HOW TO STIMULATE FUTURE TEACHER-STUDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIVE-EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Keywords:nitial training, students, group, collaborative learning, informational technologies
Teacher training is one of the concerns of the educational policy
which is more and more recquired in its pragmatics, as related to
the development of the social environment. As initial teacher
training is the first step in professionalizing the teaching career, we
consider stimulating the participation of future teacher-students in
specific activities to be important. Therefore, starting from the
clarification of the conceptual framework, we intend to verify to
what extent the use of certain models and teaching strategies
encourage the opportunities of active learning by stimulating
students to get involved. There was observed an improvement in the
results obtained by the students in the groups we worked with, as a
result of the amending research we had unfolded. The findings are
based on results obtained from implementing the independent
variable and it also emphasizes the practical aspects of strategies
that can optimize active participation achieved by cooperation and
by being computer aided. It follows that modern information
technology can be successfully used in the initial training of future
teachers whereas collaborative learning stimulates the active
involvement of students.
Feistritzer C.E. (2005). Profile of alternate route teachers.
Perrenoud Ph. (2001). Que faire d'autre pour prÃ©parer Ã l'action
professionnelle? In Former Ã l'action, est-ce possible?
Teacher Education. (2014).
Milner H.R. (2013). Policy Reforms and De-Professionalization of
Iucu R. & Codorean G., (2010). Quality of the initial teaching training in
the trainer vision.
%20Iucu,%20Gabriela%20Codorean.ppt, pp. 6-28
European Commission (Eurydice). (2006). Quality Assurance in Teacher
Education in Europe. http://www.eurydice.org, p. 21
Dembo H.M. (2001). Learning to teach is not enough â€“ Future teachers
also need To learn how to learn.
Gagnon W.G. & Collay M. (2001). Design for Learning. Six Elements in
Constructivist Classrooms, Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.,
Gilis A., Clement M., Laga L. & Pauwels P. (2008). Establishing a
competence profile for the role of student-centered teachers in higher
education in Belgium. Research in Higher Education, 49, 531-554.
Case, J.M. & Marshall D. (2009). Approaches to learning. In M. Tight,
K.H. Mok, J. Huisman & C.C. Morphew (eds.) The Routledge International
Handbook of higher education. 9-21, New York: Taylor and Francis
Fry H., Ketteridge S. & Marshall S. (2009). Understanding student
learning. In H. Fry, S. Ketteridge and S. Mashall (eds.) A handbook for
teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice. 3rd
Ed., 8-26, New York: Taylor and Francis
Long C.S., Ibrahim Z. & Kowang T. (2014). An analysis on the
relationship between lecturersâ€™ competencies and studentsâ€™ satisfaction.
International Education Studies, 7 (1), 37-46. www.ccsenat.org
Leroy J.F., (2001). Team development, group dynamics and project
coordination. In Group dynamics, P. de Visscher & A. Neculau (coord.),
Iai: Polirom, p. 428
Johns Gary, (1998). Organizational behavior, Bucharest: Economica, p.
Goffman E. (2003). Daily life as a show, Bucharest: Comunicare.ro, pp.
Boncu t. (2002). The psychology of social influence, Iai: Polirom, p.
Slavin L.R. (2002). Operative group dynamics in school settings.
Structuring to enhance educational, social and emotional progress.
Thompson L.L. (2004). Conflict Ã®n Teams. In Making the Team: A
Guide for Managers, pp. 156-175.
Frey R. L. Group interaction journal articles.
Harrington-Makin D. (2002). How to form a successful team,
Bucharest: Teora, p. 93
Brown S., (1997). The Art of Teaching in Small Groups.
Deutsch M. & Coleman T.P. (2000). Cooperation and Competition. In
The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, San Francisco:
Jossey-Bas Publishers, p. 27
Berk A.R. (2007). The Future of Teaching: Effective Teaching Is All
about the Students,
Not about the Teachers!
erk_12931_1.pdf, p. 63
Mintzes J.J. Wandersee H. J. & Novak D.J. (2005). Teaching Science
for Understanding A Human Constructivist View, U.S.A.: Elsevier
Academic Press, p. 337
Dillenbourg P. (1999). What do yuo mean by collaborative leraning? In
P. Dillenbourg (Ed.) Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational
Approaches. Oxford: Elsevier, p. 4
Glasersfeld von E. (1989). Cognition, Construction of Knowledge and
Teaching. In Synthese 80 (1), 121-140 (special issue on education).
JoiFa E., (2006). Constructivist instruction â€“ an alternative.
Fundamentals, Iai: Polirom, pp. 108-187
Henson T.K. (2004). Constructivist Teaching Strategies for Diverse
Middle â€“ Level Classrooms, Boston: Pearson Education, Inc., p. 20
Monteil J.-M. (1997). Education and training, Iai: Polirom, p. 89
Wilson B. & Cole P. (1991). A review of cognitive teaching models. In
Educational Technology Research and Development, Volume 39, Issue 4,
Hartman H.J. & Glasgow, N.A. (2002). Tips fo the Science Teacher.
Research Based Strategies to Help Students Learn, Thousand Oaks,
California: Corwin Press, Inc., pp. 38-39
Johnson D.S. & Chung S.-P. (1999). The Effect of Thinking Aloud Pair
Problem Solving (TAPPS) on the Troubleshooting Ability of Aviation
Technician Students. In Journal of Industrial Teacher Education. Volume 37,
Lee, L.K.W. (1998). Thinking aloud about pair problem solving in
chemistry. In Teaching and Learning, 18 (2), 89-95
Moazeni S. (2012). Effective Strategies to Teach Operations Research
to Non-Mathematics Majors. http://www.optimizationonline.
org/DB_FILE/2012/07/3548.pdf, p. 9
Seal K.C. & Przasnyski Z.H. (2003). Using technology to support
pedagogy in an OR/MS course. Interfaces 33(4), 27â€“40
Stahl G., Koschmann T. & Suthers D. (2006). Computer-supported
collaborative learning: An historical perspective.
Bartel N.C. (2014). Collaboration in the Grade 9 English Classroom.
Resta P. & LaferriÃ¨re T. (2007). Technology in support of collaborative
learning. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 65-83.