Tracking Teacher’s Movements In Physical Workspace In Relationship With Pupil’s Engagement. A Tool To Get Access To Professional Knowledge.

Author(s):

Isabelle Sarrade(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

10. Teacher Education Research

Format:

Paper

Session Information

10 SES 10 E, Teacher Efficacy, Movement and Well-being

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-24

15:30-17:00

Room:

K5.02

Chair:

Rachel Shanks

Contribution

Sciences Education at secondary school often takes place in specific sciences classrooms. In those classrooms, lab workstations are blocked down in specifics configurations that constrain actions/movements of teachers.
We investigate the extent to which configuration of workspace supports, prevents or restricts actions of teachers and how teachers use professional skills to adapt their work .
Different countries in Europe preconize Inquiry Based Teaching. This method of teaching includes group working sessions. Configuration of workspace can facilitate group working, or not. We observe interactions between teacher and pupils, especially the quality of the engagement of pupils in activity during working group sessions.

(We shall say “he” for the teacher to simplify reading)

Our research questions are :
1 - How does physical workspace interact with the professional activity of the teacher, especially:
a - What movements/actions of the teacher support pupils' engagement in task during group working in the context of Inquiry Based Teaching ?
b - What class configuration supports/allows/prevents these movements/actions ?
2 - How can movement awareness be used by the teacher to adjust his practices and improve his vocational skills?

Our theoretical framework calls two domains: activity analysis and working space.

-Our study considers teacher activity (Leplat, 2008), which Grangeat (2009, 2016) describes with concept of Teaching Process Knowledge (TPK). Four elements are parts of SP: Cue, Teacher’s goal, Action’s rules, Professional Knowledge (PK). Teacher gets cues in the classroom (like hands up or pupil glance), according to his goal (fostering engagement in task), and acts according to his action’s rules and PK, for instance by movements and stops. We consider movements and stops as observable traces of teacher activity.
Some of the activity is not conscious (Clot, 2000, Vergnaud, 2011). Vermersh (2000) developed the technique of elicitation interview : teacher, confronted with his activity through videotape recording, becomes able to put words on it, and becomes aware of the unconscious part of activity. We hypothesise that movement tracking, as videotape recording, can be a medium used in elicitation interview framework to help teacher to become conscious of his actions.

-Research shows that out of school, physical working-space changes, in accordance with work organisation. For Fischer & Fousse, (2002) for instance, open spaces replace closed offices, to adapt space to more interaction and autonomy for workers.

At school, new teaching models are preconized, but there is few change in space configuration, although new spaces are to imagine, to enhance interaction and collaboration (Long & Erhrman, 2005). An essential need for teachers is to have enough space to rearrange tables to ease group working and foster interactions between pupils (Lang, 2002). Walls, Schopieray, & DeVoss, (2009) point five factors that can interfere with teaching and learning, and two of them are present in science classroom: arrangement into raws and locked down tables.

Rißler, Bossen and Blasse, (2014) examine the arrangement of pupils in classrooms. They point out that, although teachers place pupils on the basis of gender and difficulties, inequalities persist. Kregenow, Rogers, & Price, (2011) show that in frontal configuration (professor in center of room, rows of tables), high achievement pupils are ahead, and low achievement pupils are at the back of the room. Our study will examine the arrangement of pupils during group working.

Forest (2006), uses concept of proxemics, developed in anthropologic field by Hall (1966). Hall identifies four distances: intimate, personal, social, public. Forest (2009) shows that teacher uses proxemic patterns to capture the attention of pupils, moving in or out of the different distances of Hall. Movements are not trivial professional gestures. So, our study will examine them as indicators of professional knowledge about using of physical workspace.

Method

Data collection: We compare activity of teachers in different workspace configurations. We record four lessons by teacher: -ConfigurationX{ClassA/Lesson1, ClassB/Lesson2} -ConfigurationY{ClassA/Lesson2, ClassB/Lesson1} We combine data in order to erase class and lesson effects : we obtain two sets of data, only different by configuration parameter: (X,AB,12) and (Y,AB,21). Recording is done for two teachers (scheduled for two others). We collect general data, teacher’s activity data, and pupils’ engagement data: -General data are classroom map, location of lab workstations and other furniture, pupils’ arrangement (location and gender) -Teacher’s activity data are teacher position, lesson time line,Teaching Process Knowledge (TPK) emerging from elicitation interview. Teacher position data: During the session, teacher wears a jacket, with infra-red device emitting 1point/second. Two infra red cameras capture position (accuracy +/-30cm) Lesson time line: During the session, we observe and report every event on a time line Elicitation interview: After the fourth session, we use teacher position data and lesson time line to load an elicitation interview. Teacher is invited to comment his movements/positions/stops in order to elicit Teaching Process Knowledge underlying his actions/movements. -Pupils engagement data. We record, transcribe and code all verbal exchanges for each group during the lesson. We use two codes to describe pupils engagement in task: P for positive engagement (trying to answer, speaking from what to do), N for negative engagement (playing, showing unwillingness) We collect data relative to achievement (annual assessment, given by teacher) Data analysis Data to process are triplets {time/teacher-position/pupil-engagement code} To simplify data processing we freeze one or two dimensions of triplets. Considering “time” and “teacher-position”, we visualize position capture by a map, that we call “presence probability density of teacher”. Time spent by teacher at different points of classroom is represented by levels of gray. Teacher can see where he stays in his workspace, and if it is congruent with representation he have of his movements/stops/interactions with groups of pupils. The presence probability density maps are fast to obtain (almost real-time). After the four lessons are recorded, we obtain series of maps, that are used as factual medium for elicitation interview. Considering “time” and “pupil engagement code”, we use diagrams to represent engagement for each group and/or for a class. Considering “teacher position” and “pupil engagement code”, we research by data-mining how teacher position is linked to positive engagement (code P).

Expected Outcomes

Available data (end of year 2016) -Probability density maps: 8 available (4/teacher) -Verbal exchanges: Transcription and coding in progress (14 groups/teacher1, 12 groups/teacher2, 60 hours) -Configurations “comb/bus” for teacher1, and “quasi-islands/bus” for teacher 2. Our methodology needs all data to be processed before we can make relevant proposals. However, according to first data, without going to fast to final results, what can be said about expected outcomes ? Probability density maps tool: As expected, this tool shows how teachers use working space, and share time between different groups of pupils, according to their belief/knowledge. We show these maps can be used for elicitation interview, and help teacher to verbalize belief/knowledge. An unexpected outcome appears with first results: “presence probability density” seems to be closely linked to characteristics of pupils like low/high achievement, or gender. It seems possible to use maps for teacher training, for instance to enhance vocational skills linked to taking on account of every pupil. Pupils engagement: As expected , visible differences between groups appears on our first diagrams. They reflect achievement of the group, according to annual results of pupil, given by teacher1. Another outcome appears with our first results : we measure effective working time of groups during a session. There are important differences among groups for the first teacher. This methodology appear to be interesting to measure effects of different teaching models on effective working time. For instance, it could be use to compare Inquiry Based Teaching to other approaches. Configuration: We expect to observe if and how specific distances between teacher and group are linked to positive engagement of pupils. We expect to determine if a specific configuration of workspace is more relevant to enhance engagement of pupils during group working during Inquiry Based teaching sessions.

References

Clot, Y. (2008). Travail et pouvoir d’agir. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. Fischer, G.-N., & Fousse, C. (2002). Espaces de travail et communication–Une lecture psychosociale. Communication et Organisation, (21). Retrieved from http://communicationorganisation.revues.org/2651 Forest, D. (2006). Analyse proxémique d'interactions didactiques. Carrefours de l'éducation, (1), 73-94. Forest, D. (2009). Agencements didactiques, pour une analyse fonctionnelle du comportement non-verbal du professeur. Revue française de pédagogie, (165), 77-89. En ligne http://rfp.revues.org/1108 Grangeat, M. (2009). Analyser le travail enseignant pour concevoir l’intervention éducative : est-ce utile et pour quoi faire ? Nouveaux c@hiers de la recherche en éducation, 12(1), 31-46. Grangeat, M. (2016). Dimensions and Modalities of Inquiry-Based Teaching: Understanding the Variety of Practices. Education Inquiry, [S.l.], v. 7, n. 4, dec. 2016. ISSN 2000-4508. Available at: . Date accessed: 14 Jan. 2017. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/edui.v7.29863. Kregenow, J. M., Rogers, M., & Price, M. F. (2011). Is There a “Back” of the Room when the Teacher Is in the Middle? Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(6), 45–51. Lang, D. C. (2002). Teacher Interactions within the Physical Environment: How Teachers Alter Their Space and/or Routines Because of Classroom Character. Consulté à l’adresse http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED472265 Leplat, J. (Éd.). (2008). Repères pour l’analyse de l’activité en ergonomie. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. Long, P. D., & Ehrmann, S. C. (2005). LEARNING SPACE. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0542.pdf Rißler, G., Bossen, A., & Blasse, N. (2014). School as Space: Spatial Alterations, Teaching, Social Motives, and Practices. Studia Paedagogica, 19(4), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.5817/SP2014-4-7 Vergnaud, G. (2011). Au fond de l'action, la conceptualisation. In Savoirs théoriques et savoirs d'action (pp. 275-292). Presses Universitaires de France. Vermersch, P. (2000). L’entretien d’explicitation (3e éd). Paris: ESF éd. Walls, D. M., Schopieray, S., & DeVoss, D. N. (2009). Hacking Spaces: Place as Interface. Computers and Composition, 26(4), 269-287. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2009.09.003

Author Information

Isabelle Sarrade (presenting / submitting)

Laboratoire des Sciences de l'Education Université Grenoble-Alpes

Alex

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.