Using video annotation to reflect on and evaluate physical education pre-service teaching practice

Abstract

This case study examined the integration of a media annotation tool (MAT) into the learning and assessment activities of an undergraduate teaching (physical education) course. The media form or artefact for annotation was video recordings demonstrating individual learners' teaching practice. The learners categorised (marked sections) and annotated their videos and received peer and teacher feedback within the tool. Their use of MAT was analysed to determine if this learning environment was effective in the context of the case, to critically reflect upon and evaluate pre-service teaching practice. The research site was RMIT University, Melbourne, and data was collected from the pilot users of MAT, a third year class and their teacher/key academic, using pre-and post-surveys and interactive process interviews (combined sessions of direct observation and semi-structured interviews). The data indicated MAT was effective for the main learning purpose of the case, but also identified some areas for further consideration.

Understanding feedback: A learning theory perspective

“…Twenty-one articles reasoned from social constructivism: Licklider (1995), Black and Wiliam (1998), Tillema and Smith (2000), MacDonald (2001), Manouchehri (2002), Mory (2003), Schelfhout, Dochy, and Janssens (2004), Gibbs and Simpson (2004), Yang and Liu (2004), Weaver (2006), Hattie and Timperley (2007), Brandt (2008), Segers, Gijbels, and Thurlings (2008), Landry, Anthony, Swank, andMonseque-Bailey (2009), Fund (2010), Gielen, Peeters, Dochy, Onghena, and Struyven (2010), Kretlow and Bartholomew (2010), Li, Liu, and Steckelberg (2010), Martens, de Brabander, Rozendaal, Boekaerts, and Van der Leeden (2010), Colasante (2011), and Van der Kleij, Eggen, Timmers, and Veldkamp (2012).…”

“…From social cultural theory, feedback can help to identify and correct errors and can explain misunderstandings (Orsmond & Merry, 2011). Articles from behaviourism (e.g., Auld et al, 2010;Goodman et al, 2008), cognitivism (e.g., Shute, 2008), social cultural theory (Ackan & Tatar, 2010;Brinko, 1993;Yeh & Lo, 2009) and social constructivism (Colasante, 2011;Gielen et al, 2010) indicated that feedback should be specific and clear. Others used different terms: feedback should be concrete (Brinko, 1993) consistent (Brinko, 1993;Ovando, 2005; from social cultural theory), and descriptive (Fund, 2010;Kretlow & Bartholomew, 2010; from social constructivism).…”

“…From meta cognitivism, feedback should leave the control with the learners (Nicol & McFarlaneDick, 2006;Sadler, 1989), which aligns with this learning theory, where learners are supposed to direct their own learning. Articles reasoning from social constructivism suggested that feedback should be sufficient (Gibbs & Simpson, 2004;Tillema & Smith, 2000), constructive (Colasante, 2011;Li et al, 2010;Weaver, 2006), and challenging (Fund, 2010). Finally, feedback is a consequence of performance (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).…”

“…From social constructivism, Licklider (1995) and Landry et al (2009) focused on teachers, Colasante (2011), Manouchehri (2002 and Brandt (2008) on student teachers, Yang and Liu (2004) on teachers and student teachers, and Kretlow and Bartholomew (2010) reviewed studies on coaching programs for teachers. Manouchehri (2002) concluded that feedback is part of peer coaching and professional development and Yang and Liu (2004), Brandt (2008), and Colasante (2011) investigated perceptions.…”

“…Yang and Liu (2004) investigated perceptions of (student) teachers participating in an online environment in which they discussed their experiences. Similarly, Colasante (2011) examined student teachers' perceptions of feedback using an annotation tool. Their findings indicated that the participants were positive about the online environment and the received feedback.…”