Psychologie fürs Klassenzimmer

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.

Erwähnt:

• Thornton, A., & McAuliffe, K. (2006). Teaching in wild meerkats. Science, 313(5784), 227-229.
• Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational psychology review, 22, 271-296.
• Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory (pp. 115-140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
• Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Olsen, M. W., & Leary, H. (2015). A pilot meta-analysis of computer-based scaffolding in STEM education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 183-197.

Zur Wirksamkeit von Differenzierung:

• Puzio, K., Colby, G. T., & Algeo-Nichols, D. (2020). Differentiated literacy instruction: Boondoggle or best practice?. Review of Educational Research, 90(4), 459-498.
• Deunk, M. I., Smale-Jacobse, A. E., de Boer, H., Doolaard, S., & Bosker, R. J. (2018). Effective differentiation practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the cognitive effects of differentiation practices in primary education. Educational Research Review, 24, 31-54.

Hauk, D., & Gröschner, A. (2022). How effective is learner-controlled instruction under classroom conditions? A systematic review. Learning and Motivation, 80, 101850.

Diese Studien/Metaanalysen werden erwähnt:

• Hanke, P. (2002). Lehr-Lernkulturen und schriftsprachliche Handlungskompetenzen im Primarstufenbereich. Köln: Habilitationsschrift Universität Köln.
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
• Giaconia, R. M., & Hedges, L. V. (1982). Identifying features of effective open education. Review of educational research, 52(4), 579-602.

Slavin, R. E. (1983). When does cooperative learning increase student achievement?. Psychological Bulletin, 94(3), 429-445.

Diese Studien/Metaanalysen werden erwähnt:

• Völlinger, V. A., Supanc, M., & Brunstein, J. C. (2018). Kooperatives Lernen in der Sekundarstufe. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 21(1), 159-176.
• Forslund Frykedal, K., & Samuelsson, M. (2016). “What’s in it for Me?” A Study on Students’ Accommodation or Resistance during Group Work. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(5), 500-514.
• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Stanne, M. B. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
• Kyndt, E., Raes, E., Lismont, B., Timmers, F., Cascallar, E., & Dochy, F. (2013). A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning: do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educational Research Review, 10, 133–149.

Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(3), 431-441.

Erwähnt:

• Mehrabian, A., & Ferris, S. R. (1967). Inference of attitudes from nonverbal communication in two channels. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 31(3), 248-252.
• Mehrabian, A., & Wiener, M. (1967). Decoding of inconsistent communications. Journal of personality and social psychology, 6(1), 109-114.
• Naftulin, D. H., Ware Jr, J. E., & Donnelly, F. A. (1973). The Doctor Fox lecture: A paradigm of educational seduction. Academic Medicine, 48(7), 630-635.
• Hall, J. A. (1998). How big are nonverbal sex differences? The case of smiling and sensitivity to nonverbal cues. In D. J. Canary & K. Dindia (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication: Critical essays and empirical investigations of sex and gender in interaction (S. 155–177). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Um diesen Artikel geht es in der Folge: Baer, J. (2010). Is creativity domain specific. In: J. Kaufman, & R. Sternberg, The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (S. 321-341). Cambridge: University Press.

Erwähnt:

• Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for content generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 179-182.
• Baer, J. (1998). The case for domain specificity of creativity. Creativity research journal, 11(2), 173-177.

• Silvia, P. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Pretz, J. E. (2009). Is creativity domain-specific? Latent class models of creative accomplishments and creative self-descriptions. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 139.
• Barbot, B., Besançon, M., & Lubart, T. (2016). The generality-specificity of creativity: Exploring the structure of creative potential with EPoC. Learning and Individual Differences, 52, 178-187.

Strong, M., Gargani, J., & Hacifazlioğlu, Ö. (2011). Do we know a successful teacher when we see one? Experiments in the identification of effective teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 367-382. 

Zu value added measures: Misco, T. (2008). Was that a result of my teaching? A brief exploration of value-added assessment. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(1), 11-14.

Erwähnt:

• Hill, H. C., Charalambous, C. Y., & Kraft, M. A. (2012). When rater reliability is not enough: Teacher observation systems and a case for the generalizability study. Educational Researcher, 41(2), 56-64.
• Peterson, K. D. (2000). Teacher evaluation: A comprehensive guide to new directions and practices. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
• Rosenbusch, H. S. (1992). Lehrer und Schulräte – ein strukturell gestörtes Verhältnis. Bamberg: Erziehungswissenschaftliche Forschungsbeiträge der Otto-Friedrich-Universität.
• Steinberg, M. P., & Garrett, R. (2016). Classroom composition and measured teacher performance: What do teacher observation scores really measure?. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 38(2), 293-317.

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of second language Writing, 16(4), 255-272.

Intro:

• Schaarschmidt, U. (2006). AVEM – ein persönlichkeitsdiagnostisches Instrument für die berufsbezogene Rehabilitation. In Arbeitskreis Klinische Psychologie in der Rehabilitation BDP (Hrsg.). Psychologische Diagnostik – Weichenstellung für den Reha – Verlauf. Deutscher Psychologen Verlag GmbH, Bonn. S.59-82
• Hillert, A., Lehr, D., Koch, S., Bracht, M.M., Ueing, S., Sosnowsky-Waschek, N. & Lüdtke, K. (2018). Lehrergesundheit: AGIL – das Präventionsprogramm für Arbeit und Gesundheit im Lehrerberuf (2., überarbeitete Aufl. 2016 Aufl.). Schattauer.

Erwähnt:

• Mußmann, F., Riethmüller, M., & Hardwig, T. (2016). Niedersächsische Arbeitszeitstudie. Lehrkräfte an öffentlichen Schulen 2015/2016. Göttingen: Georg-August-Universität.
• Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1-11.
• Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback. System, 37(2), 322-329.
• Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar. Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching, 13, 133-164.
• Spychiger M., Oser F., Hascher T., Mahler F. (1999) Entwicklung einer Fehlerkultur in der Schule. In: Althof W. (eds) Fehlerwelten. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Um diese Studie geht es in der Folge:
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.

Erwähnt:

• Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.
• Moreno, R. (2006). When worked examples don't work: Is cognitive load theory at an impasse?. Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 170-181.
• Sinha, T., & Kapur, M. (2021). When problem solving followed by instruction works: Evidence for productive failure. Review of Educational Research, 91(5), 761-798.

Um diese Studie geht es in der Folge:
Trautwein, U. (2007). The homework–achievement relation reconsidered: Differentiating homework time, homework frequency, and homework effort. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 372-388.

Intro:

Artikel „Hausaufgaben bringen nichts“ (Spiegel Online, 31.01.2008)

Diese Studien werden in der Folge erwähnt:

• Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1-62.
• Flunger, B., Trautwein, U., Nagengast, B., Lüdtke, O., Niggli, A., & Schnyder, I. (2015). The Janus-faced nature of time spent on homework: Using latent profile analyses to predict academic achievement over a school year. Learning and Instruction, 39, 97-106.
• Fernández Alonso, R., Álvarez Díaz, M., García Crespo, F. J., Woitschach Mendoza, P. R., & Muñiz Fernández, J. (2022). Should we help our children with homework? A meta-analysis using PISA data. Psicothema.

Um diese Studie geht es in der Folge:
Hattie, J.A.C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of 800+ meta-analyses on achievement. London: Routledge.

Diese Studien werden in der Folge erwähnt:

• Rorschach, H. (1921) Psychodiagnostik. Methodik und Ergebnisse eines wahrnehmungsdiagnostischen Experiments. Bern: Bircher.
• Wecker, C., Vogel, F., & Hetmanek, A. (2017). Visionär und imposant–aber auch belastbar?. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 20(1), 21-40.
• Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3087.

Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Hall, N. C., Nett, U. E., Pekrun, R., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2014). Types of boredom: An experience sampling approach. Motivation and Emotion, 38(3), 401-419.

Erwähnt werden: 

• Larson, R. W. & Richards, M. H. (1991). Boredom in the middle school years: Blaming schools versus blaming students. American Journal of Education, 99, 418–443. 
• Götz, T., Frenzel, A. C., & Pekrun, R. (2007). Regulation von Langeweile im Unterricht. Was Schülerinnen und Schüler bei der" Windstille der Seele"(nicht) tun. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 35(4), 312-333.
• Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315-341.
• Götz, T., & Frenzel, A. C. (2006). Phänomenologie schulischer Langeweile. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 38(4), 149-153.
• Miller, D. T., & Ross, M. (1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction?. Psychological Bulletin, 82(2), 213-225.

Weitere Forschung zum Thema:

Kanevsky, L., & Keighley, T. (2003). To produce or not to produce? Understanding boredom and the honor in underachievement. Roeper Review, 26(1), 20-28.

Nett, U. E., Goetz, T., & Daniels, L. M. (2010). What to do when feeling bored?: Students' strategies for coping with boredom. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(6), 626-638.

Tze, V., Daniels, L. M., & Klassen, R. M. (2016). Evaluating the relationship between boredom and academic outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 119-144.

Um diese Studie geht es in der Folge:
Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59-76.  

Diese Forschungsarbeiten werden erwähnt:

• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
• Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1972). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones et al. (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (S. 79-94). New York: General Learning Press,
• Hanfstingl, B., & Mayr, J. (2007). Prognose der Bewährung im Lehrerstudium und im Lehrerberuf. Journal für Lehrerinnen- und Lehrerbildung, 7(2). 48-56.
• Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2013). How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 774-786.
• Aloe, A. M., Amo, L. C., & Shanahan, M. E. (2014). Classroom management self-efficacy and burnout: A multivariate meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 101-126.

Um diese Studie geht es in der Folge:
Menz, C., Spinath, B., & Seifried, E. (2021). Misconceptions die hard: Prevalence and reduction of wrong beliefs in topics from educational psychology among preservice teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36(2), 477-494.

Informationen zum Intro:
Cadsby, T. (2011). Stop trusting your instincts. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2011/06/stop-trusting-your-instincts 

Diese Forschungsarbeiten werden erwähnt: 

• Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Minson, J. A., & Dorison, C. A. (2022). Why is exposure to opposing views aversive? Reconciling three theoretical perspectives. Current Opinion in Psychology, 101435. 
• Thomm, E., Gold, B., Betsch, T., & Bauer, J. (2021). When preservice teachers’ prior beliefs contradict evidence from educational research. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 1055-1072. 
• Eitel, A., Prinz, A., Kollmer, J., Niessen, L., Russow, J., Ludäscher, M., ... & Lindner, M. A. (2021). The misconceptions about multimedia learning questionnaire: An empirical evaluation study with teachers and student teachers. Psychology of Learning & Teaching, 20(3), 420-444. 

Studien/Metaanalysen zum Zusammenhang von Klassengröße und Lernerfolg: 

• Bowne, J. B., Magnuson, K. A., Schindler, H. S., Duncan, G. J., & Yoshikawa, H. (2017). A meta-analysis of class sizes and ratios in early childhood education programs: Are thresholds of quality associated with greater impacts on cognitive, achievement, and socioemotional outcomes?. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(3), 407-428. 
• Filges, T., Sonne‐Schmidt, C. S., & Nielsen, B. C. V. (2018). Small class sizes for improving student achievement in primary and secondary schools: a systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 14(1), 1-107. 
• Leuven, E., & Oosterbeek, H. (2018). Class size and student outcomes in Europe. EENEE, Analytischer Bericht, (33). 
• OECD (2016). Education at a Glance 2016: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Um dieses Review geht es in der Folge:
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. 

Diese Studien werden erwähnt: 

• Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for Mastery. Instruction and Curriculum. Regional Education Laboratory for the Carolinas and Virginia, Topical Papers and Reprints, Number 1. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1-11. 
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. 
• Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F. M., Heitink, M. C., Kippers, W. B., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2020). Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, 101602. 

Informationen zum Projekt Embedding Formative Assessment hier

• Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 495–513.
• Ophardt, D., Piwowar, V., & Thiel, F. (2017). Kompetenzen des Klassenmanagements (KODEK). In C. Gräsel & K. Trempler (Hrsg.), Entwicklung von Professionalität pädagogischen Personals: Interdisziplinäre Betrachtungen, Befunde und Perspektiven (S. 133–152). Wiesbaden: Springer.

Weitere Klassiker zum Classroom Management:

• Evertson, C. M. (1985). Training teachers in classroom management: An experimental study in secondary school classrooms. The Journal of Educational Research, 79(1), 51-58.
• Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C. M., & Anderson, L. M. (1980). Effective classroom management at the beginning of the school year. The Elementary School Journal, 80(5), 219-231.
• Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. (2003). Classroom management that works: Research-based strategies for every teacher. Arlington: ASCD.

Craik, F. I., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 104(3), 268-294.

Diese Forschungsarbeiten werden erwähnt:

Theorie der Verarbeitungstiefe: Craik, F. I., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal lLarning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684.

zur Technik der elaborativen Selbstabfrage: Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58.

Kritik und Antworten auf die Kritik:

Eysenck, M. W. (1978). Levels of processing: A reply to Lockhart and Craik. British Journal of Psychology, 69(2), 177-178.

Lockhart, R. S., & Craik, F. I. (1990). Levels of processing: A retrospective commentary on a framework for memory research. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44(1), 87-112.

Velichkovsky, B. M. (2002). Heterarchy of cognition: The depths and the highs of a framework for memory research. Memory, 10(5-6), 405-419.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.

Im Intro angesprochenes Video

Diese Forschungsarbeiten werden erwähnt:

Atkinson, J.W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Princeton: Van Nostrand.

Lepper, M., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R.(1973). Undermining childrens intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the “overjustification” hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129-137.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Die Selbstbestimmungstheorie der Motivation und ihre Bedeutung für die Pädagogik. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 39(2), 223-238.

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376.

Senko, C., Perry, A. H., & Greiser, M. (2022). Does triggering learners’ interest make them overconfident?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(3), 482-497.

Praetorius, A. K., Klieme, E., Herbert, B., & Pinger, P. (2018). Generic dimensions of teaching quality: The German framework of three basic dimensions. ZDM, 50(3), 407-426.

Diese Forschungsarbeiten werden erwähnt:

zum Thema Oberflächenmerkmale und Tiefenstrukturen:

• Kunter, M., & Voss, T. (2013). The model of instructional quality. In COACTIV: A multicriteria analysis. In Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers (S. 97-124). Springer, Boston, MA.

Forschungsarbeiten zu anderen Modellen der Unterrichtsqualität:

• Slavin, R. E. (1994). Quality, appropriateness, incentive, and time: A model of instructional effectiveness. International Journal of Educational Research, 21(2), 141-157. 
• Ferguson, R. & Danielson, C. (2014). How framework for teaching and Tripod 7Cs evidence distinguish key components of effective teaching. In T. Kane, K. Kerr & R. Pianta (Hrsg.), Designing Teacher Evaluation Systems: New Guidance from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project. (S. 98-143). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Beobachtungsinstrument des Landes Baden-Württemberg, basierend auf den 3 Basisdimensionen:

https://www.baden-wuerttemberg.de/de/service/presse/pressemitteilung/pid/unterrichtsqualitaet-beobachtbar-und-beschreibbar-machen/

Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4(1), 55-81.

Diese Forschungsarbeiten werden erwähnt:

zum Thema 'Lernen lernen'

• Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996). Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 99-136.
• Donoghue, G. M., & Hattie, J. A. (2021). A meta-analysis of ten learning techniques. Frontiers in Education, 6, 581216.

zum expertise reversal effect: 

• Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors, 40(1), 1-17.

weitere Forschungsarbeiten:

• Chi, M. T., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121-152.
• Taconis, R., Ferguson-Hessler, M.G.M., and Broekkamp, H., (2001). Teaching science problem solving: An overview of experimental work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 442-468.
• Wilke, M., Depaepe, F., & Van Nieuwenhuyse, K. (2022). Fostering Historical Thinking and Democratic Citizenship? A Cluster Randomized Controlled Intervention Study. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 102115.