de
en
Schliessen
Detailsuche
Bibliotheken
Projekt
Impressum
Datenschutz
de
en
Schliessen
Impressum
Datenschutz
zum Inhalt
Detailsuche
Schnellsuche:
OK
Ergebnisliste
Titel
Titel
Inhalt
Inhalt
Seite
Seite
Im Dokument suchen
Effects of multi-compared to mono-professional co-teaching on pre-service teachers attitudes, concepts, and beliefs of inclusive education / submitted by Roswitha Margareta Ritter. Wuppertal, 5th July 2019
Inhalt
Abstract
Zusammenfassung
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
1. Introduction
1.1 Attitudes
Figure 1. Schematic conception of the affective-cognitive-behavioral framework for attitude formation and consequences (adapted from Rosenberg et al., 1960)
Figure 2. Theory of Planned Behavior
1.2 Co-teaching
1.3 Teachers’ Beliefs
Figure 3. Conceptual Model of Teacher Beliefs and Practices (adapted from Nishino, 2012)
1.4 The relation of co-teaching, attitude, and teacher beliefs
Figure 4. Model of the relation between co-teaching, beliefs, and attitude
1.5 Research Questions and Objectives of this Study
2. Material and Methods
2.1 Academic Course
2.2 Research design
2.2.1 Instruments
2.2.1.1 Questionnaires for the assessment of attitudes.
Table 1. Subscales, example items and internal consistencies (Cohen’s alpha, α) for the attitude questionnaire
2.2.1.2 Concept maps for the assessment of concept and knowledge.
2.2.1.3 Learning diaries and questionnaire for the assessment of collaboration skills.
Table 2. Subscales, example items and Internal Consistency (Cohen’s alpha) for the collaboration questionnaire
2.2.2 Data Collection
Figure 5. Design of academic course and research study
2.2.3 Data analysis
Questionnaires
Concept maps
2.3 Sample
Table 3. Number and distribution of participants
3. Results
3.1 Inclusion-oriented teacher training: trans-disciplinary seminar-concept for teacher trainees for general education and for special needs education (Research Paper 1, peer reviewed)
Zusammenfassung
Abstract
3.1.1 Einleitung
3.1.2 Co-teaching im inklusiven Unterricht – das Seminarkonzept
Figure 6. Co-Teaching im inklusiven Unterricht, Seminarkonzeption
3.1.2.1 Universitäre Phase
3.1.2.2 Praktische Phase
3.1.2.3 Reflexive Phase
3.1.3 Evaluation
3.1.4 Diskussion
Literatur
3.2 Multi-professional and Mono-professional Collaboration and its Association with Both Student Teachers Attitudes towards, and Concepts of, Inclusive Education (Research Paper 2, peer reviewed)
Abstract:
3.2.1 Introduction
3.2.1.1 Inclusion and the Association with Teacher Training
3.2.1.2 Attitudes and the Association with Inclusive Classroom Behavior
3.2.1.3 Co-Teaching and the Association with Professional Development of Student Teachers
3.2.1.4 Research Question
3.2.2 Methodology
3.2.2.1 Academic Course
3.2.2.2 Sample
3.2.2.3 Instruments
3.2.2.3.1 Questionnaires for the assessment of attitudes.
3.2.2.3.2 Concept maps for the assessment of concept and knowledge.
3.2.2.3.3 Learning diaries for the assessment of cooperative skills.
3.2.2.4 Data Collection
Figure 7. Design of academic course and research study
3.2.3 Intended Analysis
3.2.3.1 Analysis of quantitative data/attitudes.
3.2.3.2 Analysis of qualitative data/concepts.
3.2.3.3 Analysis of mixed-method data/collaboration skills.
3.2.4 Discussion
3.2.4.1 On the Theory
3.2.4.2 On the Method
3.2.4.2.1 Academic course.
3.2.4.2.2 Instruments.
3.2.4.3 Implementation and Implications
3.2.5 Conclusion
List of references
3.3 Effect of same compared to different-discipline co-teaching on pre-service teachers’ attitude towards inclusive education and their collaboration skills (Research Paper 3, peer reviewed)
3.3.1 Introduction
3.3.1.1 Co-teaching
3.3.1.2 Attitudes
3.3.1.3 Relation between attitude and co-teaching at the pre-service level
3.3.2 Methodology and methods
3.3.2.1 Academic course
Figure 8: Seminar- and research-design
3.3.2.2 Research Design
3.3.2.3 Sample
3.3.2.4 Data analysis
3.3.3 Results
3.3.3.1 Comparison of attitude change of teacher trainees in same- or different-discipline teams
3.3.3.2 Comparison of attitude change of teacher trainees of SEN and teacher trainees of GE
3.3.3.3 Comparison of attitude change of teacher trainees for SEN and teacher trainees for GE in dependence of their team-constellation
Figure 9: Development of attitude of teacher trainees for SEN and those for GE in different- and same-discipline teams: mean scores across all items and testing times (ANOVA)
3.3.3.4 Effect of the common seminar on all participants’ collaboration skills and their attitudes towards inclusion
3.3.4 Discussion
3.3.4.1 Comparison of attitude change of teacher trainees in mono- or different-discipline teams
3.3.4.2 Comparison of attitude change of teacher trainees for SEN and teacher trainees for GE
3.3.4.3 Comparison of attitude change of teacher trainees for SEN and teacher trainees for GE in dependence of the team-constellation
3.3.5 Conclusion
3.3.6 References
3.4 Concepts of educational inclusion of teacher trainees: development of a system of categories using inductive, summarizing qualitative content analysis (Research Paper 4, peer reviewed)
Abstract:
3.4.1 Einleitung
3.4.2 Material und Methode
3.4.2.1 Stichprobe
3.4.2.2 Generierung der Analyseeinheiten
3.4.2.3 Inhaltsanalyse
3.4.2.4 Gütekriterien
3.4.3 Ergebnisse
Table 12. System of Categories
3.4.4 Diskussion
3.4.5 Limitation
Literaturverzeichnis
3.5 Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about inclusive education before and after multi- compared to mono-professional co-teaching: An exploratory study (Research Paper 5, peer-reviewed)
3.5.1 Introduction
3.5.2 Material and Method
3.5.2.1 Academic course
3.5.1.2 Participants
3.5.1.3 Data collection and analysis
3.5.3 Results
3.5.3.1 Graph-theoretical analysis
Figure 10. Pathfinder network of all teacher trainees at t1 (N=97)
Figure 11. Pathfinder network of teacher trainees at t2 (N=97)
Figure 12. Pathfinder network of participants in multi-professional teams at t2 (N=63)
Figure 13. Pathfinder network of participants in mono-professional teams at t2 (N=34)
3.5.3.2 Content analysis
Table 13. Excerpt of Final System of Categories
Table 14. Most frequent categories for t1 and t2
3.5.4 Discussion
3.5.4.1 Beliefs about inclusive education
3.5.4.1.1 Pre-service teachers’ beliefs before and after the seminar
3.5.4.1.2 Multi- and mono-professional teams: comparison of beliefs
3.5.4.2 Limitations
3.5.4. Conclusion and Implementation
3.5.5 Conflict of Interest
3.5.6 Ethic Statement
3.5.7 Author Contributions
3.5.8 Funding
3.5.9 Acknowledgments
3.5.10 References
3.6 Cluster Analysis of the Propositions
Figure 14. Cluster centers for a two-cluster solution; Pre-test
Figure 15. Cluster-centers of a four-cluster-solution, post-practice test
Figure 16. Cluster affiliation of teacher trainees in mono- and those in multi-professional teams at t1 and t2
3.7 In-service teachers’ beliefs about inclusive education
Figure 17. Pathfinder network of in-service teachers
Table 19. Most frequent categories of in-service teachers
3.8 Summary of the results
4. Discussion
4.1 Effect of the co-teaching seminar on teacher trainees’ attitudes towards inclusive education
4.2 Effect of the co-teaching seminar on teacher trainees’ collaboration skills
4.3 Participating teacher trainees’ concepts of inclusive education
4.4 Effect of the co-teaching seminar on teacher trainees’ concepts and beliefs about inclusive education
4.5 Cluster affiliation of teacher trainees before and after the seminar
4.6 In-service teachers’ beliefs about inclusion: similarities and differences to pre-service teachers’ beliefs
4.7 Limitations
4.8 Conclusion and Implication
List of References
Appendices
Appendix 1: List of all participating schools
Appendix 2: Questionnaire to assess teacher trainees’ attitudes towards inclusion
Appendix 3: Worksheet for the creation of the concept maps
Appendix 4: Example of a completed concept map
Appendix 5: Questionnaire to assess teacher trainees’ collaboration skills in learning diary
Appendix 6: Dendrogram of all categories pre-test
Appendix 7: Dendrogram of all categories post-practice test
Appendix 8: Diagrams of Test-statistics for Number of Clusters Pre-Test (t1)
Appendix 9. Diagrams of Test-Statistics for Number of Clusters Post Test (t2)
Acknowledgement