No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of videotaping experiences as an instructional aid for participating students in the development of teaching behavior. Criteria for effectiveness were derived from research by Ryans indicating that supportive (Xo), businesslike (Yo), and stimulating (Z0) patterns of action were positive factors, and by Flanders which indicated that indirect teaching behavior was a positive factor.The Cattell Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire and the Self-Evaluation of My Teaching Scale (devised by the researcher) were administered at the beginning and end of the six-week period. Mean changes in responses reflecting patterns of indirect teaching, readiness to teach, and Ryans' TCS Patterns Xo, Yo, and Zo were compared.Forty-eight Ball State University students enrolled in Participation classes at the Burris Laboratory School were randomly divided into four groups of twelve each. All of the students received the same or comparable experience in methods of teaching and in the supervision of their classroom participation. Three of the four groups were assigned a series of three microlessons to prepare and teach to a micro class.The Experimental group was given one hour of instruction on Flanders' system of interaction analysis. After each microteaching lesson, instructional feedback was received from a tally of the classroom interaction provided by the researcher and from viewing the videotape replay.A second group was given the same instruction in interaction analysis and feedback from the interaction analysis tally. A third group received no information on interaction analysis and was given feedback from the videotape replay. The fourth group received only the usual experiences of the Participation course with none of the above instructional aids.The resulting data were analyzed using analysis of covariance to adjust post-test mean scores for each group. Analysis of variance was used to compute F-ratios for each variable in the study.No statistically significant differences between the groups were found for any of the variables used. The procedures of videotaping as used and measured in the study did not show a relationship between videotape feedback and increased positive responses on either of the two measurements used.All of the groups showed some gain on items of indirect teaching. This gain may have resulted from the influence of the teachers and supervisors with whom they worked. Although not significant, the direction of the changes suggested that the videotaped groups were slightly more serious and somewhat more inclined to report themselves as ready to teach than the groups not videotaped. Other changes seemed to indicate the possibility that the videotape procedure may have mitigated against the tendency toward increased rigidity typically found in the research of initial teaching experiences. Evaluations at the conclusion of the study showed that student opinions favored the use of the videotape and interaction analysis procedures as feedback.The lack of conclusive results was postulated as being caused by multiple factors. A longer period of time and larger sample population were suggested. The instruments may have been inadequate to measure changes which may have occurred. Individual changes may have been negated in the compilation of mean scores. The individual instructional possibilities of videotaping may not have been completely revealed in this study. Further research of the instructional use of videotape seems to be warranted.

Final Project (M.A.)--John F. Kennedy University, 2005. / "August 29, 2005"--T.p. Includes bibliographical references (p. 93-98).

Thesis (Ph.D.) - University of Glasgow, 2008. / Ph.D. thesis submitted to the Faculty of Information and Mathematical Sciences, Department of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, 2008. Includes bibliographical references. Print version also available.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of North Texas, August, 2009. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 2007. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 46-01, page: 0015. Adviser: David P. Kintsfather.

No description available.

Thesis (M.S.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 2000. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-06, page: 2807. Typescript. Abstract precedes thesis as preliminary leaf 2. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 44-47).

Thesis (M.S.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 2006. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-06, page: 3251. Typescript. Abstract precedes thesis as 1 leaf. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-71).