Mohammad N. Karimi, Seyyed-Foad Behzadpoor, Behzad Mansouri
{"title":"语言教师认知研究进展:特刊导论","authors":"Mohammad N. Karimi, Seyyed-Foad Behzadpoor, Behzad Mansouri","doi":"10.55593/ej.27106a0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An oft-cited conceptualization of teacher cognition couches it as “the unobservable cognitive dimension of teaching—what teachers know, believe and think” (Borg, 2003, p. 81). While the term “unobservable” in Borg’s definition implies, or even emphatically states, that a hidden body of knowledge, beliefs, and thoughts informs teacher behavior, this hidden dimension was “un-observable” in early conceptualizations of teaching (Borg, 2019; Burns, et al., 2015). Dominated for long by the process-product interpretation (Dunkin & Biddle, 1974), teaching was primarily viewed in terms of observable instructional behaviors (e.g., wait time practices, patterns of questioning) that were judged with regard to how effectively they influenced student achievement outcomes (Verloop, et al., 2001). Language teacher education also followed suit and as posited by Gatbonton (1999), formerly a major share of the theoretical base for language teacher education came from studies of overt classroom behaviors. However, teaching was subsequently recognized as cognition-backed and knowledge-informed performance. As best reflected in Borg’s (2019, p. 2) words, although teaching involves observable behaviors, it “is not a purely behavioral enterprise; in the same way that icebergs have an exposed surface beneath which lies a significant hidden mass, teachers’ behaviors are also powerfully shaped by a complex range of unseen influences”. [First Paragraph]","PeriodicalId":36927,"journal":{"name":"TESL-EJ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advances in Research on Language Teacher Cognition: An Introduction to the Special Issue\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad N. Karimi, Seyyed-Foad Behzadpoor, Behzad Mansouri\",\"doi\":\"10.55593/ej.27106a0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An oft-cited conceptualization of teacher cognition couches it as “the unobservable cognitive dimension of teaching—what teachers know, believe and think” (Borg, 2003, p. 81). While the term “unobservable” in Borg’s definition implies, or even emphatically states, that a hidden body of knowledge, beliefs, and thoughts informs teacher behavior, this hidden dimension was “un-observable” in early conceptualizations of teaching (Borg, 2019; Burns, et al., 2015). Dominated for long by the process-product interpretation (Dunkin & Biddle, 1974), teaching was primarily viewed in terms of observable instructional behaviors (e.g., wait time practices, patterns of questioning) that were judged with regard to how effectively they influenced student achievement outcomes (Verloop, et al., 2001). Language teacher education also followed suit and as posited by Gatbonton (1999), formerly a major share of the theoretical base for language teacher education came from studies of overt classroom behaviors. However, teaching was subsequently recognized as cognition-backed and knowledge-informed performance. As best reflected in Borg’s (2019, p. 2) words, although teaching involves observable behaviors, it “is not a purely behavioral enterprise; in the same way that icebergs have an exposed surface beneath which lies a significant hidden mass, teachers’ behaviors are also powerfully shaped by a complex range of unseen influences”. [First Paragraph]\",\"PeriodicalId\":36927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TESL-EJ\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TESL-EJ\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.27106a0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TESL-EJ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.27106a0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
一个经常被引用的教师认知概念将其描述为“教学中不可观察的认知维度——教师所知道、相信和思考的东西”(Borg, 2003,第81页)。Borg的定义中的“不可观察”一词暗示,甚至强调指出,一个隐藏的知识、信仰和思想体系影响着教师的行为,但在早期的教学概念中,这个隐藏的维度是“不可观察的”(Borg, 2019;Burns等人,2015)。长期以来被过程-产品解释所主导(Dunkin &Biddle, 1974),教学主要是根据可观察的教学行为(例如,等待时间的做法,提问的模式)来判断,这些行为是根据它们对学生成绩结果的影响程度来判断的(Verloop, et al., 2001)。语言教师教育也紧随其后,正如Gatbonton(1999)所指出的,以前语言教师教育的理论基础的主要部分来自对公开课堂行为的研究。然而,教学后来被认为是认知支持和知识知情的表现。正如Borg(2019,第2页)的话所反映的那样,尽管教学涉及可观察到的行为,但它“不是纯粹的行为企业;就像冰山有一个暴露的表面,下面隐藏着大量的东西一样,教师的行为也受到一系列看不见的复杂影响的有力影响。”(第一段)
Advances in Research on Language Teacher Cognition: An Introduction to the Special Issue
An oft-cited conceptualization of teacher cognition couches it as “the unobservable cognitive dimension of teaching—what teachers know, believe and think” (Borg, 2003, p. 81). While the term “unobservable” in Borg’s definition implies, or even emphatically states, that a hidden body of knowledge, beliefs, and thoughts informs teacher behavior, this hidden dimension was “un-observable” in early conceptualizations of teaching (Borg, 2019; Burns, et al., 2015). Dominated for long by the process-product interpretation (Dunkin & Biddle, 1974), teaching was primarily viewed in terms of observable instructional behaviors (e.g., wait time practices, patterns of questioning) that were judged with regard to how effectively they influenced student achievement outcomes (Verloop, et al., 2001). Language teacher education also followed suit and as posited by Gatbonton (1999), formerly a major share of the theoretical base for language teacher education came from studies of overt classroom behaviors. However, teaching was subsequently recognized as cognition-backed and knowledge-informed performance. As best reflected in Borg’s (2019, p. 2) words, although teaching involves observable behaviors, it “is not a purely behavioral enterprise; in the same way that icebergs have an exposed surface beneath which lies a significant hidden mass, teachers’ behaviors are also powerfully shaped by a complex range of unseen influences”. [First Paragraph]