Running head: microLESSONS IN TEACHER EDUCATION

microLESSONS in Teacher Education:

Examining Pre-Service Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs

Cher Ping, Lim*

Learning Sciences and Technologies Academic Group

Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice

National Institute of Education

Nanyang Technological University

1 Nanyang Walk

Singapore 637616

cplim@nie.edu.sg

+65 6790-3279 (Office Number)

+65 6896-8038 (Fax Number)

Bee Choo, Chan

Institute of Technical Education

Singapore

*Corresponding Author

Accepted in Computers and Education (2005)

Lim, C.P. & Chan, B.C. (In Press), ‘microLESSONS in teacher education: Examining pre-service teachers'
pedagogical beliefs’, Computers and Education.
 microLESSONS 1

microLESSONS in Teacher Education:

Examining Pre-Service Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs

Abstract

It is a challenge for teacher educators to shift pre-service teachers away from traditional

pedagogical beliefs towards constructivist ones. At the National Institute of Education in

Singapore, microLESSONS is introduced into the instructional technology course of the teacher

education program to provide pre-service teachers with opportunities to adopt constructivist

instructional approaches towards the design of multimedia learning packages. Based on a class

of pre-service teachers in the Diploma in Education program, this paper examines how

participation in the microLESSONS series changes pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs.

Although the study shows that the beliefs of pre-service teachers are resistant to change and are

unlikely to be affected by a short, one-off constructivist-based practical experience provided by

the microLESSONS series, the series may have enhanced their confidence in designing and

developing multimedia learning packages based on constructivist principles. The series has also

given them a better understanding of the diverse use of technology for enhancing teaching and

learning.
 microLESSONS 2

microLESSONS in Teacher Education:

Examining Pre-Service Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs

The study of teachers’ pedagogical beliefs is indeed critical to education. Research

studies have shown that teachers with traditional pedagogical beliefs are more likely to employ

didactic instructional practices when they become teachers (Stofflett & Stoddart, 1994;

Niederhauser, Salem, & Fields, 1999). They tend to perceive teaching as a didactic way of

disseminating information to students and learning as a passive activity, with students doing

minimal task management or holding little responsibility for their own learning (Duffy &

Jonassen, 1992). This is contrasted with constructivist pedagogical beliefs where learning is

perceived as an active construction and reconstruction of knowledge, and teaching as a process

of guiding and facilitating learners in the process of knowledge construction (Cohen, 1988).

Even when placed in a technology-rich classroom, teachers with traditional pedagogical beliefs

may continue to use technology to support didactic instruction (Becker, 1994; Dexter, Anderson,

& Becker, 1999). Ertmer, Ross and Gopalakrishnan (2002) highlight that until teachers’

pedagogical beliefs are transformed, they may use technology to disseminate information or as a

tutorial aid to reinforce basic skills rather than use it to support students’ thinking process or

engage them in solving open-ended problems.

The teacher education program, especially at the pre-service stage, plays a crucial role in

facilitating teachers’ transformation in their instructional practices by shifting their pedagogical

beliefs. In his study of pre-service teachers’ perceptions of their roles in technology-mediated

classrooms, Wang (2002) suggests that pre-service teachers who have adopted constructivist

instructional approaches may have undergone fundamental shifts in their pedagogical beliefs.

He recommends that teacher educators should adopt a constructivist approach towards their own

instructional practices in order to facilitate these shifts in beliefs. At the same time, teacher

education programs need to ensure that pre-service teachers develop adequate skills to use

technology effectively in the classroom. However, successful integration of technology into

instructional practices requires more than mastering of technical skills; teacher education
 microLESSONS 3

programs need to create a meaningful context that allows pre-service teachers to critically

examine their own pedagogical beliefs and explore the application of technology in a

constructivist learning environment.

Many strategies have been recommended as to how to shift pre-service teachers away

from traditional beliefs and guide them in adopting more constructivist instructional practices

(Applefield, Huber, & Moallem, 2001; Muijs & Reynolds, 2002). Based on a case study of a

class of 19 pre-service teachers undergoing the microLESSONS series, this paper contributes to

the wealth of strategies by examining how participation in the design of constructivist

multimedia learning packages changes pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs. The

microLESSONS series is a component in the Introduction to Instructional Technology (EED100)

course, a core module of the pre-service teacher education program in the National Institute of

Education (NIE). It is a five-lesson series (ten hours over five weeks) situated in a 12-lesson

module that engages pre-service teachers in designing and developing small units of multimedia

packages (microLESSONS) to achieve a set of learning objectives based on constructivist

principles. The experience of instructional planning and the design of microLESSONS help pre-

service teachers to develop a better understanding of constructivist principles and instructional

approaches, and also create opportunities for them to consider different ways of using technology

to support learning (Divaharan & Wong, 2003).

Teacher Education and the Pedagogical Beliefs of Pre-service Teachers

Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about teaching are well established during what Lortie

(1975) terms as the apprenticeship of observation. It occurs over the years as students where

they accumulate ideas about what it takes to be an effective teacher and how students ought to

behave. Holt-Reynolds (1992) and Applefield and colleagues (2001) suggest that pre-service

teachers who have been taught in a didactic learning environment are likely to hold on to this

traditional belief of teaching and learning and carry out their instructional practices in support of

their beliefs. Therefore, to encourage pre-service teachers to adopt constructivist instructional

 microLESSONS 4

approaches when they become teachers, there is a need to engage them in examining and

changing their traditional pedagogical beliefs.

According to Muijs and Reynolds (2002), belief systems are dynamic mental structures

that are susceptible to change by practical experiences. This implies that pre-service teachers

who have participated in constructivist learning activities or observe constructivist instructional

strategies modeled are more likely to change their traditional pedagogical beliefs and adopt

constructivist instructional strategies than those who have not experienced such strategies. If the

teacher education program merely teaches learning theories and concepts, it is unlikely to have

an effect in changing pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and instructional practices

(Kagan, 1992).

Besides experiences in constructivist learning environment, pre-service teachers should

be provided with opportunities to contrast these experiences with traditional didactic learning

activities (Stofflett & Stoddart, 1994). This allows them to critically examine or reflect on the

strengths and limitations of each approach that may restructure their existing beliefs and

encourage them to adopt new instructional practices that are consistent with their pedagogical

beliefs. In their study, Kinnucan-Welsch and Jenlink (1998) observed that pre-service teachers

experienced cognitive conflict when they discovered that the current traditional instructional

approaches they were familiar with were unsatisfactory in bringing about effective learning.

This conflict disrupts their existing belief structures and creates a need for them to replace these

structures with a new set of knowledge to regain coherence in their beliefs.

The studies above suggest that for pre-service teachers to become effective adopters of

constructivist instructional approaches in technology-mediated classrooms, the teacher education

program should plan constructivist learning activities to engage them in technology-rich

classrooms. Pre-service teachers should also be asked to observe or recall different instructional

experiences and actively reflect on their learning and critically think through the problems and

issues related to these different instructional approaches. In this way, pre-service teachers are

more likely to rethink traditional didactic approaches as they obtain first-hand knowledge of how
 microLESSONS 5

constructivist instructional approaches are applied and become aware of the learning

opportunities offered by technology. Therefore, the microLESSONS series is designed to expose

pre-service teachers to constructivist learning theories and environments and make them reflect

upon their prior experiences as students; at the same time, engage them in designing multimedia

learning packages based on constructivist instructional approaches.

The microLESSONS Series: A Constructivist Learning Experience

According to Jonassen (1998), a constructivist learning experience is characterized by the

following:
 engagement in an authentic task that encourages knowledge construction;

 opportunities for collaboration;

 tutors who serve as guides and facilitators; and

 a series of scaffolding activities or tools to guide learning or to help learners perform

just beyond the limits of their ability;

These characteristics are inherent in the design of the microLESSONS series. Pre-service

teachers are first asked to reflect upon the use of technology in the classroom during their eight-

week practicum in schools and their experiences as students in schools and tertiary education

institutions. For the majority of them, their learning and teaching experiences with technology

are grounded in traditional didactic approaches. The pre-service teachers are then asked to

identify the learning opportunities provided by technology, and the limitations associated with

traditional approaches.

After addressing these limitations, pre-service teachers are provided with the

opportunities to explore exemplary microLESSONS that have been developed by past cohorts of

pre-service teachers. These microLESSONS focus on one to two learning objectives each and

have been developed with Powerpoint that is set at kiosk mode (that is, users are supposed to

click on the navigation buttons to move on from one slide to another). More details of the

microLESSONS can be found at http://www.microlessons.com.

 microLESSONS 6

The exploration of the microLESSONS is then followed by a class discussion on the

constructivist approaches adopted and the problems of implementing these lessons in schools.

After teasing out the constructivist instructional principles, pre-service work in pairs to plan their

multimedia learning packages. They are guided by various planning and design templates

downloadable from the microLESSONS website and supported by face-to-face and online

private consultation with the tutor. This is further supported by peer-critique that is carried out

twice in the series where pre-service teachers provide feedback and suggestions for one another’s

learning package. Therefore, the microLESSON series provides a constructivist learning

experience for pre-service teachers by engaging them in an authentic task of designing a

multimedia learning package.

Engaging in an Authentic Task

Grabinger (1996) advocates that there should be less emphasis on direct teaching of

specific skills and more emphasis on learning within a real-life environment by engaging

learners in an authentic task; where an authentic learning task as one that is personally

meaningful to the learner, engaging and relevant in a way that assists them in their own meaning-

making (Jonassen, 1998). Therefore, pre-service teachers need to learn how to design authentic

tasks, situated within realistic context to help students make connections with their past

experiences. The microLESSONS series prepares pre-service teachers for this role by

immersing them in an authentic task of instructional planning, where they design a multimedia

learning package, employing constructivist approaches such as case-based, simulation-based and

problem-based learning.

Opportunities for Collaboration

Throughout the five weeks of the microLESSONS series, the pre-service teachers work

in groups of twos or threes on their microLESSONS. As they co-construct their knowledge of

constructivist instructional approaches and negotiate plans and ideas, they are encouraged to
 microLESSONS 7

reflect on their own thinking processes and at the same time, scaffold each others’ learning.

When learners are given the opportunities for collaboration, they are more likely to compare

their thinking processes to that of their peers and ask relevant questions to revise their

understanding of a concept or theory (Jonassen, 1996). This will then enhance their cognitive

development based on the idea of the zone of proximal development (ZPD). ZPD refers to the

distance between the capabilities of the student when he or she is working independently and

when he or she is provided with assistance from experts or more capable peers (Vygotsy, 1978).

Tutor as Guide and Facilitator

It is important that the tutor in the microLESSONS series facilitates and guides pre-

service teachers’ instructional planning activity until they reach a state of competence where they

are able to develop their own strategies to complete the task independently. Tutor facilitation

includes modeling, coaching, and fading (Johnson, 1992). First, the tutor models expert behavior

by demonstrating the design of the microLESSONS, how they are created using Powerpoint, and

why they are being developed in a particular way. Coaching continues when the tutor uses

question prompts, hints and corrective feedback to guide and expand pre-service teachers’

thinking during the microLESSONS design and development processes. As pre-service teachers

become more adept in developing the microLESSONS, the tutor gradually reduces the support

provided and gives more authority to them by "fading" into the background. In this learning

environment, as pre-service teachers observe how the tutor facilitates the learning process, they

may develop a better understanding of the role of the teacher in a constructivist environment.

Scaffolding Tools

Besides the scaffolding provided by the tutor, scaffolding tools are used to support pre-

service teachers during the development of microLESSONS. These tools include the content

planning guide, ready-made presentation templates, and evaluation rubrics.

 microLESSONS 8

Content Planning Guide

The content planning guide that is used in the microLESSONS series provides pre-

service teachers with a framework for developing a personal lesson planning style (Clark &

Peterson, 1986). It is used to help pre-service teachers to systematically identify suitable

approaches and design a constructivist instructional plan towards the design of the

microLESSONS. The categories in the guide include determining the characteristics of learners,

identifying the problem area in the subject, stating the lesson objectives to be achieved, and

designing instructional activities (e.g. using scenarios or case-studies; identifying suitable

learning approaches).

Ready-made Presentation Templates

Technology-based “templates” allow teachers to harness the potential of technology in

schools without being bogged down by its complexities (Smolin & Lawless, 2003). Templates

are easily customizable tools that allow teachers to focus on the curriculum and instructional

planning rather than on learning programming skills. The development of microLESSONS is

made easy with ready-made presentation templates that pre-service teachers can customize for

their own multimedia packages. These templates have various design interfaces consisting of

functional navigation buttons that can be customized for different navigational paths. These

templates are downloadable from the microLESSONS website.

Evaluation Rubrics

Goodrich (2000) advocates the use of rubrics to support and evaluate learner learning. In

his studies on the effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write, he observes that the use of

rubrics has the potential of increasing learners' knowledge of the criteria for writing as

communicated by the rubrics. He claims that rubrics support learning and skill development by

providing feedback to learners and scaffolding their writing within their ZPD. The evaluation

rubrics provided in the microLESSONS series allow pre-service teachers to conduct formative
 microLESSONS 9

and summative self- and peer-evaluation of their multimedia learning packages. The rubrics

facilitate self-regulatory strategies (e.g. self-monitoring and self-evaluation) as pre-service

teachers use them to analyze and critique their own or other teams’ microLESSONS. They may

then revise their microLESSONS based on the evaluation.

Besides providing pre-service teachers with a constructivist learning experience, the

entire process of designing and developing microLESSONS also allows pre-service teachers to

exercise a diverse range of skills that include instructional planning, project management,

research, organization, presentation, and self-regulation. Based on the purpose of the study and

the write-up of the microLESSONS series, the main research question is: “How has participation

in the microLESSONS series changed pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs?”

Research Context and Methods

A case study approach was adopted to examine pre-service teachers’ changes of

pedagogical beliefs from participation in the microLESSONS series. Both quantitative and

qualitative methods were employed. The quantitative method, using pre- and post-

microLESSONS questionnaire surveys, was employed to examine the pedagogical beliefs of

teachers before and after the microLESSONS series, and also to select a sample of three pre-

service teachers for the interviews. Qualitative methods were employed to validate and provide

more depth to the quantitative data. Analyses of the pre-service teachers’ assignments and the

interviews aimed to obtain rich descriptions of the pre-service teachers’ experiences in the

microLESSONS series and gain insights into their pedagogical beliefs.

Participants and Setting of the microLESSONS Series

The participants were a typical class of pre-service teachers (N=19) pursuing a two-year

course in Diploma in Education (DipEd) at NIE. They were first year pre-service teachers who

were enrolled in the Introduction to Instructional Technology course (EE100), a core module in

Education Studies, for 12 weeks. The participants were either graduates from the polytechnics or
 microLESSONS 10

junior colleges. While 75% of them were fresh graduates, the rest were seeking a second career

in teaching. The profile of the participants matched that of the population of pre-service teachers

pursing the DipEd in NIE. The first author was the tutor of the class.

Prior to the course, the pre-service teachers were assigned to primary schools for their

eight-week school-based teaching attachment where they observed and practiced teacher’s role

in real classroom settings, under the guidance of their cooperating teachers. They were required

to plan and deliver at least one lesson that incorporated the use of technology. At the end of the

attachment, they had to submit their lesson plans together with their reflection notes on the

lessons implemented, as the first assignment of the course. The microLESSONS series was part

of the EED100 course, taking up the last five weeks of the course.

Questionnaire Survey

A pre- and post-microLESSONS survey with a five-point Likert-like scale was used to

examine how the microLESSONS series might have affected pre-service teachers’ preference of

instructional style and their pedagogical beliefs. The questionnaire consisted of three parts: Part

1 - Demographic data, Part 2 - Preference of instructional style, and Part 3 - Pedagogical beliefs.

To ensure the validity and reliability of the instrument, seven pre-service teachers from another

EED100 class participated in the pilot study. It enabled the authors to obtain feedback about the

clarity of the instructions and questions to avoid misinterpretations; revision and fine-tuning

were then made to the questionnaire.

The questionnaire was adapted from an existing validated questionnaire by Becker and

Anderson (1998) on teachers’ beliefs about teaching, learning and technology. Part J1 and Part

J3 of the validated survey that examined teaching philosophy were modified and incorporated

into Part 2 and Part 3 of the microLESSONS questionnaire survey. For instance, Part J1 used

vignettes, describing contrasting instructional styles of two hypothetical teachers, to measure

teaching philosophy. The names of teachers and vignettes were modified to give it a more local

flavor.
 microLESSONS 11

To establish a profile of the pre-service teachers, the first part of the questionnaire was to

gather their demographic data such as age, gender, education background and teaching

experience. Part 2 attempted to examine changes in pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs

indirectly by comparing their preferences of instructional style before and after participation in

the microLESSONS series. This was done by presenting two vignettes describing how two

fictional teachers (Ms. Lee and Mr. Nassim) taught their classes using contrasting instructional

styles. One described a traditional approach to instruction with emphasis on direct instruction

where the teacher (Ms. Lee) was a sage-on-stage and a knowledge provider. The other described

a constructivist approach to instruction where the teacher (Mr. Nassim) facilitated discussion and

project work. The question about which best represented the instructional style they preferred

was asked. The respondents were presented with five alternatives ranging from Definitely Ms.

Lee to Definitely Mr. Nassim. For coding purposes, they were assigned a value from 1 to 4, with

1 representing Definitely Ms. Lee and 4 representing Definitely Mr. Nassim. As there was

nobody who responded to Can’t Decide, this alternative was not coded.

The final part of the questionnaire examined the pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs

pertaining to their beliefs about the role of teachers (items 7, 8, 9, 11, 16; reversed items 10, 12,

13, 14, 15), the role of students (items 2, 3, 5; reversed items 1, 4, 6) and the role of technology

(items 17, 19, 21, 24; reversed items 18, 20, 22, 23). Reversed items consisted of belief

statements that were based on a traditional pedagogical perspective. For example, item 13

represented the traditional belief of teachers as knowledge dispensers; whereas, item 9

represented the constructivist belief of teachers as facilitators and guides. A change in

pedagogical orientation before and after the microLESSONS series might suggest that the series

had changed their pedagogical beliefs.

Artifacts: Assignments of Pre-service Teachers

Actual instructional practices of the pre-service teachers could not be observed as their

school-based practicum was before the course began. However, one could infer their
 microLESSONS 12

pedagogical orientation from the analysis of the artifacts, such as their lesson plans and their

reflection notes that were submitted as the first assignment of the EED100 course. These

documents were analyzed to determine their pedagogical orientation before they started the

microLESSONS series in March 2003. As teachers’ pedagogical beliefs have considerable

influence on their instructional practice, a lesson plan or reflection that showed evidences of the

use of constructivist instructional approaches might suggest that the constructivist belief of the

pre-service teacher. Nine microLESSONS projects were collected (8 pairs and a group of three)

at the end of the microLESSONS series.

Both the lesson plans (with reflection notes) and microLESSONS were analyzed based

on the following themes - the role of teacher, the role of students and the role of technology in

the lessons. The analyses were then compared to determine the pedagogical beliefs of the pre-

service teachers after participation in the microLESSONS.

Interviews with Pre-service Teachers

Interviews were designed to provide insights into the pre-service teachers’ experiences

and gather evidence of their changing pedagogical beliefs after participation in the

microLESSONS series. The findings from the survey were used to identify interviewees based

on criterion sampling. Pre-service teachers that demonstrated the largest increase, smallest

change and largest decrease in belief scores were selected for the interview. The initial plan was

to select a pre-service teacher with no change in belief scores; but that was non-existent and

instead, the pre-service teacher with the smallest change in belief scores was chosen. The variety

of the sample facilitated the authors’ identification of the issues that promoted or inhibited belief

changes, or unfold any unforeseen issues that might be important for the study.

A total of three 45-minute interviews were conducted by the second author, each lasted

about forty minutes. The interviews were conducted two weeks after the microLESSONS series.

An interview guide was used and it consisted of open-ended questions such as the pre-service

teachers’ experiences in delivering the technology-mediated lesson (their first assignment) and
 microLESSONS 13

their views on their instructional approaches during the school-based practicum, their

experiences during the design of microLESSONS, and the change in their pedagogical beliefs.

All interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed.

Data Analysis

The data collected from the various methods went through a few levels of analyses. First,

preliminary ideas or themes were identified during data collection to refine and inform the

research design and methods. For instance, the researchers noted that a few teams were arguing

over some issues during a discussion in one of the sessions, and they used these observed actions

to ask the interviewees about working in teams. Next, the researcher examined the data closely

and reduced data by clustering similar topics together. For example, their perceptions of the

limitations of the school environment for constructivist instructional approaches were classified

under different topics and placed under the category of “perceptions of the constraints imposed

by the school environment”. The list of topics was re-examined to identify the emergence of any

new categories. Related topics were further regrouped to reduce the list of categories.

Eventually, data belonging to each category was analyzed.

Findings

Survey Findings: Pedagogical Beliefs Before and After the microLESSONS Series

All 19 pre-service teachers participated in the pre- and post-questionnaire surveys. There

was only one male pre-service teacher in the class. About three-quarter of them were between

the age of 20 to 25, and the majority (89%) had short periods of teaching experience in primary

schools as a relief teacher or a contract teacher prior to enrolment in the pre-service teacher

education program. Before the microLESSONS series, 12 pre-service teachers felt more

comfortable, as a teacher, with constructivist instructional styles (Definitely Mr Nassim and

Tends towards Mr Nassim). After microLESSONS, the number of pre-service teachers who

preferred constructivist instructional style increased by 1.

 microLESSONS 14

To examine changes of the pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs after the

microLESSONS series, their belief score before and after participation in the series were

compared. Since the score for each question was in the range of 1 to 5, a mean score of 3 was

arbitrarily set as neutral. A mean score of less than 3 suggested traditional orientation while a

mean score of more than 3 suggested constructivist orientation. Overall, the results indicated that

the pre-service teachers had constructivist beliefs about the role of teachers, students and

technology before and after participation in the microLESSONS series. Table 1 compares the

pre-service teachers’ pedagogical belief score pre- and post-microLESSONS series.

- Insert Table 1 here -

Based on the t-test of the belief scores before and after the microLESSONS series, t(18) =

0.71, p>0.05 (not significant), participation in the microLESSONS series had not significantly

changed pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs. However, due to the small sample size and

non-randomized sampling method, it was inappropriate to generalize the findings. Moreover,

beliefs might be resilient to changes; the pre-service teachers were only exposed to practical

experience in a constructivist environment for five weeks. The duration might be too short to

note any significant change in pedagogical beliefs. To enhance the validity and reliability of the

study, the researchers drew upon other sources of data that included artifacts and interviews.

Analysis of Artifacts: Technology-Mediated Lesson Plans versus microLESSONS

Analyses of the artifacts allowed the authors to examine the shift in the instructional

approaches employed by the pre-service teachers. All 19 lesson plans (individual assignment)

were analyzed to be didactic in their instructional approaches with emphasis on the role of

teachers as information providers. A typical lesson plan started with the pre-service teachers

recapitulating the previous lesson, and proceeding to provide information and instructions for

students to carry out tasks that test their basic understanding of facts and procedures. The lesson

would be concluded with the pre-service teachers summarizing the main points.

In their reflection notes, about two-third of the pre-service teachers highlighted the
 microLESSONS 15

importance of student management in the computer laboratory, and the need for students to

remain quiet and pay attention to instructions before they were allowed to carry out the activities.

Four pre-service teachers documented the need to bar students from using the computers if they

failed to pay attention to instructions. From the lesson plans and reflection notes, it appeared that

the pre-service teachers were traditional in their instructional practices, thus suggesting that their

pedagogical beliefs were also traditional in orientation. They generally perceived their role to be

that of knowledge dispensers, and the students’ role to be knowledge absorbers and reproducers.

They also seemed to perceive the use of technology as remediation tools where students could

practice what they had learnt.

Nine microLESSONS projects (group assignment) were collected and analyzed. All of

them adopted constructivist instructional approaches that focused on contextualized learning

mediated by technological tools. The activities generally required students to work

collaboratively on authentic tasks, situated in certain scenarios. For instance, one of the projects

engaged students in finding the solution to water pollution in Singapore. There were scaffolding

tools such as worksheets that consisted of guiding questions, templates and some web links to

assist students in completing the task. The students were eventually required to present their

findings on Powerpoint slides.

Comparing the technology-mediated lesson plans and the microLESSONS, there was a

change in teachers’ role from a knowledge dispenser to a facilitator, students’ role from

knowledge receiver to knowledge constructor, and technology’s role from tools to assist students

in receiving knowledge to tools that facilitated knowledge construction. Although the survey

findings did not indicate significant changes in pre-service teachers’ preference of instructional

styles and their pedagogical beliefs, an examination of the artifacts suggested a change from a

more traditional set of pedagogical beliefs to constructivist ones. However, one might question

if the change was due to the need to meet the tutor’s expectations and fulfill the assignment

requirements rather than due to a change in pedagogical beliefs. Therefore, interviews were

conducted to validate these data and to gain insights into pre-service teachers’ pedagogical
 microLESSONS 16

beliefs and their experiences in the microLESSONS series.

The Interviews: An In-depth Examination of Pedagogical Beliefs

All the interviewees were female, aged between early to late twenties. To ensure

confidentiality, pseudonyms were used. Each interview was reported based on the following

categories: pre-service teachers’ experiences as students in schools and as teachers during the

teaching practicum; their perceptions of the experiences in the microLESSONS series; and

changes that occurred in their pedagogical beliefs.

Denise

Denise, in her late-twenties, was a diploma holder and resigned from her human resource

officer job to be a teacher. She demonstrated the smallest change (decrease) in her belief scores

in the pre- and post-microLESSONS questionnaire. Although her post-microLESSONS survey

score was lower than the pre-microLESSONS survey, her preference for instructional style and

pedagogical beliefs remained constructivist after the microLESSONS series. During the

interview, she stated that the typical lessons she had encountered as a student in her school days

were traditional in their orientation and she disliked the experiences, describing it as “very

boring”. She commented that learning in such an environment was “superficial” as all she had to

do was “just sit and listen”.

Denise’s cooperating teacher (CT) during her first teaching practicum was a young

teacher with two years of teaching experience and had no experience conducting technology-

mediated lessons. Denise described her CT’s instructional style as traditional as she was “talking

most of the time”. She recounted one incident:

The CT taught in a traditional way like how to spell a word. But that’s all the

students would know…it would be more interesting if they were taught how to

form a sentence with this word, or how to use this word in the composition

context.
 microLESSONS 17

As a result, she remarked that the lessons were “very boring and didn’t enhance learning to a

great extent” as it “didn’t appeal to students’ interest”.

Despite commenting that traditional instructional approaches were boring, Denise

adopted a similar approach in her technology-mediated lesson. She began by teaching the class

about the water cycle before directing them to the Brainpop website (www.brainpop.com) to

watch a video of the same concepts. She then went through a series of quiz questions in the

worksheet and got the students to raise their hands to answer “Yes” or “No” to the questions.

She reflected that such an environment could not actively involve every student in the learning

process and hence resulted in some students disrupting the lesson. She expressed dissatisfaction

with the traditional instructional approach and lamented that she did not know how to use other

approaches to teach.

Denise found the idea of microLESSONS “an eye-opener”. She felt that the series had

exposed her to “new ways of teaching using technology which is fun and interesting for the

kids”. However, she confessed that it was “very time-consuming for teachers to prepare” the

microLESSONS. Denise’s microLESSONS project was on science pollution, targeted at

Primary Four students. Her initial design required students to investigate the causes of water

pollution by “surfing the Internet”. But her partner reminded her that scaffolding was needed to

guide the students’ investigation. Changes to the design of the microLESSONS included adding

three web links to focus students’ investigation and probing questions from the worksheets to

guide the students in completing the task (see Figure 1). The task was also redesigned to situate

it within a context by letting the students take on the role of a researcher to investigate the causes

of environmental pollution. The students were then required to generate a report of their findings

to the Ministry of Environment.

- Insert Figure 1 here -

Denise confessed that her microLESSONS was designed with a constructivist approach

because of the need to meet the criteria set by the tutor. The lectures and the examples that the

tutor presented to the class confirmed the type of design that was expected. For instance, a
 microLESSONS 18

scenario was added because the examples shared by the tutor had scenarios in them. She only

realized later that scenarios played an important role in learning as they helped to “make the

lesson real and engaging” so that students could be “more motivated to carry out the activity”.

The opportunity to work with peers helped Denise to understand the importance of

collaboration among peers and tutors. She observed that group work “ensures that members are

actively sharing and constantly generating ideas with or without the tutor”. The active

engagement in the design of the microLESSONS had helped her to learn and apply constructivist

strategies. The positive constructivist experiences that Denise had in the microLESSONS series

reinforced her beliefs about the learning benefits of constructivist practices. However, she

commented that she might not adopt much constructivist practices as a teacher; she felt that the

rigid school system (examination-oriented, tight schedule to complete syllabus) might not

encourage her to be a constructivist teacher all the time.

Penny

Penny was in her mid-twenties and was a marketing officer before opting for teaching as

a career. Penny’s belief score increased by the most after the microLESSONS series. The main

increase was her belief score for the role of technology. She explained that she was made aware

of how technology could be used to engage students in learning. It was “an eye-opener” for her

to see how technology could be used as a tool to create scenarios, tasks to engage learners in

exploration and construction of knowledge, and scaffolds to guide them in the learning process.

Although Penny displayed a shift towards constructivist beliefs, she felt that there was still a

need to assign students worksheets to prepare them for the examinations. Like Denise, Penny’s

prior instructional experiences as a student were largely traditional in their orientation. Penny

found traditional instruction “very boring” and she recounted her experience in a typical

classroom in her secondary school: “The math teacher simply lectured and lectured and we had

to sit there like goldfish and swallow everything, and that turned me off completely. I hope not

to do the same thing with my children”.

 microLESSONS 19

Penny was attached to a 40-year-old CT (with twenty years of experience) during her

practicum. She took notes during her CT’s lessons, reflected on them and thought of ways to

improve the lessons. She described her CT’s teaching approach as constructivist because the CT

“always tried to involve the children” and “encouraged students to find out things on their own”.

Penny claimed that her observation of the “constructivist lessons” changed her beliefs about how

students learnt and how teachers should teach.

Penny felt that the microLESSONS had “opened up possibilities of what she could do”

and “introduced new ideas”. Penny’s microLESSONS consisted of a fictitious story of an

endangered creature that could not escape from the attention of its predator because of its

brightly colored body (see Figure 2). The activity was designed to allow students to create a

camouflage for the endangered creature in the form of an art piece. She explained that her

microLESSONS would help to stimulate creativity as there was “no right or wrong solution and

the students can explore whatever possibilities they could think of”. At the same time, she

provided two web links and two video clips as additional information for students to refer to (see

Figure 2). Questions in the worksheet scaffolded the students in the completion of the task.

- Insert Figure 2 here -

The use of scenario, task and scaffolding tools in her microLESSONS design were

influenced by the constructivist principles and examples shared by the tutor who “provided an

idea of what a constructivist lesson is like”. Penny felt that consultation with the tutor was

important as it reassured her that her microLESSONS design was appropriate. The tutor also

gave her some suggestions for the design considerations. Besides designing microLESSONS to

fulfill the criteria of the assignment, Penny believed that the microLESSONS would help

students to learn better as it “gives the opportunity for the students to explore things on their own

before they come out with something concrete”. Penny found that the microLESSONS series

have helped her to be more confident in planning a constructivist lesson as it has given her

hands-on experience in designing it. She felt that working with a partner helped to “bring in

ideas and different viewpoints” to the project.

 microLESSONS 20

Anna

Anna, in her early-twenties, was a fresh senior high school graduate and had completed

one year of contract teaching in a primary school. She demonstrated the largest decrease in her

belief scores with a shift of preference for constructivist instructional styles towards traditional

ones. Like most of the pre-service teachers, her experiences as a student had been predominately

direct instruction, with an emphasis on facts, and “right or wrong answers”. She commented that

the lessons conducted by her CT were “very structured” and “controlling”. Her CT would

usually lecture or get her students to read some passages which were followed up with individual

worksheets.

Anna used a Primary Four Mathematics CD-ROM for the lesson plan in her first

assignment, as advised by her CT. The CT felt that it was safer to use the CD-ROM as the

students have already used it before. The CD-ROM consisted mainly of questions that tested

recall of facts. Anna designed a worksheet that consisted of questions to test students’

understanding of the content of the CD-ROM. Anna felt confident about conducting such

lessons as it was “pretty straight forward”. She acknowledged that the traditional instructional

style that she adopted for her teaching practice was very much influenced by what she observed

of her CT’s lesson.

On the students’ role, Anna explained that “students should listen and absorb knowledge,

seek clarification when necessary and practice the exercises in the workbook to demonstrate

learning”. She perceived knowledge as received rather than created. On the teacher’s role, she

believed that teachers should impart knowledge to students and stressed teachers’ role in

directing students to the correct answers so that they could perform well in examination. Anna’s

perception of students and teachers’ role suggested that she was grounded in traditional

pedagogical beliefs.

Anna felt that the microLESSONS series exposed her to a way of teaching that was

different from the normal classroom lesson. However she dismissed the microLESSONS series
 microLESSONS 21

as “just some general knowledge that teaches you another way of presenting [information] which

is more interesting and fun…it is fun because it involved students in exploration and is different

from the norm”. Anna designed her microLESSONS to engage students in exploring seven parts

of the world as part of a Primary Four English lesson. Web links and postcard template (see

Figure 3) were provided so that they students will not “stray off” or “search for the wrong thing”.

Anna confessed that her design was influenced by the examples shared by the tutor as “it was

obvious that the tutor wanted this similar pattern. We thought that we should imitate so that we

wouldn’t go wrong”. She added that the consultation with the tutor confirmed that the project

was “enough” for her to “get a good grade”.

- Insert Figure 3 -

Anna felt that technology was not essential to teaching and learning and believed that a

whiteboard would serve the purpose equally well. The design of her own microLESSONS made

Anna realized that constructivist instruction has many disadvantages. She explained that it was

“difficult to be constructivist all the time” as the teacher would need to “come out with new ideas

constantly”. Besides, she believed that the rigid school system discouraged constructivist

practice in schools due to the tight time schedule to complete the curriculum. In fact, Anna’s

preference of instructional approach shifted towards traditional ones after the microLESSONS

series:

Initially, I thought constructivist is good because children can explore freely. But

after microLESSONS, I feel that if I were to follow the constructivist method and

ask the students to explore about Egypt, and if I were to do that as a student, I

would wander off, I would not understand what the teacher wants…besides, the

constructivist classroom would be too messy and they may not know how to

control themselves as they might be discussing loudly and running around. They

might get lost and search for things that are irrelevant. I still prefer the students to

sit down and listen and ask questions only when they have problems.

Her comment suggests that she is worried about task disorientation among the students and
 microLESSONS 22

classroom management problems.

Discussion

Most of the pre-service teachers in the study attended schools where direct instruction

and examination dominated the learning environment; where the emphasis was on the efficient

transfer of knowledge to students and the replication of basic skills. As a result of these

experiences, some of the pre-service teachers held traditional pedagogical beliefs that teaching

was a didactic way of transmitting knowledge and learning was a passive activity. They might

then employ traditional instructional approaches as teachers. The study has attempted to

examine the changes of teachers’ pedagogical beliefs in the microLESSONS series but the

findings have generated more issues and questions than the study has been set up to address.

They are categorized into themes and presented as the following statements:

 Exposure to constructivist theories alone is insufficient to change teachers’

pedagogical beliefs;

 Exposure to a one-off constructivist learning experience, such as the microLESSONS

series, is unlikely to bring about significant changes in teachers’ pedagogical beliefs;

 Dissatisfaction with traditional instructional approaches may act as a catalyst for

changes of teachers’ pedagogical beliefs towards constructivist ones;

 Perceived barriers to implement constructivist instruction may prevent the adoption of

constructivist pedagogical approaches; and

 Designing multimedia learning package in a constructivist learning environment

provides pre-service teachers with the opportunities to identify the potentials and

limitations of technology for teaching and learning.

Constructivist Theories and Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs

Exposing pre-service teachers to constructivist theories alone is not sufficient to change

their beliefs. Although the pre-service teachers in the study had been exposed to theoretical
 microLESSONS 23

lessons on constructivism prior to the teaching practicum, the majority of them still employed

traditional approaches for their technology-mediated lessons. Denise and Penny acknowledged

that these theoretical lessons had offered them with ideas for instructional approaches that were

different from traditional ones, and help them to understand that students learned best when they

were given the opportunity to construct knowledge. However, both of them attributed their

failure to employ constructivist instructional approach to their inability to apply constructivist

theory to practice and their lack of confidence in managing a constructivist classroom. This

finding is consistent with Calderhead and Robson’s (1991) and Kagan’s (1992) studies that

teaching theories and concepts alone will not change pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs

and instructional practices.

To change pre-service teachers' beliefs, appropriate linkages need to be made between

theory and practice (Kagan, 1992). The microLESSONS series may bridge the gap between

theory and practice by providing authentic contexts for pre-service teachers to explore

constructivist instructional approaches. In this study, the pre-service teachers were engaged in

designing multimedia learning packages where they explored and applied constructivist

strategies. This bridge might have helped some of the pre-service teachers to become more

confident in designing constructivist technology-mediated lessons.

One-off Constructivist Learning Experience and Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs

Although opportunities were provided in the microLESSONS series for pre-service

teachers to apply constructivist theories, the findings from the surveys, interviews and artifacts

have not shown significant changes in their pedagogical beliefs. Some of the pre-service

teachers in the study still held on to traditional beliefs such as perceiving the teachers’ role as

guiding students to arrive at the answers they expected, and the students’ role as regurgitating

information and performing well in examination. According to Niederhauser and his colleagues

(1999), changing pre-service teachers’ pedagogical beliefs is a long and difficult process that

requires more than hands-on experiences with constructivist instructional approaches. Hence,
 microLESSONS 24

exposure to a one-off constructivist learning experience, such as the microLESSON series, is not

likely to bring about significant changes in teachers’ pedagogical beliefs. Instead, Wang (2002)

recommends that pre-service teachers be exposed to constructivist instructional approaches

throughout the teacher education program.

Besides the microLESSONS series being a short, one-off constructivist learning

experience, there may be other interrelated reasons for the lack of significance changes in

pedagogical beliefs. Pre-service teachers were not given the opportunities to try out their

microLESSONS with real students in the classroom. According to Kagan (1992), extensive field

experiences are essential for pre-service teachers to test their pedagogical beliefs and reflect

upon their successful and unsuccessful instructional practices. Without such experiences, the

development of the microLESSONS projects may be perceived as just another assignment - a

point that was highlighted during the interviews.

Dissatisfaction with Traditional Approaches as Catalyst for Change in Beliefs

Pre-service teachers who reported a change in pedagogical orientation, such as Penny in

the study, had expressed dissatisfaction with the traditional instructional approach. The

dissatisfaction arose either from their experiences as students or from their observations of

students’ in traditional instructional settings. This suggests that pre-service teachers who are

dissatisfied with traditional instructional approach are more likely to be receptive to new

instructional approaches that may help to enhance teaching and learning. This finding is

consistent with the findings of Kinnucan-Welsch and Jenlink (1998) who suggest that

dissatisfaction with existing beliefs must occur and alternatives must be intelligible and appear

plausible before individuals restructure or replace their beliefs.

Anna, however, reported a change in pedagogical beliefs from constructivist to

traditional. Despite her initial dissatisfaction with the traditional teaching approach that

prompted her to consider constructivist approach, her experiences with designing the

microLESSONS made her realized that lessons adopting such approaches might be time-
 microLESSONS 25

consuming to prepare. The findings suggest that although dissatisfaction with traditional

instructional approaches may act as a catalyst for changes of teachers’ pedagogical beliefs

towards constructivist ones, the reverse may also be true, especially when teachers find

constructivist approaches impractical in real classroom situations.

Perceived Barriers and Adoption of Constructivist Pedagogical Approaches

The pre-service teachers in the study perceived some barriers that would hinder them

from adopting constructivist instructional practices in schools. These barriers include the lack of

a conducive school environment, a lack of time, and a lack of readiness of students for

constructivist instructional approaches. Although the pre-service teachers might or might not

experience these barriers in their past or future teaching activities, their perceived barriers might

prevent them from adopting constructivist instructional approaches.

Lack of a Conducive School Environment

The pre-service teachers interviewed emphasized the need for a conducive school

environment for the sustainability of constructivist instructional practices. They perceived that

certain aspects of the current education system, such as the emphasis on examination and

crammed curriculum, were not conducive for constructivist instructional practices. They

explained that in the current system, students’ success was measured in terms of the attainment

of performance rather than the attainment of learning. This resulted in an over-emphasis on

examination score and encouraged teachers to breed “muggers” (in colloquial terms, muggers

refer to students who engaged in rote memorization rather than in critical thinking). As a result,

one of the pre-service teachers admitted that she might resort to traditional practices even though

they might be incongruent with her constructivist pedagogical beliefs.

Lack of Time

The pre-service teachers in the study perceived that teachers have limited instructional
 microLESSONS 26

time and hence, time was always a concern. Through the experiences of developing the

microLESSONS, the pre-service teachers found that a lot of time was required to design

constructivist activities. They also believed that it was “time-consuming” to implement

constructivist lessons, as students would need time to explore, make mistakes and formulate

solutions. Therefore, some of them concluded that constructivist instruction would take up too

much time and therefore impractical, considering the time pressure that teachers were under.

Lack of Readiness of Students for Constructivist Instructional Approaches

Most pre-service teachers felt that students were not ready for constructivist instruction as

they were already “molded” to learn in a traditional learning environment. They believed that

students in general were not self-directed and were used to being “spoon-fed”. Because of the

perception of students as passive and lack self-regulation, they felt that students were not ready

for constructivist learning. Moreover, they commented that a constructivist classroom might be

“too chaotic” or difficult to handle. Unless their perceived barriers are addressed, pre-service

teachers may end up adopting traditional instructional approaches over constructivist ones.

In view of the many concerns that pre-service teachers have about the implementation of

constructivist practices, the teacher education program should consider providing pre-service

teachers with opportunities to conduct constructivist lessons in a real classroom environment,

using the microLESSONS they have created. These opportunities may help to raise their

confidence about classroom management and allow them to determine if the assumptions they

have made about constructivist teaching and learning are validated and reflect upon these lessons

to revise and refine their pedagogical beliefs.

Identifying Potentials of Technology for Teaching and Learning

Even though the pre-service teachers were subjected to the same experience in the

microLESSONS series, not all shared the same perception of the role of technology. In general,

pre-service teachers agreed that they had gained a better understanding of the diverse use of
 microLESSONS 27

technology for enhancing teaching and learning. That is, the design of the multimedia learning

package had provided them with the opportunities to identify the potentials of technology. Some

of the potentials identified were technology as an information tool, constructivist tool, and

situating/contextualizing tool. Only the pre-service teachers with a constructivist pedagogical

orientation perceived technology as a constructivist tool.

All the pre-service teachers identified technology as an information tool that could

provide a diverse source of easily accessible information for students to explore issues of interest

to them. With technology, they believed that students no longer relied solely on the information

from the textbooks and teacher, but could consider alternative sources of information from

different perspectives. They believed that technology as an information tool catered better to

students as information might be presented in varied ways using different multimedia elements.

All pre-service teachers also identified technology as a situating tool that provided students with

a context to the concepts or theories under study. Most of them felt that the multimedia elements

provided the opportunities for authenticity in instruction to simulate real-world problems.

Pre-service teachers with constructivist orientation explained that technology could be

used as a constructivist tool. For instance, Penny explained that students could search the World

Wide Web (WWW) for information, enter and analyze data mediated by a spreadsheet

application, and represent the relationships and ideas symbolically or visually. These ideas

might then be presented to the class or community, mediated by a presentation tool.

Conclusion and Future Research

The pedagogical beliefs of pre-service teachers are well established by the time they enter

the teacher education program. These beliefs are resistant to change and are unlikely to be

affected by a short, one-off constructivist-based practical experience provided by the

microLESSONS series. Factors that contributed to this could be due to the short period of

intervention, the pre-service teachers’ failure to see a need for pedagogical and instructional

change, the pre-service teachers’ lack of experience in implementing constructivist practices and
 microLESSONS 28

their lack of understanding of the sociocultural climate in schools. The findings provide teacher

educators with some guidelines to modify existing curricula and determine future direction of the

teacher education program. To bring about a change in the pedagogical beliefs of pre-service

teachers, the teacher education program may consider:

 The provision of constructivist learning and teaching experiences in the program;

 The provision of opportunities to experience and compare alternative approaches;

 The provision of field experience to implement constructivist practices and multimedia

packages; and

It is often a difficult task for the teacher education program to help pre-service teachers

change their underlying beliefs about teaching and learning as they “are often firmly entrenched

and resistant to change” (Niederhauser et. al, 1999, p.57). Even if the beliefs of pre-service

teachers have been successfully shifted towards a constructivist one, the question is whether it

will necessarily bring about transformation in the instructional practices. When they enter the

real world as classroom teachers, the school culture or/and the pressures of being a practicing

teacher may nurture or destroy their constructivist pedagogical beliefs.

A supportive environment is indeed an important factor in fostering constructivist

practices amongst teachers. In such an environment, teachers’ pedagogical beliefs are likely to

be reinforced by the consensus of their professional peers and by the expectations of students in

their classrooms. For future research, we may determine the obstacles faced by teachers during

the preparation and implementation of the microLESSONS and the influences these obstacles

have on their instructional practices and beliefs. We can also investigate the readiness of

students’ learning in a constructivist environment, and determine whether the microLESSONS

have improved learning outcomes. This information about the readiness of students and better

student outcomes may challenge pre-service teachers who are skeptical of constructivist

instruction. This information can also be used to improve upon and refine the microLESSONS

series in nurturing teachers to become effective implementers of constructivist instructional

approaches.
 microLESSONS 29

References

Applefield M. J., Huber R., & Moallem M. (2001). Constructivism in theory and practice:

Toward a better understanding. The High School Journal, 84(2), 35- 69.

Becker, H. J. (1994). Analysis and trends of school use of new information technologies. Report

for the Office of Technology Assessment, US Congress. Irvine: Department of

Education, University of California, Irvine.

Becker, H. J. & Anderson, R. E. (1998). Teacher's survey: Combined versions 1-4. Teaching,

Learning, and Computing: 1998. Irvine, CA: University of California. Retrieved Feb 22,

2003, from

http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/questionnaires/teachers_qs.pdf

Calderhead, J., & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: Student teachers' early conceptions of

classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7, 1-8.

Clark, C. & Peterson, P. (1986). Teacher’s thought process. In M. C.Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of

research on teaching (pp.255-296). New York: Macmillan.

Cohen, D.K. (1988). Teaching practice: Plus a change. In P.W., Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to

Educational Change: Perspectives on Research and Practice (pp.27-84). Berkeley, CA:

McCutchan.

Divaharan, S. & Wong, P. (2003). Student-centered learning: microLESSONS. In S.C., Tan &

A.F.L., Wong (Eds.), Teaching and Learning with Technology: An Asia Pacific

Perspective (pp. 232-246). Singapore: Prentice Hall.

Dexter, S. L., Anderson, R. E., & Becker, H. J. (1999). Teacher’ views of computers as catalysts

for changes in their teaching practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education,

31(3), 221-239.

Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Constructivism: New implications for instructional

technology. In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the Technology

of Instruction: A Conversation (pp.1-16). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum.

Ertmer, P.A., Ross, E..M. & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2000). Technology-using teachers: How
 microLESSONS 30

powerful visions and student-centred beliefs fuel exemplary practice. In Willis, D. A.,

Price, J. D. and Willis, J. (Eds). Technology and Teacher Education Annual (pp.1519-

24). AACE, Charlottesville, VA.

Goodrich, A.H. (2000). Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educational Leadership,

57(5), 13-18.

Grabinger, S. (1996). Rich environments for active learning. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed), Handbook

of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Macmillan

Library Reference.

Holt-Reynolds, D. (1992). Personal history-based beliefs as relevant prior knowledge in course

work. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 325-349.

Johnson, S. D. (1992). A framework for technology education curricula which emphasises

intellectual processes. Journal of Technology Education, 3(2), 1-11.

Jonassen, D. (1996). Scaffolding diagnostic reasoning in case-based learning environments.

Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 8(1), 48-68.

Jonassen, D. (1998). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed),

Instructional theories and models (2nd ed., pp. 215-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Jonassen, D., Carr, C., & Hsui-Ping, Y. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in

critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24-32.

Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among pre-service and beginning teachers. Review of

Educational Research, 62, 129-169.

Kinnucan-Welsch K. & Jenlink, P. M. (1998). Challenging assumptions about teaching and

learning: Three case studies in constructivist pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 14(4), 413-427.

Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Muijs, D. & Reynolds, D. (2002). Teachers’ beliefs and behaviours: what really matters? Journal

of Classroom Interaction, 37(2), 3-15.

 microLESSONS 31

Niederhauser, S. D., Salem, J. D. & Fields, M. (1999). Exploring teaching, learning, and

instructional reform in an introductory technology course. Journal of Technology and

Teacher Education, 7(2), 153-172.

Smolin, L. I. & Lawless, K. A. (2003). Becoming literate in the technological age: New

responsibilities and tools for teachers. The Reading Teacher, 56(6), 570-577.

Stofflett, R. T., & Stoddart, T. (1994). The ability to understand and use conceptual change

pedagogy as a function of prior content learning experience. Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 31(1), 31-51.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M.

Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman, Eds and Trans.). Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Wang, Y. M. (2002). When technology meets beliefs: Pre-service teachers’ perception of the role

of the teacher’s role in the classroom with computers. Journal of Research on Technology

in Education, 35(1), 150-161.

 microLESSONS 32

Tables

Table 1: Pedagogical Beliefs Before and After microLESSONS Series

N = 19 Pre- Post-

microLESSONS microLESSONS

Mean SD SD Mean p-value

3.56 0.37 0.39 3.40 0.22

Belief score of role of teachers
3.28 0.46 0.50 3.31 0.87
Belief score of role of students
3.11 0.42 0.24 3.09 0.91
Belief score of role of technology
3.34 0.32 0.26 3.27 0.46
Total
 microLESSONS 33

Figures

Figure 1. Denise’s microLESSONS Project

Web links in Denise’s microLESSONS Sample of worksheet with guiding questions

 microLESSONS 34

Figure 2. Penny’s microLESSONS Project

Scenario in Penny’s microLESSONS Web links and video clips

 microLESSONS 35

Figure 3. Anna’s microLESSONS Project

Web links in Anna’s microLESSONS Sample of postcard template