Shaping Pre Service Teacher’s Mental Model through Constructing Teaching Preparation and Practicing Performance

Dies Nurhayati; Yudi Hari Rayanto

doi:10.55227/ijhess.v2i4.407

Authors

Dies Nurhayati Economic Education Study Program, Pedagogy and Psychology Faculty, PGRI Wiranegara University, East Java Indonesia
Yudi Hari Rayanto English Education Study Program, Pedagogy and Psychology Faculty, PGRI Wiranegara University, East Java Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55227/ijhess.v2i4.407

Keywords:

Perspective, Teacher’s adaptation, Mental Model

Abstract

Since this research aims to search on how the students’ mental model are shaped before joining the real teaching practice field through constructing teaching tool preparation and doing teaching practice performance, so this research uses the result of lecturers’ evaluation from both of them. The result of lecturers’ evaluation is the main instrument that is analyzed as documentation. Moreover, the methods used in this research are quantitative and qualitative. The subject of this research is from Faculty of Pedagogy and psychology, PGRI Wiranegara University. The total numbers of students are 113 from 5 Education study programs in seventh semester. Based on the result analysis found that quantitatively and qualitatively the seventh semester students are success and ready to join the real teaching field. It can be seen from the result of analysis in constructing teaching tool preparation stated very bright in civic 95% and 5% very good, (economic) very bright 71% and 20% students are bright, and the rest are very good and almost good and very good, (English) very bright 51% and 49% are bright, (Indonesian) very bright 64% and 36% students are bright, (mathematics) very bright 92% and the rest is bright. It can be deduced that the process of shaping students’ mental model are successful and students are ready to join the real teaching field in school.

References

Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 473–498.

Cox, S., & Graham, C. (2009). Using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to amalyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60–69.

Firmansyah, M. B., Siswanto, W., & Priyatni, E. T. (2020). Multimodal Smartphone: Millennial Student Learning Style. Test Engineering & Management, 82, 9535–9545.

Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39(2), 93.

Ifenthaler, D. (n.d.). Pirnary-Dummer., Spector, JM (2008). Understanding Models for Learning and Instruction. Blumschein, Patrick; Model Centered Learning and Instructional Design, Albert-Ludwigs-University, Freiburg, Germany.

Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2017). What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303

Leinhardt, G. (1989). Math lessons: A contrast of novice and expert competence. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(1), 52–75.

Leinhardt, G., & Greeno, J. G. (1986). The cognitive skill of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 75.

Livingston, C., & Borko, H. (1990). High school mathematics review lessons: Expert-novice distinctions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(5), 372–387.

Mayer, R. E., Moreno, R., Boire, M., & Vagge, S. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 638.

Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.03.006

Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.

Rayanto, Y. H. (2022). Investigating Student’s Learning Style in Learning Activity during Blended Learning Class. International Journal Of Humanities Education and Social Sciences (IJHESS), 2(2).

Rayanto, Y.H.,& Nurhayati, Dies.(2021). Epistemologi Pembelajaran; CV Jejak, Jawa Barat

Schreiter, B., & Ammon, P. (1989). Teachers’ Thinking and Their Use of Reading Contracts.

Seel, N. M. (1991). Mentale modelle und weltwissen. Göttingen: Hogrefe.

Seel, N. M. (2004). Model-centered learning environments: Theory, instructional design, and effects. In Curriculum, plans, and processes in instructional design (pp. 63–88). Routledge.

Seel, N. M., Dörr, G., & Dinter, F. R. (1992). Lernen im Medienverbund-Eine Untersuchung zum Erwerb neuen Wissens. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 20(3), 275–288.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0013-189X%28198602%2915%3A2%3C4%3ATWUKGI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. In Harvard Educational Review (Vol. 57, Issue 01, pp. 4–14). https://doi.org/0017-8055/87/0200-0001s01.25/0

Spiro, R. J. (2012). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In Cognition, education, and multimedia (pp. 177–220). Routledge.

Susanto. (2008). Assessing and teaching beginning readers. Toronto: Toronto University Press.

Wahyuddin, W. (2016). GAYA BELAJAR MAHASISWA: Studi Lapangan di Program Pascasarjana IAIN SMH Banten. Al Qalam, 33(1), 105–120.

Westerman, D. A. (1991). Expert and novice teacher decision making. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(4), 292–305.