This project investigates whether establishing joint attention between student and teacher during real-time dyadic interaction is conducive to a teacher’s instructional alignment and student learning. After identifying task characteristics associated with joint or diverging attention (Study 1), which will also allow for creating a task database for subsequent studies, we explore the relation between levels of joint-attention, student learning and teacher alignment by measuring verbal and non-verbal cues in real-time interaction (Study 2). This is followed by two studies which address the following questions: Does student learning improve when teachers are trained to use cues which increase joint attention (Study 3)? Does teacher alignment increase when teachers receive real-time information about a student’s level of understanding (Study 4)?

• Alline Aleman
• prof. dr. Tamara van Gog
• dr. Margot van Wermeskerken

Adaptive Instruction is a key concept in contemporary educational policy development. Adaptive instruction is instruction that is tailored to a student’s understanding and is considered highly effective. Adaptive instruction is currently widely promoted and implemented. It is advocated, for instance, by the Dutch government (e.g. Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science, 2011 and 2014), and the Educational Inspectorate regards it as an important normative standard: they yearly evaluate the extent to which teachers provide adaptive instruction (e.g., Educational Inspectorate, 2019). And also internationally, student-centred education and personalized learning in which adaptive instruction is a key aspect, are promoted (OECD, 2006; DfES, 2007). Therefore, it is surprising that the empirical evidence for the effectiveness of this famous and widely applied principle is scarce and weak (e.g., Van de Pol, Volman, & Beishuizen, 2010). Thus, more empirical evidence with more precise estimations of the effect is needed.

Although the effect in Wood et al. (1978) was “huge” (Sawilowsky, 2009), the sample size was low (N=8 per condition, 32 in total) resulting in very large confidence intervals and thus very imprecise effect estimates. The only two conceptual replications of this study (focusing on older children, on math and science problems and other control conditions) also showed a positive effect of adaptive instruction, yet they also had very imprecise estimates (Murphy & Messer, 2000; Pratt & Savoy-Levine, 1998). Wood and others further developed the work on scaffolding after 1978. Yet, these studies focused on computer-based tutoring systems instead of tutoring in face-to-face interaction (e.g., Wood, 1999; Wood, 2001; Wood & Wood, 1996; Wood & Wood, 1999; Wood, Shadbolt, Reichgelt, Wood, & Paskiewicz, 1992; Wood, Wood, Ainsworth, & O’Malley, 1995). Surprisingly, given its status as a seminal study, no close replication of the study of Wood et al. (1978) exists.

Our goal is to accurately estimate the well-known effect of adaptive instruction on children’s task performance by conducting a close replication of the seminal study of Wood et al., 1978.

https://www.uu.nl/organisatie/educatie/puzzeltaak-voor-peuters-welke-hulp-werkt-het-best

• Renske de Kleijn
• Monique Voman
• Jelte Wicherts