Studies demonstrate that teacher candidates (TCs) may capitalize on the power of video representations of teaching (Borko, Koellner, Jacobs, & Seago, 2011; Brophy, 2004; Gaudin & Chaliès, 2015; Sun & van Es, 2015). This body of research indicates advantages of the use of video, such as easier access to classroom observation; authenticity of the situation; and linkage between coursework and practice (Gaudin & Chaliès, 2015). Brophy (2004) argues that another advantage of video is the ability to go in depth in complex teaching situations by stopping the video, pointing to specific instances, and re-viewing it.

Reviewing the literature, Gaudin and Chaliès (2015) point to a range of studies highlighting that “the most important component of teaching expertise is the ability to identify and interpret relevant classroom events and make instructional decisions based on those interpretations” (p. 45-46). According to Gaudin and Chaliès (2015), these studies point to selective attention to classroom events as the main process during video viewing, by many conceptualized in the terms “learning to notice” (Barnhart & van Es, 2015; Castro Superfine, Amador, & Bragelman, 2019; Seidel & Stürmer, 2014; Sherin, Jacobs, & Philipp, 2010) or “perception” (Blömeke, Gustafsson, & Shavelson, 2015). Furthermore, Gaudin and Chaliès (2015) point to reasoning as another process of video viewing. This implies the interpretation of selected classroom events, and teachers’ ability to process the events based upon their knowledge of teaching and learning (Castro Superfine et al., 2019; Kisa & Stein, 2015; Seidel & Stürmer, 2014). Building on a framework by van Es (2011), Castro Superfine et al. (2019) argue that noticing appears on different levels; from mere descriptions of an event to a response that describes, interprets and provides evidence for their reasoning.

In order for TCs to develop their ability to notice and reason, much research has investigated the importance of support by the TE (Borko et al., 2011; Gaudin & Chaliès, 2015; Kang & van Es, 2018; Star & Strickland, 2008; van Es, 2011; van Es, Tunney, Goldsmith, & Seago, 2014). Reviewing the literature on the use of video in teacher education, Gaudin and Chaliès (2015) emphasize the importance of deliberate choice of videos, as well as a clear goal for the use of a specific video, in addition to a planned and structured discussion of the selected video. Many highlight the importance of using video with highly specified goals and curriculum, and with a clear observation focus (Borko et al., 2011; Seidel & Stürmer, 2014; Star & Strickland, 2008). Yet others have paid attention to the questions and talk moves used by the facilitators, to support TCs in their noticing (Borko, Jacobs, Seago, & Mangram, 2014; van Es, 2011; van Es et al., 2014). van Es et al. (2014) define facilitator moves: to orient the group to the video analysis task; to sustain an inquiry stance, for instance by pressing and clarifying; to maintain a focus on the video; and to support group collaboration.

To summarize, even though this growing body of research increasingly entangles the nature of TCs’ reasoning, and to some extent also seem to agree on facilitator moves, questions remain as to how to support TCs in their noticing and reasoning around classroom video (Castro Superfine et al., 2019). This paper contributes to this line of research, by investigating further the relationship between the support provided by the teacher educator (TE) and the TC reasoning through the research question: to what extent and how can teacher educators’ facilitation moves support teacher candidates in their noticing and reasoning around classroom video.

This study is part of a longitudinal intervention study (see also Cohen, Manion, Morrison, & Bell, 2011) within an integrated 5-year teacher education program at a Norwegian university. The program’s candidates have their teacher training with coursework in foundations, pedagogical content knowledge, as well as fieldwork, in semesters 3, 6 and 7. In the overall design of the study, the candidates are followed from the coursework intervention into their fieldwork and their teaching practice as novice and experienced teachers. This paper reports on data from the coursework intervention. Data collection was conducted in the candidates’ 6th and 7th semesters in courses of pedagogical content knowledge in Norwegian Language Arts in one cohort in the spring of 2019. One TE and 30 TCs participated. The second author of this paper was the TE facilitating the discussions. The intervention used selected videos of authentic classroom teaching, and focused on specific features of scaffolding techniques. We defined teacher’s scaffolding according to the Protocol for Language Arts Teaching Observation [PLATO] (version 5.0, Grossmann, 2015), i.e., teachers’ use of modeling, strategy use and instruction, and feedback. A simplified version of PLATO was used as a tool for learning to notice the scaffolding features. This paper reports on five lessons (450 minutes) of the intervention, across semesters 6 and 7. We have chosen to focus on the whole-class discussions across these lessons (N = 175 minutes), to capture the TE’s facilitations moves in relation to the TCs’ reasoning around classroom video. To capture the observation data, we used a two-camera solution, with one camera in the front of the classroom, and one in the back. We distributed four microphones across the classroom, and one designated to the TE. The audio and video observation data was supported with artefacts such as the PowerPoint used and pictures of the writings on the blackboard. All data was transcribed using IncScribe, and analyzed using the software NVivo12. All lessons will be double coded, and disagreements resolved within the research group. We adapted the analytical framework developed by Castro Superfine et al. (2019) for analyzing TC’s reasoning around teachers’ scaffolding techniques (p. 5), using categories ranging from “None” to “Extended” reasoning. Further, we adapted the framework by van Es et al. (2014) to examine facilitator moves, using categories such as “Contextualizing”, “Pressing”, and “Validating Participant Ideas” (p. 347).

Initial findings indicate a strong relationship between the TE’s facilitator moves and the TCs reasoning. It seems that in the instances where the TCs reasoning is “Extended”, i.e., their response “describes, interprets, provides evidence related to teacher’s scaffolding from the video, and connects to principles of teacher scaffolding”, happens when the TE extensively employs a variety of facilitator moves. This led us to look further into the specific facilitator moves the TE employed, and initial analysis indicate that the moves used are often to “sustain an inquiry stance”, such as the moves “pressing”, “offering an explanation”, and “clarifying”. Also moves used to “support group collaboration”, i.e., “distributing participation” and “validating participant ideas” are frequent. These findings corroborate findings from Castro Superfine et al. (2019) and others, although there is some variance as to which facilitation moves that initiate extended reasoning. This might relate to issues of adaptation of analytical frameworks, which will be further explored. Nevertheless, our findings strengthen the growing research evidence pointing to the importance of specific TE facilitation moves to enhance TCs reasoning. It also supports previous findings that longer, sustained, talk or reasoning in the teacher education classroom is necessary to produce reasoning that is generative for professional learning (Author and colleagues, 2018), and indicate that the use of video can indeed function as a tool to make the reasoning more extended. Further analysis will continue to look into the correspondence between TC reasoning and TE facilitation moves, to examine if there are specific sequencing of moves that seem important.

Author et al. (2018). [Blinded for peer review]. Barnhart & van Es (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among pre-service science teachers' ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83–93. Blömeke, Gustafsson & Shavelson (2015). Beyond dichotomies. Competence viewed as a continuum. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(1), 3-13. Borko, Jacobs, Seago, & Mangram (2014). Facilitating video-based professional development: Planning and orchestrating productive discussions. In Y. Li, E. Silver, & S. Li (Eds.), Transforming mathematics instruction (pp. 259-281). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Borko, Koellner, Jacobs, & Seago (2011). Using video representations of teaching in practice-based professional development programs. ZDM, 43(1), 175-187. Brophy (2004). Using video in teacher education. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. Castro Superfine, Amador, & Bragelman (2019). Facilitating video-based discussions to support prospective teacher noticing. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 54, 100681. Gaudin & Chaliès (2015). Video viewing in teacher education and professional development: A literature review. Educational Research Review, 16, 41-67. Grossman (2015). Protocol for Language Arts Teaching Observations (PLATO 5.0). Palo Alto: Stanford University. Kang & van Es (2018). Articulating design principles for productive use of video in preservice education. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(3), 237-250. Kisa & Stein (2015). Learning to See Teaching in New Ways. American Educational Research Journal, 52(1), 105-136 Seidel & Stürmer (2014). Modeling and Measuring the Structure of Professional Vision in Preservice Teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 51(4), 739-771. Sherin, Jacobs & Philipp (2010). Mathematics teacher noticing : seeing through teachers' eyes. New York: Routledge. Star & Strickland (2008). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107–125. Sun & van Es (2015). An exploratory study of the influence that analyzing teaching has on preservice teachers’ classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(3), 201–214. van Es (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. In M. Sherin, V. Jacobs, & R. Phillipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers' eyes (pp. 164-181). New York: Routledge. van Es, Tunney, Goldsmith & Seago (2014). A framework for the facilitation of teachers’ analysis of video. Journal of Teacher Education, 64.