Free access
Figures
2.1The design of this study.31
3.1My journey at ISATTISATT conferences 1997–2017.43
3.2Issues wanting attention in the future (adapted from Kompft & Rust, 2013).44
4.1School mediation process (adapted from Damiano, 2013, p. 76).65
4.2The exploratory case-study design (from Stake, 1995).70
4.3Explanatory maps in the school textbook.75
4.4Visual representations used by teacher A during the lesson.76
5.1The mentor (teacher) roles in dialogues model (Hennissen et al., 2008).87
5.2The amount of positive and negative critical incidents in the lessons.91
5.3The relationships of the critical incidents in the reflection sessions. CR = content relationship; DR = didactic relationship; LR = learning relationship; PR = pedagogical relationship.91
5.4The most frequently used words in the sessions of the practicum. The more frequently used words are represented in a bigger size than the less frequently used words.92
5.5The types of practical knowledge that were extracted from the three types of reflections (individual, with a peer, and with a mentor).94
5.6The types of practical knowledge that were extracted in interactions with each mentoring role.96
8.1Learning attitudes description.147
9.1Distribution of score on ‘Sensitive’.171
9.2Distribution of score on ‘Retard’.172
9.3Distribution of score on ‘Contract’.174
11.1The role of PCs in teacher educators’ work.202
14.1Screenshot showing an annotated video.270
15.1What makes a good lecturer (from Mundy, 2014)?283
15.2A praxis model of education at Victoria University.285
15.3The value of learning circles.288
15.4Living praxis and the learning circle process (from Mundy, 2015).289
15.5The process of living theory development during a class.291
15.6Living praxis in a narrated complex classroom.296
15.7Visualising living praxis and the narrative.298
Tables
4.1Five kinds of knowledge structures (adapted from Mayer, 2005, p. 69).68
4.2Basic criteria of visual representations’ classification (adapted from Mayer, 2005).72
4.3Principles for multimedia presentations (adapted from Mayer, 2005).73
4.4Synthetic analysis for the triangulation of data (Silverman, 2009).74
4.5Occurrences of Mayer’s criteria for document analysis (Mayer, 2005).77
5.1The most frequent themes that emerged in the three reflections.93
5.2Roles of mentors and peers.95
6.1Demographic breakdown of pre-service participants for Phase 2.110
6.2Demographic breakdown of in-service participants for Phase 2.110
6.3Thematic coding breakdown of the interviews.112
6.4Integration of metacognition.114
6.5Teacher strategies for integrating metacognition.114
6.6Pre-service and in-service teachers report struggling.115
6.7What resources would be helpful?116
6.8Importance of building executive function.118
8.1Descriptive statistics of students’ perceptions on task-based approach on the reinforcement of English learning in CLIL.149
8.2Descriptive statistics of students’ satisfaction on their learning experiences.150
8.3Descriptive statistics of students’ perceived accomplishments in their learning experiences.151
8.4Bivariate correlation of all variables.152
8.5Coefficient of determination (R2) model results.153
9.1Non-technical words presented in science context in the questionnaire.168
9.2Respective response selections and percentage scores on the very difficult words test items.170
11.1Brief descriptions of the pedagogical confrontations.206
14.1Four levels of reflection and examples.268
14.2Participants’ annotations coded according to the four levels of reflection271
15.1Student evaluation results.294
15.2The Praxis Inquiry Protocol and questions for its use as a teaching instrument (adapted from Mundy, 2018, p. 46).301
16.1Descriptive statistics for ‘Attitude towards collaborative learning with video games’.313
16.2Analysis of statistical differences in attitude towards collaborative learning with video games according to gender.314
16.3Analysis of statistical differences in attitude towards collaborative learning with video games according to students’ age.314
16.4Analysis of statistical differences in attitude towards collaborative learning with video games according to the variety of digital resources students have at home.315
16.5Attitudes towards collaborative learning through videogames according to the availability (yes/no) and use of digital resources at home.316
16.6Analysis of statistical differences in attitudes towards collaborative learning with video games according to the variety of digital resources used to play video games at home.317
16.7Attitudes towards collaborative learning through videogames according to the availability (yes/no) of digital resources at home.317
16.8Attitude towards collaborative learning with video games according to the frequency of playing video games as entertainment.318
16.9Post-hoc comparisons among groups generated by the frequency of play.318
Table of Contents
Index Card
Metrics

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 6 6 1
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0