(2019) Science and education, 4, 5-15. Odessa.

Estella W. Chizhik,
Professor of Teacher Education, San Diego State University, San Diego, USA
Alexander W. Chizhik,
Professor of Teacher Education, San Diego State University, San Diego, USA
Brian Burgess,
Student in the Psychology Department, San Diego State University, San Diego, USA
Maelyn Tanmajo,
B.A. in Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, USA
Derrick Seng,
Student in the Psychology Department, San Diego State University, San Diego, USA
Myrna Hernandez,
B.A. in Psychology, San Diego State University,
San Diego, USA *Corresponding author
email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

VIDEO-BASED COACHING IN SUPPORT OF
ELEMENTARY TEACHER-CANDIDATE’S PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Teacher-education programs seek to improve their clinical practice for teacher candidates. Video-based coaching enables university supervisors the ability to provide meaningful feedback to teacher candidates. Most of the research on video-based coaching has focused on how the tool helps candidates notice aspects of their teaching. Few studies have examined the type of feedback university supervisors provide their teacher candidates. The current research examined the type of feedback university supervisors provide, how the feedback changes over the course of the program and its impact on a summative performance-based assessment. Reviewing the feedback provided by 16 university supervisors for 124 elementary school teacher candidates, our findings show that university supervisors’ feedback tends to be more positive than constructive. The select skills on which supervisors focused modulated over time and appear to be associated with candidates’ performance on the summative performance assessment. The implications of this research posits that university supervisors can have a measurable effect on teacher candidates’ instructional performance with the use of video-based coaching.

 teacher education, teacher candidates, university supervisors, video-based coaching, feedback, performance-based assessment.

1. Koerner, M., Rust, F., & Baumgartner, F. (2002). Exploring roles in student teaching placements. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29 (2), 35–58 [in English]. 
2. Authors. (2017). [Title omitted for blind review]. Teacher Education Quarterly [in English]. 
3. Authors. (2018). [Title omitted for blind review]. J Technology and Teacher Education [in English]. 
4. Tan, A. L., & Towndrow, P. A. (2009). Catalyzing student–teacher interactions and teacher learning in science practical formative assessment with digital video technology. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 61- 67 [in English].
5. Hamilton, E. R. (2012). Video as a metaphorical eye: Images of positionality, pedagogy, and practice. College Teaching, 60(1), 10-16 [in English]. 
6. van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 244-276 [in English]. 
7. Marsh, B., & Mitchell, N. (2014). The role of video in teacher professional development. Teacher Development, 18(3), 403-417 [in English]. 
8. Sun, J., & Van Es, E. A. (2015). An Exploratory Study of the Influence That Analyzing Teaching Has on Preservice Teachers' Classroom Practice. J of Teacher Education, 66(3), 201-214 [in English]. 
9. Voerman, L., Meijer, P. C., Korthagen, F. A., Simon, R. J. (2012). Types and frequencies of feedback interventions in classroom interaction in secondary education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8) [in English]. 
10. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Rev of Educ. Research, 77(1), 81-112 [in English]. 
11. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Rev of Educ. Research, 78(1), 153-189 [in English].
12. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606-633 [in English]. 
13. Mason, J. (2002). Researching Your Own Practice: The Discipline of Noticing. Psychology Press [in English].
14. Lefstein & Snell. (2011). Professional vision and the politics of teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 505-514 [in English].
15. Stürmer, K., Könings, K., & Seidel, T. (2013). Declarative knowledge and professional vision in teacher education: Effect of courses in teaching and learning. British J of Educational Psychology,83(3), 467-483 [in English]. 
16. Wu, C. C., & Lee, G. C. (2004). Use of computermediated communication in a teaching practicum course. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(4), 511-528 [in English].
17. Kennedy, A. S., & Lees, A. T. (2016). Preparing undergraduate pre-service teachers through direct and video-based performance feedback and tiered supports in early Head Start. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44(4), 369-379 [in English]. 
18. Gregory, A., Ruzek, E., Hafen, C. A., Mikami, A. Y., Allen, J. P., & Pianta, R. C. (2017). My teaching partner-secondary: A video-based coaching model. Theory Into Practice, 56(1), 38-45 [in English]. 
19. Kolman, J. S. (2018). Clinical supervision in teacher preparation exploring the practices of universityaffiliated supervisors. Action in Teacher Education, 40(3) [in English]. 
20. Ritter, J. K., Powell, D., Hawley, T. S., & Blasik, J. (2011). Reifying the ontology of individualism at the expense of democracy: An examination of university supervisors’ written feedback to student teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(1) [in English].
21. Schwartz, C., Walkowiak, T. A, Polin, L., Richardson, K., & Polly, D. (2018). The nature of feedback given to elementary student teachers from university supervisors after observations of mathematics lessons. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 20(1), 62- 85 [in English].
22. Cummins, L. (2004). The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow: Mentoring in early childhood education. Childhood Education, 80(5), 254 [in English]. 
23. Nolan, A., Morrissey, A. M., & Dumenden, I. (2013). Expectations of mentoring in a time of change: Views of new and professionally isolated early childhood teachers in Victoria, Australia. Early Years, 33(2), 161- 171 [in English]. 
25. Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317-344 [in English]. 
26. Webb, S., Massey, D., Goggans, M., & Flajole, K. (2019). Thirty‐five years of the gradual release of responsibility: Scaffolding toward complex and responsive teaching. Reading Teacher,73(1), 75-83 [in English]. 
27. Okraski, C. V., & Kissau, S. P. (2018). Impact of content-specific seminars on candidate edTPA preparation and performance. Foreign Language Annals, 51(3), 685- 705 [in English]. 
28. Donovan, M. K., & Cannon, S. O. (2018). The university supervisor, edTPA, and the new making of the teacher. Education Policy Analysis Archives 26(28), 1-26 [in English]. 
29. Choppin, J., & Meuwissen, K. (2017). Threats to validity in the edTPA video component. Action in Teacher Education, 39(1), 39-53 [in English].