Digital technologies can have positive effects on student learning in higher education.Based on the ICAP framework, they should be particularly effective when teachers use them to encourage student engagement in constructive and interactive as opposed to passive and active learning activities. Using a sample of 381 higher education students, we investigated if student engagement in these activities depends on whether technologies are implemented in class or not, and how engagement in these activities affects learning outcomes. Results indicated that when technologies were implemented in class, students felt encouraged to engage in more constructive, but also in more passive and active activities as compared to when no technologies were used.Furthermore, student engagement in active, constructive, and interactive activities was positively associated with learning outcomes.

Using the theory of planned behavior, we investigated whether attitudes, subjective norms, and self-efficacy facilitate pre-service teachers’ engagement in evidence-informed reasoning about classroom problems. N = 157 pre-service teachers were asked about these motivationally relevant antecedents to engaging in evidence-informed reasoning about classroom-related challenges and analyzed case scenarios of problematic teaching situations. Results revealed that self-reported evidence-informed reasoning was directly predicted by intention to engage in evidence-informed reasoning, self-efficacy, and attitude toward evidence-informed reasoning. However, the objectively coded quality of teachers’ evidence-informed reasoning was seemingly negatively predicted by perceived costs and self-efficacy. Thus, the theory of planned behavior partly explained self-reported evidence-informed reasoning, but not objectively observed reasoning. Pre-service teachers might not be skilled enough to assess their own competency accurately and might be unaware of external conditions facilitating or hindering evidence-informed reasoning. Thus, interventions aiming to foster pre-service teachers’ motivation to engage in evidence-informed reasoning might not be effective until such teachers gain the necessary skills.

No abstract

Pre-service teachers face difficulties when dealing with problem situations in the classroom if their evidence-informed reasoning script (EIRS) is not adequately developed. An EIRS might be promoted by demonstrating how to implement evidence-informed reasoning after a problem-solving activity on an authentic case. However, it is unclear what form of instruction is appropriate to promote pre-service teachers in the development of an EIRS. The present 2×3-factorial experimental intervention study investigated how different forms of instruction on functional procedures (example-free vs. example-based) and on dysfunctional procedures (without vs. example-free vs. example-based) affect the development of an EIRS. N = 384 pre-service teachers worked on a written case vignette of a problem situation in a problem-solving phase, in which the crucial steps of the EIRS were prompted externally. In the subsequent instruction phase, the participants compared their own solution with an example-free or example-based instruction on functional procedures, which was either supplemented by an example-free or example-based instruction on typical dysfunctional procedures or not at all. The participants’ learning success (declarative EIRS; near and far transfer problem-solving performance) and error awareness were assessed. The results revealed that the example-based instruction on functional procedures led to a higher learning success than the example-free instruction. Both forms of instruction on dysfunctional procedures improved learning success compared to learning without one. During learning, error awareness was higher for learners who worked with an example-free instruction on dysfunctional procedures. In order to promote the development of an EIRS in pre-service teachers, it is promising to provide instruction after problem-solving that presents a functional example of evidence-informed reasoning for the given problem and that also points out typical dysfunctional approaches to solving the problem. The results highlight the importance of selecting appropriate scaffolds in case-based learning approaches that aim to develop cognitive schemata. The mechanisms that explain when and why instructions on dysfunctional procedures work need to be further explored.

No abstract