Abstract
A robust finding in educational research is that student learning is positively affected by teacher support and that teacher support is particularly critical for students’ engagement in their own learning (OECD 2005; Hattie 2009; Baumert et al. 2010; Bryk et al. 2010), a vital factor for achieving good learning results (Kumar 1991; Boyd et al. 2009; Hill and Grossman 2013). Meichenbaum and Biemiller (1998) argue that teachers, in order to optimize their support of student learning, must take into consideration and be sensitive to the different stages in the learning process, and plan and balance the classroom activities accordingly.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Unpublished information from the Norwegian PISA 2012 data file.
References
Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., Neubrand, M., & Tsai, Y.-M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 133–180.
Bergem, O. K. (2009). Individuelle versus kollektive arbeidsformer. En drøfting av aktuelle utfordringer i matematikkundervisningen i grunnskolen (Individual seat work versus collaborative practices. a discussion of current challenges in the teaching of mathematics in lower secondary school). Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Oslo.
Bergem, O. K., & Dalland, C. (2010). Arbeidsplaner, læringsmål og vurdering. Hva gjør vi? (Workplans, learning goals and assessment. What do we do?). Oslo: Universitetforlaget.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). Teacher preparation and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 416–440.
Bransford, J., Vye, N., Stevens, R., Kuhl, P., Schwartz, D., Bell, P., Meltzoff, A., Barron, B., Pea, R., Reeves, B., Roschelle, J., & Sabelli, N. (2006). Learning theories and education: Toward a decade of synergy. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 209–244). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Philadelphia: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Dalland, C. P., & Klette, K. (2014). Work-plan heroes: Student strategies in lower-secondary Norwegian classrooms. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(4), 400–423.
Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. London: Routledge.
Helgevold, N. (2011). Å lære å kommunisere i det moderne klasserommet: en kvalitativ studie av interaksjonsformer på ungdomstrinnet (Learning to communicate in the modern classroom: a qualitative study of forms of interactions in lower secondary school). Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Stavanger.
Hill, H. C., & Grossman, P. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 400–423.
KD. (2006). Kunnskapsløftet. Læreplan for grunnskolen og videregående skole (Curriculum for primary and secondary school in Norway). http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/KD/Vedlegg/Kunnskapsloeftet/Kunnskapsloftet_presentasjon.pdf
Kjærnsli, M., & Roe, A. (2010). På rett spor. Norske elevers kompetanse i lesing, matematikk og naturfag i PISA 2009 (Norwegian National PISA 2009 Report). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Kjærnsli, M., Lie, S., Olsen, R. V., Roe, A., & Turmo, A. (2004). Rett spor eller ville veier? Norske elevers prestasjoner i matematikk, naturfag og lesing i PISA 2003 (Norwegian National PISA 2003 Report). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Klette, K. (2007). Bruk av arbeidsplaner i skolen – et hovedverktøy for å realisere tilpasset opplæring? (The use of work plans in school – A key tool for implementing individually adapted learning). Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 91(4), 344–358.
Klette, K., Lie, S., Anmarkrud, Ø., Arnesen, N., Bergem, O. K., Ødegaard, M., et al. (2005). Categories for video analysis of classroom activities with a focus on the teacher. Oslo: University of Oslo.
KUD. (1997). Læreplanverket for den 10-årige grunnskolen (Curriculum for primary and lower secondary school in Norway). Oslo: Nasjonalt læremiddelsenter.
Kumar, D. D. (1991). A meta-analysis of the relationship between science instruction and student engagement. Educational Review, 43(1), 49–61.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science. Language, learning and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
Lie, S., Kjærnsli, M., Roe, A., & Turmo, A. (2001). Godt rustet for framtida? Norske 15-åringers kompetanse i et internasjonalt perspektiv (Norwegian National PISA 2000 Report). Oslo: Institute for teacher education and school research, University of Oslo.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in school. Alexandria: ASCD.
Mayer, R. E., & Alexander, P. A. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of research on learning and instruction. New York: Routledge.
Meichenbaum, D., & Biemiller, A. (1998). Nurturing independent learners. Helping student take charge of their learning. Ontario: Brookline Books.
Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Ödegaard, M., & Arnesen, N. E. (2006). Categories for video analysis of science classroom activities. Oslo: University of Oslo.
Ödegaard, M., Arnesen, N. E., & Bergem, O. K. (2006). Categories for video analysis of mathematics classroom activities. Oslo: University of Oslo.
OECD. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2013). Education at a glance 2013: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2013-en.
Olaussen, B. S. (2009). Arbeidsplaner i skolen: En kontekst for utvikling av selvregulert læring? – Refleksjoner etter en studie på småskoletrinnet (Workplans in school. A context for developing self-regulated learning. Reflexions from a study in primary school). Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 93(3), 189–201.
Skaalvik, S., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2009). Arbeidsplaner fremmer flere mål (Workplans nurtures several goals). Bedre Skole, 03/2009, 17–21.
Taylor, J. (1972). Organizing the open classroom: A teacher’s guide to the integrated day. New York: Schocken Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bergem, O.K. (2016). “Usually We Are Not Where the Teacher Is”. In: Klette, K., Bergem, O., Roe, A. (eds) Teaching and Learning in Lower Secondary Schools in the Era of PISA and TIMSS. Professional Learning and Development in Schools and Higher Education, vol 12. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17302-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17302-3_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17301-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17302-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)