Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student Characteristics
Teachers' ability to assess student cognitive and motivational-affective characteristics is a requirement to support individual students with adaptive teaching. However, teachers have difficulty in assessing the diversity among their students in terms of the intra-individual combinations of the...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-12-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Education |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2020.602470/full |
| _version_ | 1818322650187956224 |
|---|---|
| author | Katharina Schnitzler Doris Holzberger Tina Seidel |
| author_facet | Katharina Schnitzler Doris Holzberger Tina Seidel |
| author_sort | Katharina Schnitzler |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Teachers' ability to assess student cognitive and motivational-affective characteristics is a requirement to support individual students with adaptive teaching. However, teachers have difficulty in assessing the diversity among their students in terms of the intra-individual combinations of these characteristics in student profiles. Reasons for this challenge are assumed to lie in the behavioral and cognitive activities behind judgment processes. Particularly, the observation and utilization of diagnostic student cues, such as student engagement, might be an important factor. Hence, we investigated how student teachers with high and low judgment accuracy differ with regard to their eye movements as a behavioral and utilization of student cues as a cognitive activity. Forty-three participating student teachers observed a video vignette showing parts of a mathematics lesson to assess student characteristics of five target students, and reported which cues they used to form their judgment. Meanwhile, eye movements were tracked. Student teachers showed substantial diversity in their judgment accuracy. Those with a high judgment accuracy showed slight tendencies toward a more “experienced” pattern of eye movements with a higher number of fixations and shorter average fixation duration. Although all participants favored diagnostic student cues for their assessments, an epistemic network analysis indicated that student teachers with a high judgment accuracy utilized combinations of diagnostic student cues that clearly pointed to specific student profiles. Those with a low judgment accuracy had difficulty using distinct combinations of diagnostic cues. Findings highlight the power of behavioral and cognitive activities in judgment processes for explaining teacher performance of judgment accuracy. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T11:00:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e38d9d093da543edbc784ffcb065f4ef |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2504-284X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T11:00:10Z |
| publishDate | 2020-12-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Education |
| spelling | doaj.art-e38d9d093da543edbc784ffcb065f4ef2022-12-21T23:49:18ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Education2504-284X2020-12-01510.3389/feduc.2020.602470602470Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student CharacteristicsKatharina Schnitzler0Doris Holzberger1Tina Seidel2TUM School of Education, Chair for Educational Psychology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyTUM School of Education, Centre for International Student Assessment, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyTUM School of Education, Chair for Educational Psychology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyTeachers' ability to assess student cognitive and motivational-affective characteristics is a requirement to support individual students with adaptive teaching. However, teachers have difficulty in assessing the diversity among their students in terms of the intra-individual combinations of these characteristics in student profiles. Reasons for this challenge are assumed to lie in the behavioral and cognitive activities behind judgment processes. Particularly, the observation and utilization of diagnostic student cues, such as student engagement, might be an important factor. Hence, we investigated how student teachers with high and low judgment accuracy differ with regard to their eye movements as a behavioral and utilization of student cues as a cognitive activity. Forty-three participating student teachers observed a video vignette showing parts of a mathematics lesson to assess student characteristics of five target students, and reported which cues they used to form their judgment. Meanwhile, eye movements were tracked. Student teachers showed substantial diversity in their judgment accuracy. Those with a high judgment accuracy showed slight tendencies toward a more “experienced” pattern of eye movements with a higher number of fixations and shorter average fixation duration. Although all participants favored diagnostic student cues for their assessments, an epistemic network analysis indicated that student teachers with a high judgment accuracy utilized combinations of diagnostic student cues that clearly pointed to specific student profiles. Those with a low judgment accuracy had difficulty using distinct combinations of diagnostic cues. Findings highlight the power of behavioral and cognitive activities in judgment processes for explaining teacher performance of judgment accuracy.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2020.602470/fulljudgment accuracyjudgment processlens modelstudent cue utilizationstudent engagementstudent profiles |
| spellingShingle | Katharina Schnitzler Doris Holzberger Tina Seidel Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student Characteristics Frontiers in Education judgment accuracy judgment process lens model student cue utilization student engagement student profiles |
| title | Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student Characteristics |
| title_full | Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student Characteristics |
| title_fullStr | Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student Characteristics |
| title_full_unstemmed | Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student Characteristics |
| title_short | Connecting Judgment Process and Accuracy of Student Teachers: Differences in Observation and Student Engagement Cues to Assess Student Characteristics |
| title_sort | connecting judgment process and accuracy of student teachers differences in observation and student engagement cues to assess student characteristics |
| topic | judgment accuracy judgment process lens model student cue utilization student engagement student profiles |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2020.602470/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT katharinaschnitzler connectingjudgmentprocessandaccuracyofstudentteachersdifferencesinobservationandstudentengagementcuestoassessstudentcharacteristics AT dorisholzberger connectingjudgmentprocessandaccuracyofstudentteachersdifferencesinobservationandstudentengagementcuestoassessstudentcharacteristics AT tinaseidel connectingjudgmentprocessandaccuracyofstudentteachersdifferencesinobservationandstudentengagementcuestoassessstudentcharacteristics |