Advertisement

Lehrexpertise – Integration und Förderung von pädagogischem und psychologischem Wissen

  • Nora Harr
  • Andreas Eichler
  • Alexander Renkl
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

In diesem Kapitel wird ein Problem gegenwärtiger universitärer Lehramtsausbildung diskutiert. Einerseits ist die Integration unterschiedlicher Arten von Wissen (Fachwissen, fachdidaktisches Wissen sowie pädagogisches und psychologisches Wissen) ein zentraler Faktor für Entwicklung von Lehrexpertise. Andererseits wird diese Integration in der gegenwärtigen Lehramtsausbildung kaum gefördert. Es werden zwei Studien in zusammengefasster Form dargestellt, in denen zwei Arten der Förderung der Wissensintegration (hier exemplarisch fachdidaktisches Wissen einerseits sowie pädagogisches und psychologisches Wissen andererseits) untersucht wurde: Eine vorgegebene Integration, bei der die Lehrinhalte miteinander „verflochten“ werden, und eine Integration, bei der angehenden Lehrkräfte separat dargebotene Inhalte, unterstützt durch Leitfragen, selbst integrieren. Die Befunde zeigen, dass beide Maßnahmen geeignet sind, die Wissensintegration zu fördern. Diese Integration wurde jedoch mit erhöhten Lernzeitkosten erkauft. Ausgehend von diesen Befunden werden verschiedene Möglichkeiten der Wissensintegration in der universitären Lehramtsausbildung mit ihren Vor- und Nachteile diskutiert.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(99)00029-9Google Scholar
  2. Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16, 183-198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001Google Scholar
  3. Ainsworth, S., Bibby, P., & Wood, D. (2002). Examining the effects of different multiple representational systems in learning primary mathematics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 25-61.Google Scholar
  4. Akkoç, H. (2011). Investigating the development of prospective mathematics teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. Research in Mathematics Education, 13, 75-76.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2011.550729Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, J. R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 261-295.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(83)90201-3Google Scholar
  6. Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Anderson, L. M., Blumenfeld, P., Pintrich, P. R., Clark, C. M., Marx, R. W., & Peterson, P. (1995). Educational psychology for teachers: Reforming our courses, rethinking our roles. Educational Psychologist, 30, 143-157.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3003_5Google Scholar
  7. Ayres, P. (2013). Can the isolated-elements strategy be improved by targeting points of high cognitive load for additional practice? Learning and Instruction, 23, 115-124.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.08.002Google Scholar
  8. Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1-29.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422Google Scholar
  9. Ball, D. L. (1990). The mathematical understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher education. The Elementary School Journal, 90, 449-466.Google Scholar
  10. Ball, D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 241-247.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487100051003013Google Scholar
  11. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 389-407.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554Google Scholar
  12. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  13. Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 9, 469-520.Google Scholar
  14. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., & … Tsai, Y. M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 133-180.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209345157Google Scholar
  15. Berliner, D. C. (1992). Telling the stories of educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 27, 143-161.Google Scholar
  16. Berthold, K., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17, 564–577.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.007Google Scholar
  17. Berthold, K., & Renkl, A. (2009). Instructional aids to support a conceptual understanding of multiple representations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 70-87.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013247Google Scholar
  18. Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 473-498.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312026004473Google Scholar
  19. Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673-708). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Schmidt, H. G. (1992). On the role of biomedical knowledge in clinical reasoning by experts, intermediates, and novices. Cognitive Science, 16, 153-184.Google Scholar
  21. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind experience, and school. Washigton, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  22. Bransford, J., Derry, S., Berliner, D., Hammerness, K., & Beckett, K. L. (2005). Theories of learning and their roles in teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 40-87). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  23. Bromme, R. (1997). Kompetenzen, Funktionen und unterrichtliches Handeln des Lehrers. In F. E. Weinert (Ed.), Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule (Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, Vol. 3, pp. 177-212). Goettingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  24. Bromme, R. (2001). Teacher Expertise. In J.J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 15459-15465). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  25. Brush, T., & Saye, J. W. (2009). Strategies for preparing pre-service social studies teachers to integrate technology effectively: Models and practices. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 46-59.Google Scholar
  26. Bubrowski, A. (2007). Was ist ein guter Lehrer? Die vorläufige Top 10 der Merkmale. Retrieved February 14, 2014, from http://www.cjd-update.de/cjd-jugenddorf-christophorusschuleoberurff/was-ist-ein-guter-lehrer-die-vorlaeufige-top-10-der-merkmale/2007/09/28
  27. Bullough, R. V. (2001). Pedagogical content knowledge circa 1907 and 1987: A study in the history of an idea. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 655-666.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-051x(01)00022-1Google Scholar
  28. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2014). Qualitätsoffensive Lehrerbildung gestartet. Retrieved December 16, 2014, from http://www.bmbf.de/_media/press/PM0724-067.pdf
  29. Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (n.d.). Qualitätsoffensive Lehrerbildung – ein Beitrag zu mehr Mobilität in der Lehrerschaft. Retrieved December 16, 2014, from http://www.bmbf.de/de/21697.php
  30. Chai, C.-S., Koh, J. H.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Technology & Society, 16, 31-51.Google Scholar
  31. Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55-81.Google Scholar
  32. Chi, M. T. H. (2011). Theoretical perspectives, methodological approaches, and trends in the study of expertise. In Y. Li & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Expertise in mathematics instruction: An international perspective (pp. 17-39). New York: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7707-6_2Google Scholar
  33. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2Google Scholar
  34. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (Eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  35. Colhoun, J., Gentner, D., & Loewenstein, J. (2008). Learning abstract principles through principlecase comparison. In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1659-1664). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
  36. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  37. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  38. De Groot, A. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  39. De Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. (1986). Cognitive structures of good and poor novice problem solvers in physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 279-288.Google Scholar
  40. De Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. (1996). Types and qualities of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 31, 105-113.Google Scholar
  41. Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135-168.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750Google Scholar
  42. Duncan, A. (2009a). A call to teaching: Secretary Arne Duncan’s remarks at the rotunda at the University of Virginia. Retrieved August 14, 2014, from: http://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/10/10092009.html
  43. Duncan, A. (2009b). Teacher preparation: Reforming the uncertain profession—Remarks of Secretary Arne Duncan at Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved August 14, 2014, from: http://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/10/10222009.html
  44. Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Nyström, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2013). How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction, 28, 48-63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.002Google Scholar
  45. Engle, R.W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 19-23.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00160Google Scholar
  46. Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102, 211-245.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.102.2.211Google Scholar
  47. Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Prospects and limits in the empirical study of expertise: An introduction. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 1-38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Fink, P.K. (1985). Control and integration of diverse knowledge in a diagnostic expert system. In A. Joshi (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 426-431). Los Angeles, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.Google Scholar
  49. Gemeinsame Wissenschaftskonferenz (2013). Qualitätsoffensive Lehrerbildung. Retrieved December 16, 2014, from http://www.bmbf.de/pubRD/bund_laender_vereinbarung_qualitaetsoffensive_lehrerbildung.pdf
  50. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: A general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 393-405.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.393Google Scholar
  51. Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Forbus, K. D. (2009). Reviving inert knowledge: Analogical abstraction supports relational retrieval of past events. Cognitive Science, 33, 1343-1382.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01070.xGoogle Scholar
  52. Geo (2012). Schule: Was ist ein guter Lehrer? Retrieved February 14, 2014, from http://www.geo.de/GEO/heftreihen/geo_magazin/ebooks/was-ist-ein-guter-lehrer-geo-ebookschule-73008.html
  53. Glaser, R. (1992). Expert knowledge and processes of thinking. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Enhancing thinking skills in the sciences and mathematics (pp. 63-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  54. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  55. Grossman, P. L. (1992). Why models matter: An alternate view on professional growth in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 62, 171-179.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062002171Google Scholar
  56. Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. W. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111, 2055-2100.Google Scholar
  57. Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 184-205.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312906Google Scholar
  58. Grossman, P. L., & Richert, A. E. (1988). Unacknowledged knowledge growth: A re-examination of the effects of teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 53-62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051x(88)90024-8Google Scholar
  59. Gruber, H. (2001). Acquisition of expertise. In J. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 5145-5150). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  60. Gruber, H., Mandl, H., & Renkl, A. (2000). Was lernen wir in Schule und Hochschule: Träges Wissen? In H. Mandl & J. Gerstenmaier (Eds.), Die Kluft zwischen Wissen und Handeln: Empirische und theoretische Lösungsansätze (pp. 139-156). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  61. Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358-389). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  62. Hammond, T. C., & Manfra, M. M. (2009). Giving, prompting, making: Aligning technology and pedagogy within TPACK for social studies instruction. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 160-185.Google Scholar
  63. Harr, N., Eichler, A., & Renkl, A. (2014). Integrating pedagogical content knowledge and pedagogical/psychological knowledge in mathematics. Frontiers in Psychology, 5:924.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00924
  64. Harr, N., Eichler, A., & Renkl, A. (2015). Integrated learning: Ways of fostering the applicability of teachers’ pedagogical and psychological knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology. 6:738.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00738
  65. Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculumbased TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux (Ed.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education (pp. 99-108). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  66. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1984). Two courses of expertise. Research and Clinical Center for Child Development, 6, 27-36.Google Scholar
  67. Hatano, G., & Oura, Y. (2003). Commentary: Reconceptualizing school learning using insight from expertise research. Educational Researcher, 32, 26-29.Google Scholar
  68. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Ishler, P. (1996). President’s message. Action in Teacher Education, 18, v–vi.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.1996.10462815Google Scholar
  70. Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62, 129-169.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062002129Google Scholar
  71. Kalyuga, S. (2008). When less is more in cognitive diagnosis: A rapid online method for diagnosing learner task-specific expertise. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 603-612.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.603Google Scholar
  72. Kay, R. H. (2006). Evaluating strategies used to incorporate technology into preservice education: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38, 383-408.Google Scholar
  73. Kennedy, M. M., Ahn, S., & Choi, J. (2008). The value added by teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. E. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3rd ed., pp. 1247-1271). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  74. Kleickmann, T., Richter, D., Kunter, M., Elsner, J., Besser, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2013). Teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: The role of structural differences in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 90-106.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112460398Google Scholar
  75. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32, 131–152.Google Scholar
  76. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193, 13-19.Google Scholar
  77. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2014). The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 101-112). New York: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_9Google Scholar
  78. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers and Education, 49, 740-762.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.012Google Scholar
  79. König, J., Blömeke, S., Paine, L., Schmidt, W. H., & Hsieh, F. (2011). General pedagogical knowledge of future middle school teachers: On the complex ecology of teacher education in the United States, Germany, and Taiwan. Journal of Teacher Education, 62, 188-201.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487110388664Google Scholar
  80. Krauss, S., Brunner, M., Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Neubrand, M. & Jordan, A. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 716-725.Google Scholar
  81. Lagemann, E. C. (1999). Whither schools of education? Whither education research? Journal of Teacher Education, 50, 373-376.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002248719905000509Google Scholar
  82. Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208, 1335-1342.Google Scholar
  83. Mandl, H., Gruber, H., & Renkl, A. (1993). Misconceptions and knowledge compartmentalization. In G. Strube & K. F. Wender (Eds.), The cognitive psychology of knowledge (pp. 161-176). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  84. Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) (2001). Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge. University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 34-52.Google Scholar
  86. Ministerium für Kultus, Jugend und Sport des Landes Baden-Württemberg (2004). Bildungsstandards für Mathematik im Gymnasium. Retrieved November 4, 2014, from http://www.bildungstaerkt-menschen.de/service/downloads/Bildungsstandards/Gym/Gym_M_bs.pdf
  87. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017-1054.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.xGoogle Scholar
  88. Nathan, M. J., Koedinger, K. R., & Alibali, M. W. (2001). Expert blind spot: When content knowledge eclipses pedagogical content knowledge. In L. Chen (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Cognitive Science (pp. 644-648). Beijing: University of Science and Technology of China Press.Google Scholar
  89. Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. J. (2003). Expert blind spot among preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 905-928.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040004905Google Scholar
  90. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (2013). AYA/mathematics standards. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from http://www.nbpts.org/sites/default/files/documents/certificates/NB-Standards/nbpts-certificate-aya-math-standards_10.01.13.pdf
  91. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Retrieved May 13, 2014, from http://www.nctm.org/standards/content.aspx?id=16909
  92. Niess, M. L., van Zee, E. H., & Gillow-Wiles, H. (2010). Knowledge growth in teaching mathematics/science with spreadsheets: Moving PCK to TPACK through online professional development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27, 42–52.Google Scholar
  93. Nolte, D. (2013). Was macht gute Lehrer aus? Bitte keine Haarbüschel in den Ohren. Retrieved February 14, 2014, from http://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/was-macht-gute-lehrer-aus-bittekeine-haarbueschel-in-den-ohren-/8175772.html
  94. Palmer, D. J., Stough, L. M., Burdenski, T. K., Jr., & Gonzales, M. (2005). Identifying teacher expertise: An examination of researchers’ decision making. Educational Psychologist, 40, 13-25.Google Scholar
  95. Patel, V. L., Arocha, J. F., & Kaufman, D. R. (1999). Expertise and tacit knowledge in medicine. In R. J. Sternberg & J. A. Horvath (Eds.), Tacit knowledge in professional practice: Researcher and practitioner perspectives (pp. 75-99). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  96. Patrick, H., Anderman, L. H., Bruening, P. S., & Duffin, L. C. (2011). The role of educational psychology in teacher education: Three challenges for educational psychologists. Educational Psychologist, 46, 71-83.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538648Google Scholar
  97. Peters, F. (2013). Was eine Lehrerin zu einer guten Lehrerin macht. Retrieved February 14, 2014, from http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article122231244/Was-eine-Lehrerin-zu-einerguten-Lehrerin-macht.html
  98. Peterson, P. L., Clark, C. M., & Dickson, W. P. (1990). Educational psychology as a foundation in teacher education: Reforming an old notion. Teachers College Record, 91, 322-346.Google Scholar
  99. Pressley, M., Wood, E., Woloshyn, V. E., Martin, V., King, A., & Menke, D. (1992). Encouraging mindful use of prior knowledge: Attempting to construct explanatory answers facilitates learning. Educational Psychologist, 27, 91-109.Google Scholar
  100. Rau, M. A., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N. (2009). Intelligent tutoring systems with multiple representations and self-explanation prompts support learning of fractions. In V. Dimitrova, R. Mizoguchi, & B. du Boulay (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 441-448). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  101. Reimann, P., & Rapp, A. (2008). Expertiseerwerb. In A. Renkl (Ed.), Lehrbuch Pädagogische Psychologie (pp. 155-203). Bern: Huber.Google Scholar
  102. Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21, 1-29.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2101_1Google Scholar
  103. Renkl, A. (2002). Worked-out examples: Instructional explanations support learning by selfexplanations. Learning and Instruction, 12, 529-556.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00030-5Google Scholar
  104. Renkl, A. (2005). The worked-out-example principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 229-246). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  105. Renkl, A. (2014). Towards an instructionally-oriented theory of example-based learning. Cognitive Science, 38, 1-37.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12086Google Scholar
  106. Renkl, A., Mandl, H., & Gruber, H. (1996). Inert knowledge: Analyses and remedies. Educational Psychologist, 31, 115-121.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3102_3Google Scholar
  107. Rikers, R. M. J. P., Schmidt, H. G., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2000). Knowledge encapsulation and the intermediate effect. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 150-166.  https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.1000Google Scholar
  108. Ross, B. H., & Kilbane, M. C. (1997). Effects of principle explanation and superficial similarity on analogical mapping in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 427-440.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.23.2.427Google Scholar
  109. Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141-156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(02)00017-8Google Scholar
  110. Schwonke, R., Ertelt, A., Otieno, C., Renkl, A., Aleven, V., & Salden, R. J. C. M. (2013). Metacognitive support promotes an effective use of instructional resources in intelligent tutoring. Learning and Instruction, 23, 136-150.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.08.003Google Scholar
  111. Seidel, T., Blomberg, G., & Renkl, A. (2013). Instructional strategies for using video in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 56-65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.004Google Scholar
  112. Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77, 454-499.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307310317Google Scholar
  113. Seufert, T., & Brünken, R. (2006). Cognitive load and the format of instructional aids for coherence formation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 321-331.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1248Google Scholar
  114. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x015002004Google Scholar
  115. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-23.Google Scholar
  116. Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1978). Individual differences in solving physics problems. In R. S. Siegler (Ed.), Children’s thinking: What develops? (pp. 325-348). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  117. Simons, P. R. J. (1999). Transfer of learning: Paradoxes for learners. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 577-589.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-0355(99)00025-7Google Scholar
  118. Sternberg, R. J., & Horvath, J. A. (1995). A prototype view of expert teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(6), 9-17.Google Scholar
  119. Sweller, J., Ayres, P. L., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  120. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022193728205Google Scholar
  121. Tashman, L. S. (2013).The development of expertise in performance: The role of memory, knowledge, learning and practice. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 5, 33-48.Google Scholar
  122. Tondeur, J., Pareja Roblin, N., van Braak, J., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in teacher education: In search of a new curriculum. Educational Studies, 39, 239-243.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2012.713548Google Scholar
  123. T-Online (2013). Was macht einen guten Lehrer aus? Retrieved February 14, 2014, from http://www.t-online.de/eltern/schulkind/id_43489764/lehrer-kriterien-was-macht-einen-gutenlehrer-aus.html
  124. Van Driel, J. H., & Berry, A. (2010). Pedagogical content knowledge. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGraw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 656-661).  https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-044894-7.00642-4Google Scholar
  125. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge – a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 109-121.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.xGoogle Scholar
  126. Voss, T., Kunter, M., & Baumert, J. (2011). Assessing teacher candidates’ general pedagogical/psychological knowledge: Test construction and validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 952-969.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025125Google Scholar
  127. Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays. New York: The Free Press. Wineburg, S. (1998). Reading Abraham Lincoln: An expert/expert study in the interpretation of historical texts. Cognitive Science, 22, 319-346.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2203_3Google Scholar
  128. Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Educational psychology in teacher education, Educational Psychologist, 35, 257-270.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3504_04Google Scholar
  129. Zeichner, K. (2012). The turn once again toward practice-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 63, 376-382.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112445789Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nora Harr
    • 1
  • Andreas Eichler
    • 1
  • Alexander Renkl
    • 2
  1. 1.Albert-Ludwigs-Universität FreiburgFreiburgDeutschland
  2. 2.Universität KasselKasselDeutschland

Personalised recommendations