated learning: Where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research, 316, 445—457.
10.
BoekaertsM., & CornoL. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology, 542, 199—231.
11.
BorkoH.JacobsJ. K.EiteljorgE., & PittmanM. E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 242, 417—436.
12.
BrownA. L.CampioneJ. C., & DayJ. D. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from texts. Educational Researcher, 102, 14—21.
13.
BurtonR. R., & BrownJ. S. (1982). An investigation of computer coaching for informal learning activities. In SleemanD., & BrownJ. S., Eds., Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 227—282). London, U.K.: Academic Press.
14.
CanningsT., & TalleyS. (2003). Bridging the gap between theory and practice in preservice education: The use of video case studies. In A. McDougall, J. S. Murnane, C. Stacey, & C. Dowling (Eds.), ICT and the Teacher of the Future: Selected Papers from the International Federation for Information Processing Working Groups 3.1 and 3.3 Working Conference (CRPIT Proceedings, Vol. 23, pp. 17–20). Melbourne, Australia: Australian Computer Society.
15.
CarterK.SabersD.CushingK.PinnegarP., & BerlinerD. C. (1987). Processing and using information about students: A study of expert, novice and postulant teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 32, 147—157. doi:10.1016/0742-051X(87)90015-1
16.
ChiM. T. H. (2009). Active–constructive–interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 11, 73—105.
17.
ChiM. T. H.GlaserR., & FarrM. J. (Eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18.
CollinsA.BrownJ. S., & HolumA. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator, 153, 6—11.
19.
CornoL. (2004). Work habits and work styles: Volition in education. Teachers College Record, 1069, 1669—1694.
20.
CornoL., & RandiL. (1999). A design theory for classroom instruction. In ReigeluthC. R. (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. I, pp. 293—318). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
Darling-HammondL.ChungR., & FrelowF. (2002). Variation in teacher preparation: How well do different pathways prepare teachers to teach?Journal of Teacher Education, 534, 286—302.
22.
DavisD. S., & NeitzelC. (2011). A self-regulated learning perspective on middle grades classroom assessment. Journal of Educational Research, 1043, 202—215.
23.
DavisE. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 121, 91—142.
24.
De CorteE.VerschaffelL., & MasuiC. (2004). The CLIA-model: A framework for designing powerful learning environments for thinking and problem solving. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 194, 365—384.
25.
DignathC., & BüttnerG. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students: A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacognition & Learning, 3(3), 231—264.
26.
Dignath-van EwijkC.DickhäuserO., & BüttnerG. (2013). Assessing how teachers enhance self-regulated learning: A multiperspective approach. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 123, 338—358.
27.
DuschlR., & GrandyR. (Eds.). (2008). Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
28.
EilamB., & PoyasY. (2006). Promoting awareness of the characteristics of classrooms’ complexity: A course curriculum in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 223, 337—351. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.11.004
29.
EndsleyM. R., & JonesD. G. (2012). Designing for situation awareness: An approach to human-centered design (2nd ed.). London, U.K.: Taylor & Francis.
30.
FrankeM. L.CarpenterT. P.LeviL., & FennemaE. (2001). Capturing teachers’ generative growth: A follow-up study of professional development in mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 383, 653—690.
31.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.PrenticeK.BurchM.HamlettC. L., & OwenR. (2003). Enhancing third grade students’ mathematical problem solving with self-regulated learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 952, 306—315.
32.
FukkinkR. G.TrienekensN., & KramerL. C. (2011). Video feedback in education and training: Putting learning in the picture. Educational Psychology Review, 231, 45—63.
33.
GaudinC., & ChalièsS. (2015). Video viewing in teacher education and professional development: A literature review. Educational Research Review, 16, 41—67.
34.
GeX.ChenC., & DavisK. A. (2005). Scaffolding novice instructional designers’ problem-solving processes using question prompts in a web-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 332, 219—248.
35.
GibbsG., & CoffeyM. (2004). The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching skills, their approach to teaching and the approach to teaching of their students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 51, 87—100.
36.
GoodnoughK. (2006). Exploring problem-based learning in the context of high school science: Design and implementation issues. School Science and Mathematics, 1067, 280—296.
37.
GoodwinC. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 963, 606—633. doi:10.1525/aa.1994.96.3.02a00100
38.
GreeneJ. A., & AzevedoR. (2010). The measurement of learners’ self-regulated cognitive and metacognitive processes while using computer-based learning environments [Special issue]. Educational Psychologist, 454, 1—9.
39.
GriffinP.CareE., & McGawB. (2012). The changing role of education and schools. In GriffinP.McGawB., & CareE. (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 1—15). New York, NY: Springer.
40.
GruberH. (2001). Acquisition of expertise. In SmelserJ., & BaltesP. B. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 5145—5150). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
41.
HattonN., & SmithD. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching & Teacher Education, 111, 33—49.
42.
HiebertJ.MorrisA.BerkD., & JansenA. (2007). Preparing teachers to learn from teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 581, 47—61.
43.
KarsentiT., & CollinS. (2011). The impact of online teaching videos on Canadian pre-service teachers. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 283, 195—204.
44.
KerstingN. B. (2008). Using video clips as item prompts to measure teachers’ knowledge of teaching mathematics. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 685, 845—861.
45.
KerstingN. B.GivvinK. B.SoteloF. L., & StiglerJ. W. (2010). Teachers’ analyses of classroom video predict student learning of mathematics: Further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 611–2, 172—181.
46.
Kinnucan-WelschK., & JenlinkP. M. (1998). Challenging assumptions about teaching and learning: Three case studies in constructivist pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 144, 413—427.
47.
KistnerS.RakoczyK., & OttoB. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in classrooms: Investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student performance. Metacognition and Learning, 52, 157—171.
48.
KlahrD., & NigamM. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15, 661—667.
49.
KramarskiB., & KohenZ. (2017). Promoting preservice teachers’ dual self-regulation roles as learners and as teachers: Effects of generic vs. specific prompts. Metacognition and Learning, 122, 157—191.
50.
KunterM. (2013, August). Preparing teachers for responsible teaching: Research on teachers’ professional competence. Keynote address presented at EARLI conference, Munich, Germany.
51.
LemkeJ. (2007). Video epistemology in- and outside the box: Traversing attentional spaces. In GoldmanR.PeaR.BarronB., & DerryS. J. (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 39—51). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
52.
LlinaresS., & VallsJ. (2009). The building of pre-service primary teachers’ knowledge of mathematics teaching: Interactions and online video cases studies. Instructional Science, 373, 247—271.
53.
MasuiC., & De CorteE. (1999). Enhancing learning and problem-solving skills: Orienting and self-judging, two powerful and trainable tools. Learning and Instruction, 96, 517—542.
54.
MasuiC., & De CorteE. (2005). Learning to reflect and to attribute constructively as basic components of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 753, 351—372.
55.
MeyersC., & JonesT. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
56.
MichalskyT. (2012). Shaping Self-Regulation in Science Teachers’ Professional Growth: Inquiry Skills. Science Education. 96 (6), 1106—1133.
57.
MichalskyT. (2013). Integrating skills and wills instruction in self-regulated science text reading for secondary students. International Journal of Science Education, 1311, 1846—1873.
58.
MichalskyT. (2014). Developing the SRL-PV assessment scheme: Preservice teachers’ professional vision for teaching self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43, 214—229.
59.
MichalskyT., & KramarskiB. (2015). Prompting Reflections for integrating self-regulation into teacher technology education. Teachers College Record, 1175, 1—38.
60.
MichalskyT., & SchechterC. (2013). Preservice teachers’ self-regulated learning: Integrating learning from problems and learning from successes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 30, 60—73.
61.
MillerK., & ZhouX. (2007). Learning from classroom video: What makes it compelling and what makes it hard. In GoldmannR.PeaR.BarronB., & DerryS. J. (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 321—334). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
62.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2002). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: Author.
63.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2011). Duncan praises NCATE and its Blue Ribbon Panel at release of administration's plan for educator preparation reform and improvement (NCATE News and Press Releases). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.NCATE.org
64.
OECD. (2006). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow's world (Vol. 2). Paris, France: Author.
OttoB. (2010). How can motivated self-regulated learning be improved? In MouradA., & de la Fuente AriasJ. (Eds.), International perspectives on applying self-regulated learning in different settings (pp. 183—204). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang.
67.
P21 Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2013). Framework for 21st century learning: Partnership for 21st century skills. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework
68.
PalmerD. J.StoughL. M.BurdenskiT. K., & GonzalesM. (2005). Identifying teacher expertise: An examination of researchers’ decision making. Educational Psychologist, 401, 13—25.
69.
PalmeriT. J.WongA. C. N., & GauthierI. (2004). Computational approaches to the development of perceptual expertise. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 88, 378—386.
70.
PerelsF.GürtlerT., & SchmitzB. (2005). Training of self-regulatory and problem-solving competence. Learning and Instruction, 15, 123—139.
71.
PerryN. E.HutchinsonL., & ThaubergerC. (2007). Mentoring student teachers to design and implement literacy tasks that support self-regulated reading and writing. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 231, 27—50.
72.
PerryN. E.PhillipsL., & HutchinsonL. (2006). Mentoring student teachers to support self-regulated learning. Elementary School Journal, 1063, 237—254.
73.
PintrichP. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 316, 459—470.
74.
PuntambekarS., & HübscherR. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex environment: What have we gained and what have we missed?Educational Psychologist, 401, 1—12.
75.
PutnamR. T., & BorkoH. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning?Educational Research, 291, 4—15.
76.
RandiJ. (2004). Teachers as self-regulated learners. Teachers College Record, 1069, 1825—1853.
77.
RandiJ., & CornoL. (2000). Teacher innovations in self-regulated learning. In PintrichP.BoekaertsM., & ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 651—685). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
78.
ReeveJ., & TsengM. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of student engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257—267.
79.
ResnickL. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
80.
RichardsonV., & KileR. (1999). Learning from video cases. In LunderbergM. A.LevinB. B., & HarringtonH. L. (Eds.), Who learns what from cases and how?: The research base for teaching and learning with cases (pp. 121—136). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
81.
RothK. J. (2009). Using video studies to transform science teaching and learning: Results from the STeLLA professional development program. In JanikT., & SeidelT. (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 23—37). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
82.
SantagataR. (2009). Designing video-based professional development for mathematics teachers in low-performing schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 601, 38—51. doi:10.1177/0022487108328485
83.
SantagataR., & AngeliciG. (2010). Studying the impact of the lesson analysis framework on preservice teachers’ abilities to reflect on videos of classroom teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 614, 339—349. doi:10.1177/0022487110369555
84.
SantagataR., & GuarinoJ. (2011). Using video to teach future teachers to learn from teaching. ZDM International Journal of Mathematics Education, 431, 133—145.
85.
SantagataR.ZannoniC., & StiglerJ. W. (2007). The role of lesson analysis in pre-service teacher education: An empirical investigation of teacher learning from a virtual video-based field experience. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10, 123—140.
86.
SchäferS., & SeidelT. (2015). Noticing and reasoning of teaching and learning components by pre-service teachers. Journal of Educational Research Online, 72, 34—58.
87.
SchmitzB., & WieseB. S. (2006). New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time-series analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 311, 64—96.
88.
SchönD. (1995). Knowing-in-action: The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 276, 26—34.
89.
SchrawG. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 261–2, 113—125.
90.
SchrawG.CrippenK. J., & HartleyK. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 361–2, 111—139.
91.
SchunkD. H.PintrichP. R., & MeeceJ. (2008). Motivation in education (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
92.
SchwarzerG. (2002). Entwicklung von Wahrnehmungsprozessen: Ein natürliches Labor menschlicher Informationsverarbeitung [Perceptual development: A natural laboratory for understanding human information processing]. Psychologische Rundschau, 531, 3—13. doi:10.1026//0033-3042.53.1.3
93.
SeidelT. (2011). Lehrerhandeln im unterricht [Teacher action during classroom instruction]. In TerhartE.BennewitzH., & RothlandM. (Eds.), Handbuch der forschung zum lehrerberuf [Handbook of research on the teaching profession] (pp. 605—629). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
94.
SeidelT.BlombergG., & RenklA. (2013). Instructional strategies for using video in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 56—65.
95.
SeidelT., & PrenzelM. (2007). Wie lehrpersonen unterricht wahrnehmen und einschätzen: Erfassung pädagogisch-psychologischer kompetenzen mit videosequenzen [How teachers perceive lessons: Assessing educational competencies by means of videos]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft [Review of Education], 8, 201—216.
96.
SeidelT.SchwindtK.StürmerK., & BlombergG. (2008). Observer: Videobasiertes Tool zur Diagnose pedagogisch-psychologischer Kompetenzen bei Lehrpersonen [Observer: video-based tool to diagnose teachers’ professional vision]. Jena, Germany: Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat.
97.
SeidelT., & StürmerK. (2014). Modeling and measuring the structure of professional vision in pre-service teachers. American Educational Research Journal. Advance online publication. doi:10.3102/0002831214531321
98.
SeidelT., & StürmerK. (2015). Modeling the structure of professional vision in preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 514, 739—771.
99.
SeidelT.StürmerK.BlombergG.KobargM., & SchwindtK. (2011). Teacher learning from analysis of videotaped classroom situations: Does it make a difference whether teachers observe their own teaching or that of others?Teaching and Teacher Education, 272, 259—267.
100.
SherinM. G. (2002). When teaching becomes learning, Cognition and Instruction, 20(2), 119—150.
101.
SherinM. G. (2007). The development of teachers’ professional vision in video clubs. In GoldmanR.PeaR.BarronB., & DerryS. J. (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 383—395). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
102.
SherinM. G., & van EsE. A. (2005). Using video to support teachers’ ability to notice classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 133, 475—491.
103.
SherinM. G., & van EsE. A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 601, 20—37.
104.
SilbermanM. (1996). Active learning: 101 Strategies to teach any subject. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
105.
StarJ. R., & StricklandS. K. (2008). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 112, 107—125.
106.
SteffenskyM.GoldB.HolodynskiM., & MöllerK. (2015). Professional vision of classroom management and learning support in science classrooms: Does professional vision differ across general and content-specific classroom interactions?International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 132, 351—368.
107.
StürmerK.KöningsK. D., & SeidelT. (2013). Declarative knowledge and professional vision in teacher education: Effect of courses in teaching and learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 833, 467—483. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02075.x
108.
StürmerK.SeidelT., & SchäferS. (2013). Preservice teachers’ professional vision changes following practical experience: A video-based approach in university based teacher education. Gruppendynamik und Organisationsberatung, 443, 339—355.
109.
TenenbaumH. R.CallananM.Alba-SpeyerC., & SandovalL. (2002). The role of educational background, activity, and past experiences in Mexican-descent families’ science conversations. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 242, 225—248.
110.
TerwelJ. (1999). Constructivism and its implications for curriculum theory and practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 312, 192—201.
TroianoB., & RumenappJ. C. (2015). Examining bilingual classroom video analysis: A teacher education framework for curriculum integration. In OrtliebE.ShanahanL., & McVeeM. (Eds.), Video research in disciplinary literacies (pp. 307—327). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.
113.
Van de PolJ.VolmanM., & BeishuizenJ. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 271—297.
114.
van EsE. (2009). Participants’ roles in the context of a video club. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 181, 100—137.
115.
van EsE. (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. In SherinM. G.JacobsV., & PhilippR. (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 134—151). New York, NY: Routledge.
116.
van EsE., & SherinM. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 104, 571—596.
117.
van EsE., & SherinM. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 242, 244—276. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.005
118.
van EsE. A., & SherinM. G. (2010). The influence of video clubs on teachers’ thinking and practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 132, 155—176.
119.
VarmaK.HusicF., & LinnM. C. (2008). Targeted support for using technology enhanced science inquiry modules. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 174, 341—356.
120.
VeenmanM. V. J. (2007). The assessment of metacognition: A matter of multi-method designs. EAPA Newsletter of the European Association of Psychological Assessment, 1, 8—9.
121.
VermuntJ. D. (1998). The regulation of constructive learning processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 682, 149—171.
122.
VermuntJ. D., & VermettenY. J. (2004). Patterns in student learning: Relationships between learning strategies, conceptions of learning, and learning orientations. Educational Psychology Review, 164, 359—384.
123.
VerschaffelL.De CorteE.LasureS.van VaerenberghG.BogaertsH., & RatinckxE. (1999). Learning to solve mathematical application problems: A design experiment with fifth graders. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 13, 195—229.
124.
Von GlasersfeldE. (1988). The reluctance to change a way of thinking. Irish Journal of Psychology, 91, 83—90.
125.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Reprinted from 1934 edition.)
126.
VygotskyL. S. (1998). Infancy. In ReiberR. W. (Ed.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 5, pp. 207—241). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
127.
WangX. (2013). A potential approach to support pre-service teachers’ professional learning: the video analysis of the authentic classroom. US-China Education Review B, 33, 149—161.
128.
WeinfurtK. P. (1995). Multivariate analysis of variance. In GrimmL. G., & YarnoldP. R. (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 245—276). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
129.
WhiteB. Y., & FrederiksenJ. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(11), 3—118.
130.
WinneP. H. (2005). A perspective on state-of-the-art research on self-regulated learning. Instructional Science, 335–6, 559—565.
131.
WinneP. H., & HadwinA. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In HackerD. J.DunloskyJ., & GraesserA. C. (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277—304). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
132.
WinneP. H., & NesbitJ. C. (2010). The psychology of academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 653—678.
133.
WinneP. H., & PerryN. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP., & ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531—566). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
134.
WoodD.WoodH., & MiddletonD. (1978). An experimental evaluation of four face-to-face teaching strategies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 12, 131—147.
135.
YeaC., & SantagataR. (2013, April). Preparing to learn from teaching: A study of the effects of two math methods courses on preservice teachers’ analysis skills. Paper presented at the AERA Conference, San Francisco, CA.
136.
ZimmermanB. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 251, 3—17.
137.
ZimmermanB. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In SchunkD. H., & ZimmermanB. J. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1—19). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
138.
ZimmermanB. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 251, 82—91.
139.
ZimmermanB. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 451, 166—183.
140.
ZimmermanB. J.SchunkD. H. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York, NY: Routledge.
141.
ZoharA. (2004). Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students’ learning and teachers’ professional development. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
