IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucl/cepeow/23-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modelling evidence-based practice in initial teacher training: causal effects on teachers' skills, knowledge and self-efficacy

Author

Listed:
  • Sam Sims

    (UCL Centre for Education Policy & Equalising Opportunities, University College London)

  • Harry Fletcher-Wood

    (Ambition Institute)

  • Thomas Godfrey-Faussett

    (Ambition Institute)

  • Peps Mccrea

    (Ambition Institute)

  • Stefanie Meliss

    (Ambition Institute)

Abstract

Teacher education/training often incorporates observable examples of focal teaching practices - models. Yet, there is little causal evidence on the benefits of models or how best to design them. We used a classroom simulator experiment to test the effects of video models on trainee teachers' skills, knowledge, and self-efficacy in relation to using retrieval practice at the end of a primary school science unit. Results showed that models improved participants' skills, but not their knowledge or self-efficacy. Adding annotations to the models had no additional benefit. Incorporating models in initial teacher training can help new teachers make better use of evidence-based teaching practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Sam Sims & Harry Fletcher-Wood & Thomas Godfrey-Faussett & Peps Mccrea & Stefanie Meliss, 2023. "Modelling evidence-based practice in initial teacher training: causal effects on teachers' skills, knowledge and self-efficacy," CEPEO Working Paper Series 23-09, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Aug 2023.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucl:cepeow:23-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec-cepeo.ucl.ac.uk/cepeow/cepeowp23-09.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2023
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sam Sims & Harry Fletcher-Wood & Alison O'Mara-Eves & Sarah Cottingham & Claire Stansfield & Josh Goodrich & Jo Van Herwegen & Jake Anders, 2022. "Effective teacher professional development: new theory and a meta-analytic test," CEPEO Working Paper Series 22-02, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Jan 2022.
    2. Armin Falk & James J. Heckman, 2009. "Lab Experiments are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences," Working Papers 200935, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    3. Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham & Peter Hull & Michal Koles'ar, 2021. "Contamination Bias in Linear Regressions," Papers 2106.05024, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    4. Yankun Han & Syed Kamaruzaman Bin Syed Ali & Lifu Ji, 2022. "Use of Observational Learning to Promote Motor Skill Learning in Physical Education: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Sam Sims & Jake Anders & Matthew Inglis & Hugues Lortie-Forgues & Ben Styles & Ben Weidmann, 2023. "Experimental education research: rethinking why, how and when to use random assignment," CEPEO Working Paper Series 23-07, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Aug 2023.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wettstein, Dominik J. & Boes, Stefan, 2022. "How value-based policy interventions influence price negotiations for new medicines: An experimental approach and initial evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 112-121.
    2. Potters, Jan & Stoop, Jan, 2016. "Do cheaters in the lab also cheat in the field?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 26-33.
    3. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    4. Lechthaler, Wolfgang & Ring, Patrick, 2021. "Labor force participation, job search effort and unemployment insurance in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 748-778.
    5. Johannes Abeler & Felix Marklein, 2017. "Fungibility, Labels, and Consumption," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 99-127.
    6. Amadou Boly & Robert Gillanders & Topi Miettinen, 2016. "Deterrence, peer effect, and legitimacy in anti-corruption policy-making: An experimental analysis," WIDER Working Paper Series 137, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. Thieme, Lutz & Winkelhake, Olaf & Hartmann, Ulrich, 2014. "Fairness als universelle Norm? Empirische Evidenz ohne Manna [Fairness as a universal norm? Empiric evidence without manna]," Working Papers of the European Institute for Socioeconomics 12, European Institute for Socioeconomics (EIS), Saarbrücken.
    8. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List, 2019. "How natural field experiments have enhanced our understanding of unemployment," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(1), pages 33-39, January.
    9. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    10. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    11. Arno Riedl & Paul Smeets, 2017. "Why Do Investors Hold Socially Responsible Mutual Funds?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(6), pages 2505-2550, December.
    12. Gary Charness & Francesco Feri & Miguel A. Meléndez‐Jiménez & Matthias Sutter, 2014. "Experimental Games on Networks: Underpinnings of Behavior and Equilibrium Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(5), pages 1615-1670, September.
    13. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    14. Falk, Armin & Menrath, Ingo & Verde, Pablo Emilio & Siegrist, Johannes, 2011. "Cardiovascular Consequences of Unfair Pay," IZA Discussion Papers 5720, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Allain, Marie-Laure & Chambolle, Claire & Rey, Patrick & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2021. "Vertical integration as a source of hold-up: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    16. Angelovski, Andrej & Brandts, Jordi & Sola, Carles, 2016. "Hiring and escalation bias in subjective performance evaluations: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 114-129.
    17. Bluffstone, Randy & Dannenberg, Astrid & Martinsson, Peter & Jha, Prakash & Bista, Rajesh, 2020. "Cooperative behavior and common pool resources: Experimental evidence from community forest user groups in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    18. Barmettler, Franziska & Fehr, Ernst & Zehnder, Christian, 2012. "Big experimenter is watching you! Anonymity and prosocial behavior in the laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 17-34.
    19. Lude, Maximilian & Prügl, Reinhard, 2021. "Experimental studies in family business research," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 12(1).
    20. Nunnari, Salvatore, 2021. "Dynamic legislative bargaining with veto power: Theory and experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 186-230.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    teachers; professional development; models;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucl:cepeow:23-09. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jake Anders (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/epucluk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.