Exploring the variability in how educators attend to science classroom interactions
Exploring the variability in how educators attend to science classroom interactions
Files
Publication or External Link
Date
2013
Authors
Gillespie, Colleen
Advisor
Elby, Andrew
Citation
DRUM DOI
Abstract
Many researchers assert educators must develop a shared instructional vision in order for schools to be effective. While this research tends to focus on educators' alignment around goals of science classrooms, I argue that we can't assume that educators agree on what they see when they look at science classrooms. In this dissertation, I explore the variability in what teachers and leaders notice in science classroom episodes and how they reason about what they notice. I ground my studies in real classroom practice: a videotaped lesson in the first study and a live classroom observation in the second. In Chapter 2, I discuss the importance of grounding discussions about teaching and learning in classroom artifacts, a commitment that motivates my dissertation: educators may have a shared vision when discussing teaching and learning in the abstract but disagree about whether that vision is being realized in a classroom. I then describe and analyze the video clip I used in my interviews, highlighting moments that I consider to be good teaching and learning. In Chapter 3, I present my first study, in which I showed this episode to 15 different science teachers, science instructional leaders, and principals. I found that participants attended to many different features in the episode, which led to significant disagreement about what is happening in the episode. Additionally, I found that these differences in attention corresponded to differences in how participants were framing the activity of watching the clip. In Chapter 4, I explore the attentional variability of one science instructional leader, Valerie, in multiple contexts. In addition to interviewing Valerie about the videotaped lesson, I also observed Valerie engage in an "observation cycle" with a teacher. Even though Valerie is quite skilled at attending to student thinking in some contexts, I found that Valerie's attention is strongly context-dependent and gets pulled away from students' scientific thinking when she uses a district mandated form. Finally, in Chapter 5 I summarize my findings and describe the implications my work has for both research and practice.