CSCL2017 Talk: Effects of Perspective-Taking through Tangible Puppetry in Microteaching Role-play
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•116 views
The document summarizes a study that examined the effects of using tangible puppets in microteaching role-plays compared to self-performance. The study found that puppetry elicited a greater variety of informal discourse from student roles. These positive effects transferred to immediate self-performances but were lost in later feedback discussions. The researchers suggest lack of diverse perspectives in reflection may explain this. Developing a first-person view interface could help overcome full video reflection and better support transferring puppetry effects.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to CSCL2017 Talk: Effects of Perspective-Taking through Tangible Puppetry in Microteaching Role-play
Similar to CSCL2017 Talk: Effects of Perspective-Taking through Tangible Puppetry in Microteaching Role-play (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
CSCL2017 Talk: Effects of Perspective-Taking through Tangible Puppetry in Microteaching Role-play
- 1. SENSHU-UNIV, School of Network and Information Effects of Perspective-Taking Through Tangible Puppetry in Microteaching Role- Play Toshio Mochizuki, Senshu University Takehiro Wakimoto, Yokohama National University Hiroshi Sasaki, Kyoto University Ryoya Hirayama, Senshu University Hideo Funaoi, Soka University Yoshihiko Kubota, Utsunomiya University Hideyuki Suzuki, Ibaraki University Hiroshi Kato, The Open University of Japan
- 2. Theoretical Background • Schoolteachers should have dialogic teaching skills as essential skills (Alexander, 2008) – To stimulate students’ thinking and learning – Need to imagine a wide variety of possible reactions and questions (Bahktin, 1981) • Microteaching as a training method of dialogic teaching – however, it is not easy to achieve – “Apprenticeship of observation” (Lortie, 1975) – monologic teaching experience as students – Another promising reason: • Self-consciousness (Ladrousse, 1989) • Evaluation apprehension (Cottrell et al., 1968)
- 3. Puppetry can be a powerful device for role-play simulations The puppeteer can project him/herself using the puppet to play the role without fear of being identified with the role they are playing. (Aronoff, 2005) Puppeteer (Participant)
- 4. EduceBoard Watching animation for reflection & collaborative commenting on the Web system Tangible puppetry recorded by webcam under the transparent table LEDs Red: Sleepy Blue: Attentive Nothing: Normal (Mochizuki, et al. 2015; Sasaki et al. in press)
- 5. Research Questions 1. How can the tangible puppetry CSCL help student teachers achieve perspective-taking in their performances and reflections after the performance? 2. Can the immediate transfer of perspective-taking training be achieved when the student teachers self-perform microteaching after the tangible puppetry training?
- 6. Method • Context – a part of a pedagogy course in an undergraduate teacher education program in Japan • Participants – 36 undergraduates (66.7% female) • Studying to become elementary school teachers • This study was conducted as a part of a pedagogy course • 12 triads were created randomly • Design – ABA design
- 7. 1st Self-performance 10 min self-performed microteaching role-play Student A taught to Student B & C. (B & C played pupils’ role) 10 min reflection through watching the recorded video independently 20 min mutual feedback discussion while watching video Writing a short essay regarding what was learned (10 min) 2nd Puppetry on EduceBoard Tutorial of EduceBoard system 10 min Puppetry microteaching role-play Student B taught to Student A & C. (A & C played pupils’ role) 10 min reflection through watching the animation on the Web application independently 20 min mutual feedback discussion with watching animation Writing a short essay regarding what was learned (10 min) 3rd Self-performance 10 min self-performed microteaching role-play Student C taught to Student A & B. (A & B played pupils’ role) 10 min reflection through watching the recorded video independently 20 min mutual feedback discussion with watching video. Writing a short essay regarding what was learned (10 min)
- 8. Assessment (1): Performances • Transcripts of puppetry and self-performed role- plays – Analyzed the student teachers’ performance – Fujie (2000)’s scheme for teacher-student discourse • Especially focusing on formal academic utterances versus informal or everyday utterances Utterances Definition Teacher-Formal A teacher’s utterance that follows his/her lesson plan or is academic related Teacher-Informal A teacher’s utterance based on his or her individual experience and reaction to the students Teacher-Double barreled A teacher’s utterance reflecting the features of both “formal” and “informal” types Student-Formal A student’s utterance that follows the teacher’s instructions or is academic related Student-Informal A student’s utterance based on his or her individual experience and intention (not academic) Student-Double barreled A student’s utterance reflecting the features of both “formal” and “informal” types
- 9. Assessment (2): Discussions • Student discussions for mutual feedback – Examined how the student teachers reflected on their role-playing – Slightly modified Rosaen et al. (2008)’s coding scheme Comments Definition Focus on Teacher-Management Managing students’ behavior, role in organization for a smooth lesson flow Focus on Teacher-Instruction Instructional strategy that facilitates the cognitive and social interaction around the goals of the lesson; focuses on the teacher’s role Focus on Teacher-Double barreled Reflecting both “Teacher-Management” and “Teacher-Instruction”; focuses on the teacher’s role or behavior Focus on Student-Management Managing students’ behavior, organization for a smooth lesson flow; focuses on the children’s behavior or attitudes Focus on Student-Instruction Instructional strategy that facilitates the cognitive and social interaction around the goals of the lesson; focuses on how the students responded to the instruction Focus on Student-Double barreled Reflecting both “Student-Management” and “Student-Instruction”; focuses on the students’ behavior and their response to the instruction Student Achievement Preservice teacher indicates attention to student learning and achievement or assesses student learning Other Other comments or utterances to maintain the conversation
- 10. Assessment (3) Essays • Coded student teachers’ essays written at the end of each session – Examined student-centered viewpoints, or/and ideas of possible pupils’ presence and reactions in an actual classroom
- 11. Result (1): Performances • Puppetry can allow improvisational role-play that includes a variety of voices from pupils. • The effect remains in the role-play in the immediate transfer session in self-performance. 1st (Self) 2nd (Puppetry) 3rd (Self) Teacher-Formal 741 (+) 988 817(-) Teacher-Informal 21 (-) 101 (+) 48 Teacher-Double barreled 45 (-) 182 (+) 108 Student-Formal 450 (+) 436 (-) 456 Student-Informal 98 (-) 219 (+) 193 (+) Student-Double barreled 26 43 (-) 106 (+) Note: χ2(10) = 168.712, p < .01, Cramer’s V = .128. (+)(-) are the results based on the residual analysis (p < .05). The group which had data missing was excluded.
- 12. Result (1): Performances • Epistemic Network Analysis (Shaffer et al. 2015) was conducted to compare the network between three sessions. • The differences between 1st and 2nd: – Teacher Formal-Student Informal, Teacher Informal-Student Informal, & Teacher Formal-Teacher Informal linkages increased in the 2nd – Teacher Formal-Student Formal & Student Formal-Student Informal linkages decreased in 2nd.
- 13. Result (1): Performances • Epistemic Network Analysis (Shaffer et al. 2015) was conducted to compare the network between three sessions. • In the 3rd session: – More Teacher Formal-Student Informal, Teacher Informal-Student Informal, & Teacher Informal-Student Formal linkages than those in the 1st session – LessTeacher Formal-Student Formal & Student Formal-Student Informal linkages decreased in 2nd.
- 14. Result (1): Performances • Epistemic Network Analysis (Shaffer et al. 2015) was conducted to compare the network between three sessions. • In the 3rd session: – More Teacher Formal-Student Informal, Teacher Informal-Student Informal, & Teacher Informal-Student Formal linkages than those in the 1st session – LessTeacher Formal-Student Formal & Student Formal-Student Informal linkages decreased in 2nd.
- 15. Result (2): Discussions • Discussion after the puppetry could increase the student-centered utterances • BUT, discussion in the third session, the discussion tended to return to the similar perspective appeared in the first session. 1st (Self) 2nd (Puppetry) 3rd (Self) Focus on Teacher-Management 468 331 (-) 420 (+) Focus on Teacher-Instruction 1131 (+) 755 (-) 1073 (+) Focus on Teacher-Double barreled 37 (+) 33 (+) 5 (-) Focus on Student-Management 90 (-) 329 (+) 117 (-) Focus on Student-Instruction Focus on Student-Double barreled* 304 340 (+) 177 (-) Student Achievement 28 20 35 (+) Note: χ2(10) = 368.277, p < .01, Cramer’s V = .180. (+)(-) are the results based on the residual analysis (p < .05). *Student-Double barreled is merged to Student-Instruction due to few amount of data classified.
- 16. Result (3) Essays • Most students could describe student-centered viewpoint in some extent. • Descriptions about images of a variety of students’ presence & reactions increased significantly, without significant decrease in the third session 1st (Self) 2nd (Puppetry) 3rd (Self) 1. Student-centered viewpoint(s) included 31 32 29 2. Images of a variety of students’ possible reactions included 6 23 16 Note: A Chi-Square test was conducted for each item separately because the item 1 can include the item 2 as a theoretical construct. For the item 1, χ2(2) = .182, n.s.; for the item 2, χ2(2) = 9.73, p < .01. Ryan’s multiple comparison test on proportions showed a significant difference between the first and the second sessions. +
- 17. Summary of the Results • The use of puppets elicited a variety of informal discourse from pupils that is rarely used in self- performance • Those positive effects were also seen in the self- performance when made just after the tangible puppetry. • BUT, the effects were lost in the mutual feedback discussions in the third session, although the essays after the session still included a variety of pupils’ perspectives.
- 18. Discussion • One possible reason is a lack of diverse perspectives in reflection by the participants; – They reviewed with a full view (video) or a bird-eye’s view (animation) every time. • Necessary to be exposed to the first-person view (Lindgren, 2012) during the intervention to overcome the full view of video reflection in the transfer task.
- 19. Our next step • Developing 3D interface to allow the first-person view for reflection
Editor's Notes
- Thank you all for coming today. My name is Toshio Mochizuki. This presentation deals with how immediate transfer is achieved after perspective-taking training using tangible puppetry CSCL in microteaching role-plays.
- We focus on perspective-taking of student teachers for acquiring dialogic teaching skills. Schoolteachers should have dialogic teaching skills as essential skills, which stimulate students’ thinking and foster their learning through questioning and discussion. The teachers need to imagine a wide variety of students’ voices, possible reactions and questions for designing lessons. Although microteaching is one of the training methods for implementing dialogic teaching, it is not easy to achieve. One of the reasons is “apprenticeship of observation”; student teachers usually have their learning experience in monologic teaching as students. In addition, we will argue another promising reason – excessive self-consciousness or evaluation apprehension during microteaching. For example, when playing young pupils’ roles in a realistic way, student teachers may face difficulties due to fear of embarrassment, which creates a tendency to play honest students who blindly follow the teacher’s instructions.
- We believe that puppetry is a very powerful device for this issue especially when participants feel such obstacles in face-to-face role plays. The puppetry provides a psychological safety margin by separating the participants from players, enabling participants to take various perspectives by playing roles that rarely appear in self-performed role plays.
- Thus, we have developed the EduceBoard System which is a tangible puppetry-based CSCL, that enables users to elicit and learn more realistic pupils’ reactions. The system has two functions: recording puppetry play on the table, and playing the recordings online for their reflection on the role play. * - * - * I will skip next paragraph * - * - * Puppets or prop are attached to an AR marker and LED lights on the bottom. Each player can express their puppet’s condition by changing the color of the LED. Red may represent a sleeping or careless student, and blue an attentive or note-taking student. The system can capture all of the movements and changes of the puppets, enabling the participants to watch the recorded puppetry on the webpage in the form of animation from a bird’s-eye view after the role-play.
- This study tackles two research questions: How can the tangible puppetry help student teachers achieve perspective-taking of possible pupils in their performances and reflections after the performance? And, the transfer of learning through this activity: Can the immediate transfer of perspective-taking training be achieved when student teachers self-perform microteaching after the tangible puppetry training?
- This study was conducted as a part of a pedagogy course in Japan. We had 36 students in 12 groups, each group consisting of three students. We adopted ABA design for this study.
- In the first session, a ten-minute self-performed microteaching role play took place. One of the student teachers taught while the others played pupils’ roles. The microteaching was video-recorded and the student teachers watched the video after the role play independently, had a twenty-minute discussion while watching the video together, then they each wrote a short essay regarding what they learned in the session. In the second session, another student teacher taught and the others played pupils’ roles in a puppetry form on the EduceBoard for 10 minutes. Each of them watched the animation generated from the system independently, then had a feedback discussion collaboratively. As per the prior session, they each wrote a short essay. The final session is almost the same as the first. The last student teacher taught and the others played pupils’ roles in a self-performance, then they watched the video, had a discussion together, and wrote an essay each. Thus, we could gather microteaching dialogues data, discussions discourse data, and the essays.
- For Research Question 1, we analyzed transcripts of role plays to understand the performances. We used Fujie’s coding scheme for teacher-student discourse, which focuses on formal academic utterances versus informal or everyday utterances, as shown in the table. “Formal” means based on lesson plans or academic related utterances. “Informal” means relating to non-academic individual experiences and reactions unrelated to lesson plans, including irregular utterances such as chatting. “Double-barreled” means a combination of formal and informal.
- For both research questions, we also coded the discussions discourse, using a scheme as shown in the table, to examine how preservice teachers reflect on the teaching practice. In this scheme, ”Teacher” indicates teacher’s viewpoint, focused on teacher’s role. and ”Student” means pupil’s viewpoint. “Management” is focusing on managing the student behavior, and “Instruction” is focusing on teaching during the lesson. For example, “teacher-management” indicates management of pupil’s behavior, such as chatting, and focusing on teacher’s role to keep the lesson flow smooth, in such cases, for example, “the teacher should tell the students not to chat”. On the other hand, “student-management” indicates management of pupil’s behavior, such as chatting, and focusing on pupils’ behaviors or attitudes, from the viewpoint of pupils, for example, “the students got tired.” Similarly, “teacher-instruction” indicates how to teach from the teacher’s viewpoint, and “student-instruction” indicates how pupils responded to the instructions from pupils’ viewpoints. “Student Achievement” indicates attention to student learning and achievement.
- For Research Question 2, we coded the essays from two viewpoints: Whether each essay has student-centered viewpoints or not, and whether each essay contains ideas of a variety of possible pupils’ reactions.
- Let me explain the results. The analysis of microteaching performance showed that puppetry intervention could increase informal utterances both from teacher-role player and pupils-role players. Residual analysis showed significant increases in those utterances, and a significant decrease in student-formal utterances. Therefore, the puppetry allows the student teachers to elicit a variety of voices from pupils. In addition, even in the third session, the number of student-informal utterances were significantly higher, while the number of teacher-formal utterances were significantly lower than expected numbers. Thus, the effect of the puppetry intervention can be maintained in the immediate transfer session.
- We also conducted an epistemic network analysis that can compare the several discourse networks simultaneously, in order to examine how the discourse network changed through the intervention. As the results, Teacher Formal-Student Informal, Teacher Informal-Student Informal, & Teacher Formal-Teacher Informal linkages increased in the second session, while the Teacher Formal-Student Formal and Student Formal-Teacher Informal decreased significantly.
- The next plot shows that comparison between the session 3 (after the puppetry) and the session 1 (before the puppetry), indicating that TF-SI, TI-SF, and TI-SI linkages of the session 3 are stronger than those of the session 1, while TF-SF & SF-SI linkage of the session 1 is stronger than that of the session 3. Thus, we can see that some of the effects which prompted informal reactions between the student teachers and the pupils were still remained in the session 3, especially focusing on the student-teacher interactions.
- The next plot shows that comparison between the session 3 (after the puppetry) and the session 1 (before the puppetry), indicating that TF-SI, TI-SF, and TI-SI linkages of the session 3 are stronger than those of the session 1, while TF-SF & SF-SI linkage of the session 1 is stronger than that of the session 3. Thus, we can see that some of the effects which prompted informal reactions between the student teachers and the pupils were still remained in the session 3, especially focusing on the student-teacher interactions.
- The analysis of discussions showed that the number of utterances in the discussion after the puppetry increased the student-centered utterances, leading to more student-centered viewpoints than expected; however, in the third session, the tendency of utterances returned to the same patterns as in the first session.
- The analysis of the essay showed that most students could describe some texts from student-centered viewpoints in every session. However, descriptions of images of a variety of students’ possible reactions increased significantly in the 2nd session, and the number of descriptions slightly decreased in the third session without statistical difference. Thus, student teachers could maintain their viewpoints regarding the presence of a variety of students to some extent, but their reflection discussions before writing the essays could not include such perspective.
- To sum up, the use of puppets could elicit a variety of informal discourse from pupils, rarely used in self-performances. Those positive effects were also maintained in the self-performances. But, the effects were lost in the mutual feedback discussions in the third session, although the essays after the discussions still included possible pupils’ perspectives.
- One possible reason is a lack of diverse perspectives in the reflections, because they watched a full-view video or a bird’s-eye’s view animation. One promising way to improve this would be more exposure to a first-person view while watching the animation of the puppetry. Lindgren argued that this would generate a person-centered learning stance and perspective-taking.
- Thus, now we are developing a new function to allow the participants to watch the first-person view using three dimensional interface. We are going to examine its effectiveness in the near future.