Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 458–470 | Cite as

Beginning Science Teachers’ Use of a Digital Video Annotation Tool to Promote Reflective Practices

  • Justin McFadden
  • Joshua Ellis
  • Tasneem Anwar
  • Gillian Roehrig


The development of teachers as reflective practitioners is a central concept in national guidelines for teacher preparation and induction (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education 2008). The Teacher Induction Network (TIN) supports the development of reflective practice for beginning secondary science teachers through the creation of online “communities of practice” (Barab et al. in Inf Soc, 237–256, 2003), which have been shown to have positive impacts on teacher collaboration, communication, and reflection. Specifically, TIN integrated the use of asynchronous, video annotation as an affordance to directly facilitate teachers’ reflection on their classroom practices (Tripp and Rich in Teach Teach Educ 28(5):728–739, 2013). This study examines the use of video annotation as a tool for developing reflective practices for beginning secondary science teachers. Teachers were enrolled in an online teacher induction course designed to promote reflective practice and inquiry-based instruction. A modified version of the Learning to Notice Framework (Sherin and van Es in J Teach Educ 60(1):20–37, 2009) was used to classify teachers’ annotations on video of their teaching. Findings from the study include the tendency of teachers to focus on themselves in their annotations, as well as a preponderance of annotations focused on lower-level reflective practices of description and explanation. Suggestions for utilizing video annotation tools are discussed, as well as design features, which could be improved to further the development of richer annotations and deeper reflective practices.


Teacher induction Reflective practice Video annotation Teacher education 



This study was made possible by National Science Foundation grant 0833250. The findings, conclusions, and opinions herein represent the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the view of personnel affiliated with the National Science Foundation.


  1. Acheson KA, Zigler CJ (1971) A comparison of two teacher training programs in higher cognitive questioning. Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen DW, Clark RJ (1967) Microteaching: its rationale. High Sch J 51:75–79Google Scholar
  3. Barab SA, MaKinster JG, Scheckler R (2003) Designing system dualities: characterizing a web-supported professional development community. Inf Soc 19(3):237–256Google Scholar
  4. Blomberg G, Renkl A, Sherin MG, Borko H, Seidel T (2013) Five research-based heuristics for using video in pre-service teacher education. J Educ Res Online 5(1):90–114Google Scholar
  5. Brophy J (2003) Chapter 11 discussion. In: Brophy J (ed) Using video in teacher education (pp. 1–27). Elsevier Science, New York, pp 287–304Google Scholar
  6. Brophy S, Klein S, Portsmore M, Rogers C (2008) Advancing engineering education in the P-12 classrooms. J Eng Educ 97(3):369–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bryan LA, Recesso A (2006) Promoting reflection with a web-based video analysis tool. J Comput Teach Educ 23(1):31–39Google Scholar
  8. Creswell JW, Clark VLP (2010) Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  9. Danielson C (2007) Enhancing professional practice: a framework for teaching. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VAGoogle Scholar
  10. De Wever B, Schellens T, Valcke M, Van Keer H (2006) Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: a review. Comput Educ 46(1):6–28Google Scholar
  11. Dewey J (1933) How we think. Henrey Regney, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  12. Donna JD (2009) Surviving and thriving as a new science teacher: exploring the role of comprehensive online induction (unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Minnesota, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  13. Feiman-Nemser S (2001) From preparation to practice: designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teach Coll Rec 103:1013–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gentry L, Denton C, Kurz T (2008) Technologically-based mentoring provided to teachers: a synthesis of the literature. J Technol Teach Educ 16(3):339–373Google Scholar
  15. Grossman P (2005) Research on pedagogical approaches. In: Cochran-Smith M, Zeichner KM (eds) Studying teacher education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 425–476Google Scholar
  16. Hammer D (2000) Teacher inquiry. In: Minstrell J, van Zee E (eds) Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC, pp 184–215Google Scholar
  17. Hosack B (2010) VideoANT: extending online video annotation beyond content delivery. TechTrends 54:45–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ingersoll R (2001) Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: an organizational analysis. Am Educ Res J 38(3):499–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ingersoll R (2012) Beginning teacher induction: what the data tell us. Phi Delta Kappan 93(8):47–51Google Scholar
  20. Ingersoll R, Merrill E (2010) Who’s teaching our children? Educ Leadersh 67:14–20Google Scholar
  21. Ingersoll R, Perda D (2006) What the data tell us about shortages of mathematics and science teachers. Paper presented at the national commission on teaching and America’s future meeting on mathematics and science teachers. November, 2006, Wingspread, WIGoogle Scholar
  22. Ingersoll R, Strong M (2011) The impact of induction and mentoring for beginning teachers: a critical review of the research. Rev Educ Res 81(2):201–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jaffe R, Moir E, Swanson E, Wheeler G (2006) EMentoring for student success. In: Dede C (ed) Online professional development for teachers: emerging models and methods. Havard Education Press, Cambridge, pp 89–116Google Scholar
  24. Kirschner P, Strijbos J-W, Kreijn K, Jelle Beers P (2004) Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educ Tech Res Dev 52(3):44–66Google Scholar
  25. Kong SC (2010) Using a web-enabled video system to support student–teachers’ self-reflection in teaching practice. Comput Educ 55(4):1772–1782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Limbacher PC (1971) A study of the effects of microteaching experiences upon the classroom behavior of social studies student teachers. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Luft JA, Roehrig GH, Patterson NC (2003) Contrasting landscapes: a comparison of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers’ practices and beliefs. J Res Sci Teach 40:77–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Luft JA, Firestone JB, Wong SS, Ortega I, Adams K, Bang E (2011) Beginning secondary science teacher induction: a two-year mixed methods study. J Res Sci Teach 48(10):1199–1224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Martin S, Siry C (2012) Using video in science teacher education: an analysis of the utilization of video-based media. In: Fraser B, Tobin K, McRobbie C (eds) Using video in science teacher education: an analysis of the utilization of video-based media by teacher educators and researchers. Springer, Netherlands, pp 417–433Google Scholar
  30. McCullagh J (2012) How can video supported reflection enhance teachers’ professional development? Cult Sci Edu 7(1):137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983) A nation at risk: the imperative for educational reform. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  32. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2008) NCATE unit standards. Retrieved from
  33. Norman DA (1988) The psychology of everyday things. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Olivero JL (1965) The use of video recordings in teacher education. Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 011 074)Google Scholar
  35. Putnam RT, Borko H (2000) What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educ Res 29(1):4–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rich PJ, Hannafin MJ (2008) Decisions and reasons: examining pre-service teacher decision-making through video self-analysis. J Comput High Educ 20(1):62–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rich PJ, Hannafin M (2009) Video annotation tools: technologies to scaffold, structure, and transform teacher reflection. J Teach Educ 60:52–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rich PJ, Trip T (2011) Ten essential questions educators should ask when using video annotation tools. TechTrends 55(6):16–24Google Scholar
  39. Rodgers C (2002) Defining reflection: another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. Teach Coll Rec 104(4):842–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Roehrig GH (2012) The Minnesota teacher induction network: providing continued support to our teacher candidates during their first year of teaching. National Science and Mathematics Teacher Imperative Conference, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  41. Roehrig GH, Donna J, Billington BL, Hoelscher M  (in review) Design of online induction programs to promote reform-based science and mathematics teaching. Contemp Issue Technol Teach EducGoogle Scholar
  42. Schön DA (1983) The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Sherin MG (2004) New perspectives on the role of video in teacher education. In: Brophy J (ed) Using video in teacher education. Elsevier Science, New York, pp 1–27Google Scholar
  44. Sherin MG, van Es EA (2005) Using video to support teachers’ ability to notice classroom interactions. J Technol Teach Educ 13(3):475–491Google Scholar
  45. Sherin MG, van Es EA (2009) Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. J Teach Educ 60(1):20–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith TM, Ingersoll RM (2004) What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? Am Educ Res J 41(3):681–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Strijbos JW, Martens RL, Prins FJ, Jochems WMG (2006) Content analysis: what are they talking about? Comput Educ 46(1):29–48Google Scholar
  48. Teacher Education Accreditation Council (2008) Accreditation goal and principles. Retrieved from
  49. Tripp TR, Rich PJ (2013) The influence of video analysis on the process of teacher change. Teach Teach Educ 28(5):728–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. van Es EA, Sherin MG (2002) Learning to notice: scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. J Technol Teach Educ 10(4):571–596Google Scholar
  51. van Es EA, Sherin MG (2008) Mathematics teachers’ ‘‘learning to notice’’ in the context of a video club. Teach Teach Educ 24:244–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wopereis I, Sloep P, Poortman S (2010) Weblogs as instruments for reflection on action in teacher education. Interact Learn Environ 18(3):245–261Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Justin McFadden
    • 1
  • Joshua Ellis
    • 1
  • Tasneem Anwar
    • 1
  • Gillian Roehrig
    • 1
  1. 1.STEM Education CenterUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations