Students in sight: Using mobile eye-tracking to investigate mathematics teachers’ gaze behaviour during task instruction-giving
Main Article Content
Abstract
Abstract
Mobile eye-tracking research has provided evidence both on teachers' visual attention in relation to their intentions and on teachers’ student-centred gaze patterns. However, the importance of a teacher’s eye-movements when giving instructions is unexplored. In this study we used mobile eye-tracking to investigate six teachers’ gaze patterns when they are giving task instructions for a geometry problem in four different phases of a mathematical problem-solving lesson. We analysed the teachers’ eye-tracking data, their verbal data, and classroom video recordings. Our paper brings forth a novel interpretative lens for teacher’s pedagogical intentions communicated by gaze during teacher-led moments such as when introducing new tasks, reorganizing the social structures of students for collaboration, and lesson wrap-ups. A change in the students’ task changes teachers’ gaze patterns, which may indicate a change in teacher’s pedagogical intention. We found that teachers gazed at students throughout the lesson, whereas teachers’ focus was at task-related targets during collaborative instruction-giving more than during the introductory and reflective task instructions. Hence, we suggest two previously not detected gaze types: contextualizing gaze for task readiness and collaborative gaze for task focus to contribute to the present discussion on teacher gaze
Article Details
FLR adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Creative Common License (BY-NC-ND). That is, Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors with, however, first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.
References
Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. Communication Yearbook, 3, 543. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1979.11923782
Anderson, N. C., Anderson, F., Kingstone, A., & Bischof, W. F. (2015). A comparison of scanpath comparison methods. Behaviour Research Methods, 47(4), 1377-1392. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0550-3
Baron-Cohen, S. (1997). How to build a baby that can read minds: Cognitive mechanisms in mindreading. The Maladapted Mind: Classic Readings in Evolutionary Psychopathology, 207-239.
Berliner, D. C. (2004). Describing the behaviour and documenting the accomplishments of expert teachers. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 24(3), 200-212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467604265535
Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviours, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 39(4), 323-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529009378813
Cohen, P. R., & Levesque, H. J. (1990). Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence, 42(2-3), 213-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(90)90055-5
Cortina, K. S., Miller, K. F., McKenzie, R., & Epstein, A. (2015). Where low and high inference data converge: Validation of CLASS assessment of mathematics instruction using mobile eye tracking with expert and novice teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 389-403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9610-5
Csibra, G., & Gergely, G. (2009). Natural pedagogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 148-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.005
ELAN (Version 5.3) [Computer software]. (2018). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, The Language Archive. Retrieved from https://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3), 215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215
Farroni, T., Csibra, G., Simion, F., & Johnson, M. H. (2002). Eye contact detection in humans from birth. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(14), 9602-9605. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.152159999
Foulsham, T., & Underwood, G. (2008). What can saliency models predict about eye movements? spatial and sequential aspects of fixations during encoding and recognition. Journal of Vision, 8(2), 6. https://doi.org/10.1167/8.2.6
Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2010). Identifying instructional moves during guided learning. The Reading Teacher, 64(2), 84-95. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.64.2.1
Frymier, A. B. (1994). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly, 42(2), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379409369922
Gegenfurtner, A., Lehtinen, E., & Säljö, R. (2011). Expertise differences in the comprehension of visualizations: A meta-analysis of eye tracking research in professional domains. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 523-552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9174-7
Gest, S. D., & Rodkin, P. C. (2011). Teaching practices and elementary classroom peer ecologies. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32(5), 288-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2011.02.004
Haataja, E., Garcia Moreno-Esteva, E., Salonen, V., Laine, A., Toivanen, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2019). Teacher's visual attention when scaffolding collaborative mathematical problem solving. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102877
Haataja, E., Toivanen, M., Laine, A., & Hannula, M. S. (2019). Teacher-student eye contact during scaffolding collaborative mathematical problem-solving. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 7(2), 9-26.
Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Paper presented at the Building Teacher Quality: What does research tell us ACER Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2003/4/
Hendrickx, M. M., Mainhard, M. T., Boor-Klip, H. J., Cillessen, A. H., & Brekelmans, M. (2016). Social dynamics in the classroom: Teacher support and conflict and the peer ecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.10.004
Holmqvist, K., & Andersson, R. (2017). Eye tracking: A comprehensive guide to methods, paradigms, and measures. Lund: Eye-Tracking Research Institute.
Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Andersson, R., Dewhurst, R., Jarodzka, H., & Van de Weijer, J. (2011). Eye tracking: A comprehensive guide to methods and measures. OUP Oxford.
Jarodzka, H., Holmqvist, K., & Gruber, H. (2017). Eye tracking in educational science: Theoretical frameworks and research agendas. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 10(1):3, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.10.1.3
Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491-525. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325693
Johnson, H. L., Coles, A., & Clarke, D. (2017). Mathematical tasks and the student: Navigating “tensions of intentions” between designers, teachers, and students. Zdm, 49(6), 813-822. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0894-0
Kaakinen, J. K. (2020). What can eye movements tell us about visual perception processes in classroom contexts? commentary on a special issue. Educational Psychology Review, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09573-7
Kounin, J. S. (1970). Discipline and group management in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Lester Jr, F. K. (1989). The role of metacognition in mathematical problem solving: A study of two grade seven classes. Final report.
Lukander, K., Toivanen, M., & Puolamäki, K. (2017). Inferring intent and action from gaze in naturalistic behavior: a review. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction (IJMHCI), 9(4), 41-57. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMHCI.2017100104
Lukander, K., Toivanen, M., & Puolamäki, K. (2017). Probabilistic approach to robust wearable gaze tracking. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.10.4.2
McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., Sallinen, A., Fayer, J. M., & Barraclough, R. A. (1995). A cross-cultural and multi-behavioural analysis of the relationship between nonverbal immediacy and teacher evaluation. Communication Education, 44(4), 281-291. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529509379019
McCluskey, R., Dwyer, J., & Sherrod, S. (2017). Teacher immediacy and learning mathematics: Effects on students with divergent mathematical aptitudes. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 9(4), 157-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/19477503.2016.1245047
McIntyre, N. A., & Foulsham, T. (2018). Scanpath analysis of expertise and culture in teacher gaze in real-world classrooms. Instructional Science, 46(3), 435-455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9445-x
McIntyre, N. A., Jarodzka, H., & Klassen, R. M. (2019). Capturing teacher priorities: Using real-world eye-tracking to investigate expert teacher priorities across two cultures. Learning and Instruction, 60, 215-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.003
McIntyre, N. A., Mainhard, M. T., & Klassen, R. M. (2017). Are you looking to teach? cultural, temporal and dynamic insights into expert teacher gaze. Learning and Instruction, 49, 41-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.12.005
McIntyre, N. A. (2016). Teach at First Sight: Expert Teacher Gaze Across Two Cultural Settings (Doctoral dissertation). University of York, York.
Mehrabian, A. (1970). A semantic space for nonverbal behaviour. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35(2), 248-257. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030083
Mennie, N., Hayhoe, M., & Sullivan, B. (2007). Look-ahead fixations: Anticipatory eye movements in natural tasks. Experimental Brain Research, 179(3), 427-442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0804-0
Noton, D., & Stark, L. (1971). Scanpaths in saccadic eye movements while viewing and recognizing patterns. Vision Research, 11(9), 929-IN8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(71)90213-6
Orquin, J. L., & Holmqvist, K. (2018). Threats to the validity of eye-movement research in psychology. Behaviour Research Methods, 50(4), 1645-1656. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0998-z
Polya, G. (1948). How to solve it. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press.
Pouta, M., Lehtinen, E., & Palonen, T. (2020). Student teachers’ and experienced teachers’ professional vision of students’ understanding of the rational number concept. Educational Psychology Review, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09536-y
Richmond, V. P. (1990). Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. Communication Education, 39(3), 181-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529009378801
Rothkopf, C. A., Ballard, D. H., & Hayhoe, M. M. (2007). Task and context determine where you look. Journal of vision, 7(14), 16-16. https://doi.org/10.1167/7.14.16
Schurter, W. A. (2002). Comprehension monitoring: An aid to mathematical problem solving. Journal of Developmental Education, 26(2), 22.
Shteynberg, G. (2015). Shared attention. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 579-590.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615589104
Shteynberg, G., Hirsh, J. B., Apfelbaum, E. P., Larsen, J. T., Galinsky, A. D., & Roese, N. J. (2014). Feeling more together: Group attention intensifies emotion. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 14(6), 1102-1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037697
Simon, H. A. (1992). What is an “explanation” of behaviour? Psychological Science, 3(3), 150-161.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00017.x
Stuermer, K., Seidel, T., & Holzberger, D. (2016). Intra-individual differences in developing professional vision: Preservice teachers’ changes in the course of an innovative teacher education program. Instructional Science, 44(3), 293-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9373-1
Tatler, B. W., Kirtley, C., Macdonald, R. G., Mitchell, K. M., & Savage, S. W. (2014). The active eye: Perspectives on eye movement research. In Current trends in eye tracking research (pp. 3-16). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02868-2_1
Tatler, B. W., & Land, M. F. (2016). Everyday visual attention. Handbook of Attention, 391-422.
Tomasello, M., & Carpenter, M. (2007). Shared intentionality. Developmental Science, 10(1), 121-125. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00573.x
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 28(5), 675-735. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X05000129
Toom, A. (2006). Tacit pedagogical knowing at the core of teacher's professionality.
Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6
van den Bogert, N., van Bruggen, J., Kostons, D., & Jochems, W. (2014). First steps into understanding teachers' visual perception of classroom events. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37, 208-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.09.001
van der Want, A. C., den Brok, P., Beijaard, D., Brekelmans, M., Claessens, L. C., & Pennings, H. J. (2015). Teachers' interpersonal role identity. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 59(4), 424-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2014.904428
Van Manen, M. (1991). Reflectivity and the pedagogical moment: The normativity of pedagogical thinking and acting. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 23(6), 507-536. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027910230602
Van Tartwijk, J., Brekelmans, M., Wubbels, T., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1998). Students’ perceptions of teacher interpersonal style: The front of the classroom as the teacher’s stage. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(6), 607-617. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00011-0
Witt, P. L., Wheeless, L. R., & Allen, M. (2004). A meta-analytical review of the relationship between teacher immediacy and student learning. Communication Monographs, 71(2), 184-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/036452042000228054
Wolff, C. E., Jarodzka, H., van den Bogert, N., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2016). Teacher vision: Expert and novice teachers’ perception of problematic classroom management scenes. Instructional Science, 44(3), 243-265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9367-z
Wolff, C. E., Jarodzka, H., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2017). See and tell: Differences between expert and novice teachers’ interpretations of problematic classroom management events. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 295-308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.04.015