The report portrays a theory-practice psychology course on reading education in a German teacher education programme. Having completed a theoretical course phase that is largely based on knowledge from cognitive and educational psychology, pre-service student-teachers applied their acquired knowledge by working with a fifth-grader in five individual reading lessons. During the sessions, students were supported by a mentor and received individual video feedback as well as peer feedback. The students also kept a learning journal to document and reflect on their practical experiences. The results from a small-scale evaluation study suggest that the course format bears a high potential for meaningful learning experiences regarding both general teaching practice and reading instruction.
References
1.
Ahrens-DrathR.BräuerC.PieperI., & WirthweinH. (2005). Lesekompetenz im Kontext – Lesesozialisation und schulische Praxis'. Ein Fortbildungskonzept zum Lesen für Lehrkräfte [Reading literacy in contexts – reading socialization and practice at school: A training on reading literacy for teachers]. Literatur im Unterricht, 1, 65–82.
2.
Bangert-DrownsR. L.HurleyM. M., & WilkinsonB. (2004). The effects of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 29–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001029
3.
BertholdK.NücklesM., & RenklA. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 564–577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.007
4.
BloomB. S. (1984). The 2 Sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13(6), 4–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X013006004
5.
BorkoH., & MayfieldV. (1995). The roles of the cooperating teacher and university supervisor in learning to teach. Teaching & Teacher Education, 11(5), 501–518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(95)00008-8
6.
BorkoH., & PutnamR. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In BerlinerD. C. (Ed.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673–708). New York: Macmillan.
ChiM. T. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1
9.
CohenP. A.KulikJ. A., & KulikC. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312019002237
10.
Darling-HammondL., & BransfordJ. (2006). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
11.
DrechselB., & ArteltC. (2007). Lesekompetenz [Reading Literacy]. In PrenzelM.ArteltC.BaumertJ.BlumW.HammannM.KliemeE., & PekrunR. (Hrsg.), PISA 2006. Die Ergebnisse der dritten internationalen Vergleichsstudie [PISA 2006. Results from the third study] (S. 225–248). Münster: Waxmann.
12.
EricssonK. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In EricssonK. A.CharnessN.FeltovichP. J.HoffmanR. R. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (pp. 685–705). New York: Cambridge University Press
13.
GeorgeJ., & CowanJ. (1999). A Handbook of Techniques for Formative Evaluation.London: Kogan Page.
14.
GoldA.MokhlesgeramiJ.RühlK.SchreblowskiS., & SouvignierE. (2010). Wir werden Textdetektive. Arbeitsheft [Text detectives: Workbook]. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
15.
GröschnerA., & MüllerK. (2013). Bewertung praktischer Lerngelegenheiten durch Lehramtsstudierende –Betrachtungen zur Abbildbarkeit unterschiedlich dauernder Praxisphasen in Kompetenzselbsteinschätzungen [Self-Evaluation of practical learning opportunities by student teachers: How different durations of practical phases influence self-assessments]. In GehrmannA.KranzB.PelzmannS., & ReinartzA. (Eds.), Formation und Transformation der Lehrerbildung [Formations and transformations in teacher education], (pp. 119–133). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
16.
GröschnerA.SchmittC., & SeidelT. (2013). Veränderung subjektiver Kompetenzeinschätzungen von Lehramtsstudierenden im Praxissemester [Change of teacher candidates' perceived professional competencies during a practical internship]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 27(1–2), 77–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/a000090
17.
GrossmanP. (2005). Research on pedagogical approaches. In Cochran-SmithM. & ZeichnerK. M. (Eds.), Studying teacher education (pp. 425–476). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
GrossmanP., & McDonaldM. (2010). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312906
19.
HaggerH.BurnK.MuttonT., & BrindleyS. (2008). Practice makes perfect? Learning to learn as a teacher. Oxford Review of Education, 34(2), 159–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03054980701614978
20.
HascherT. (2012). Lernfeld Praktikum. Evidenzbasierte Entwicklungen in der Lehrer/innenbildung [Learning setting student teaching: Evidence-based developments in teacher training]. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 2(2), S. 109–129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s35834-012-0032-6
21.
HascherT.CocardY., & MoserP. (2004). Forget about theory – practice is all? Student teachers' learning in practicum. Teachers and teaching, 10(6), 623–637. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1354060042000304800
22.
HollingsworthS. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach. American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 160–189. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312026002160
23.
JudeN., & KliemeE. (2013). PISA 2009 – Impulse für die Schul- und Unterrichtsforschung. Einleitung [PISA 2009 – Impulses for teaching and learning research: Introduction]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, Beihefte, 59, 7–11.
KMK. (2004). Standards für die Lehrerbildung: Bildungswissenschaften [Standards for teacher education: Educational research]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 51(2), 280–290.
26.
KreisA., & StaubF. C. (2011). Fachspezifisches Unterrichtscoaching im Praktikum. Eine quasi experimentelle Interventionsstudie [Subject-specific lesson coaching during placements: A quasi-experimental intervention study]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 14(1), 61–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11618-011-0170-y
27.
MayringP. (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken [Qualitative content analysis: Basics and techniques]. Weinheim: Beltz.
28.
McCrindleA. R., & ChristensenC. A. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performance. Learning and Instruction, 5(2) 167–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(95)00010-Z
29.
MüllerK. (2010). Das Praxisjahr in der Lehrerbildung. Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit studienintegrierter Langzeitpraktika [A year of student teaching. Empirical findings on the effectiveness of pre-service teaching]. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
30.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: ‘Teaching children to read’ – An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.Washington: US Government Printing Office.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (Ed.) (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000.Paris: OECD.
34.
PutnamR. T. & BorkoH. (2000). What Do New Views of Knowledge and Thinking Have to Say about Research on Teacher Learning?Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X029001004
35.
RoscoeR. D., & ChiM. T. (2008). Tutor learning: The role of explaining and responding to questions. Instructional Science, 36(4), 321–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-007-9034-5
36.
RopoE. (2004). Teaching expertise: Empirical findings on expert teachers and teacher development. In BoshuizenH. P. A.BrommeR., & GruberH. (Eds.), Professional learning: Gaps and transitions on the way from novice to expert (pp. 159–179). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
37.
SchiefeleU.ArteltC.SchneiderW., & StanatP. (Eds.) (2004). Struktur, Entwicklung und Förderung von Lesekompetenz [Structure, development and facilitation of reading literacy]. Wiesbaden: VS. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-81031-1.
38.
SchubarthW.SpeckK.SeidelA.KammC.KleinfeldM. & SarrarL. (2011). Evidenzbasierte Professionalisierung der Praxisphasen in außeruniversitären Lernorten: Erste Ergebnisse des Forschungsprojektes ProPrax [Evidence-based development of practical learning outside university: First results from the research project ProPrax]. In SchubarthW.SpeckK., & SeidelA. (Hrsg.), Nach Bologna: Praktika im Studium – Pflicht oder Kür?: Empirische Analysen und Empfehlungen für die Hochschulpraxis [After Bologna: Internships in academic studies – compulsory or free choice?: Empirical analyses and recommendations for universities] (pp. 79–212). Potsdam: Universitätsverlag.
ShulmanL. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
41.
SnowC. E.GriffinP., Burns, M. S., & the National Academy of Education Subcommittee on Teaching Reading. (2005). Knowledge to support the teaching of reading: Preparing teachers for a changing world.San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
42.
ThurnD., & DrechselB. (under review) Concept Maps als Diagnoseinstrument kognitiver Strukturen im Bereich der Lesekompetenz(-förderung) bei Lehramtsstudierenden [Concept maps as a tool to diagnose cognitive structures in fostering reading literacy in student teachers]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht.
43.
WasakB. A., & SlavinR. E. (1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 179–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/747888ßΣ
44.
WeinsteinC. E., & MayerR. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In WittrockC. M. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315–327). New York: Macmillan.
