This article was downloaded by: [University Of Pittsburgh]On: 12 November 2014, At: 08:07Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Teacher EducatorPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utte20

I never saw that before: A deeper view of videoanalysis in teacher educationAnn Watts Pailliotet aa Reading and Language Arts , Syracuse University ,Published online: 20 Jan 2010.

To cite this article: Ann Watts Pailliotet (1995) I never saw that before: A deeper view of video analysis in teacher education,The Teacher Educator, 31:2, 138-156, DOI: 10.1080/08878739509555107

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08878739509555107

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

I NEVER SAW THAT BEFORE: A DEEPER VIEW OFVIDEO ANALYSIS IN TEACHER EDUCATION

Ann Watts PailliotetReading and Language Arts, Syracuse University

Abstract

This article presents a method for observation and analysis of videotapes called "deep viewing." Deep viewing is a method forobservation and analysis of visual information through the use ofcommunal talk, pictures, and writing. It offers a framework foranalyzing visual information and for building meaning from it. Itmay be used by educators, preservice teachers, students, artists,researchers, and general audiences to examine different kinds of visualinformation—video, film, television, computer programs, art work,print advertisements, or field observations. Applications of deepviewing to teacher education are explained. The deep viewingmethod is described, and extension activities that connectinformation gained through an examination of video tapes to agreater understanding of teaching are detailed. Examples ofcomments made by preservice teachers who have used the method arepresented and, in order to illustrate a range of understandings thatmay be gained through its use, adaptations for its use are discussed.

Introduction

Teacher educators are faced with the complex task of helping pre-service teachers develop positive educational practices and reflect ontheir experiences in constructive ways. The use of video recordingsaffords a powerful means of instruction and reflection for teachersand preservice teachers (Kagan andTippins, 1992; Mclntyre andPape, 1993; Robinson, 1992; Winitzky and Arends, 1991). However,there are few systematic methods currendy available to teacher educa-tors and their students for analyzing video tapes.

In my own experiences using video tapes with preserviceteachers, I find tliat many become mired in surface details such astheir personal appearance or how they sound, without reachingdeeper levels of analysis and understanding. Often they areoverwhelmed with the amount of information they must process andfail to connect what they see and hear in meaningful ways, ways thatlead to deeper theoretical or practical understandings of teaching.

138

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

In response I have created a method of analysis of visual informa-tion called "deep viewing." The method offers a framework foranalyzing visual information and for building meaning from it. Itspurpose is to develop observational and analytic abilities. Preserviceteachers and their instructors can use deep viewing to systematicallyanalyze teaching videos, in order to reach deeper understandings oftheir educational experiences.

Deep viewing allows educators, preservice teachers, students,artists, researchers, and general audiences to reach understandings ofvisual information through die use of communal talk, pictures, andwriting by examining a variety of visual information—video, film,television, computer programs, art work, print advertisements, orfield observations. This article focuses on applications of deepviewing to teacher education.

In diis article, the deep viewing method will be described.Extension activities that connect information gained from an exami-nation of video tapes to a greater understanding of teaching will dienbe detailed. In order to illustrate a range of understandings that maybe gained from its use, examples of comments made by preserviceteachers who have used the mediod and adaptations for it will bepresented.

Theoretical Basis

Deep viewing builds on principles and practices of several disci-plines. Its name comes from Himley's (1991) "deep talk," a processused to describe students' written texts, but extends her ideas toinclude all visual texts. The method is based on three presumptionsabout meaning: (1) meaning is created through interactions of partic-ipants and text, (2) meaning is readily available, and (3) meaningbecomes accessible through structured discussion. Because meaning isconstructed through social processes, deep viewing uses acollaborative format for analysis (Johnson, Johnson, Holubec, andRoy, 1984) and builds on the ideas and practices of educators whoidentify the interactive nature of all modern literacies (Atwell, 1985;Calkins, 1983; Dyson, 1984; Sinatra, 1986). Examining visual andverbal symbols is also compatible with many qualitative researchmethods in the social sciences, particularly those of the symbolicinteractionists, who believe that through observing human symbolsand behaviors one may ascertain human thoughts and beliefs(Blumer, 1969).

139

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Deep viewing also uses elements from discourse and semioticanalysis. Traditionally, textual analysis centers on language, but deepviewing extends this notion to include the language of visual images.Barthes (1974) and Saint-Martin (1990) established codes, orcategories to give textual meaning. The coding system used in deepviewing draws from these notions. Although one of its categoriesexamines discourse patterns, it also examines visual elements and howrelationships among these elements create meaning.

Educational researchers increasingly demonstrate how beliefs andperceptions exert tremendous influence on preservice teachers' under-standings and practices during teacher education (Calderhead andRobson, 1991; Hollingsworth, 1989; O'Brien and Norton, 1991;Weinstein, 1990). Deep viewing helps preservice teachers explorehow their beliefs shape the ways they perceive and practice teaching.By analyzing what they see and hear in video tapes of their own andothers' teaching, preservice teachers may be better able to concep-tualize and develop positive images of teaching that will translate intoimproved practice.

General Guidelines

Deep viewing is best done in a cooperative learning, Jigsaw IIformat. Groups are formed according to each code category asdescribed below. Participants are encouraged to write notes and/ordraw diagrams as they view and talk. The process involves three levelsof analysis: (a) literal observation, (b) interpretation, and (c)evaluation and application. After analyzing each level, groups sharetheir observations with the whole group, thus creating a broad basisfor understanding. There are several points that are useful toremember in a deep viewing session:

1. Follow the progression to build levels of understanding.2. Use written notes, pictures, diagrams, and discussion to build

understanding throughout the process.3. It is often useful to designate a facilitator, recorder, and

reporter in each group, especially when learning this technique. Thefacilitator keeps the group focused on the specific task at each leveland makes sure each member is allowed to speak; the recorder takesnotes about group comments; the reporter relates findings to thewhole group.

4. For clarity, use "in the text" statements to describe the text.Use "I" statements to express your perceptions, ideas, observations,etc.

140

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

5. When using longer texts, participants or the instructor maychoose to stop at points for analysis and discussion. Instructors mayguide student inquiry by using prompts or additional activities thatfollow the description of the method.

Directions for the Deep Viewing Method

Form six groups according to the following codes:

1. Action/Sequence—This group notes events and relationshipsof time. They may use written notes and/or visual devices such asflow charts and story boards. They ask: What happens? When andhow long do events take place? In what order?

2. Semes/Forms—Semes are units of visual meaning that createsymbols. This group notes the forms they see—both objects andpeople. They note the traits of these forms like colors, textures,shapes and icons, and repeated or emphasized objects (e.g., theteacher holds up a textbook four times). They also note theappearance of people—dress, physical traits, etc. They ask: Whatobjects do we see? What are the traits of these objects?

3. Sound/Discourse—This group examines what is said andheard. They note words and phrases that may sum up main ideas orthemes, repeated language, terms used, language that seems out ofplace, and sounds in the setting. They also note relations andqualities of what they hear: Who talks the most and least; what arethe rate, tone, and pitch of voices? They ask: What do we hear?

4. Proximity/Movement—This group examines all movement,including gestures and movements of people and other forms. Theyfocus on vectorality (e.g., where they move), relationships (e.g., howthe forms move in relation to each other), and dimensions andrelative sizes (e.g., does one form dominate by standing in front).They ask: What or who moves where? How do people or objectsmove?

5. Culture/Context—This group notes references to culturalknowledge such as science, art, educational practice, or popularculture. They ask: What social knowledge is referred to? What isimplied? What is assumed? What is missing?

6. Effects/Process—This group examines how perspectives andthe quality of the video influence understanding and outcomes. Theyexamine angles of observation, sound and visual quality, and what ismissing from view. They ask: What production devices and elementsare in the video?

141

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Level One: Literal Level

While you tape the text take notes, use diagrams, or drawpictures of elements that you notice. Make observations based onyour groups assigned code. Note questions that puzzle you. Thepurpose of this level is to gather as much visual information aspossible for analysis in the later stages of the process. Instructorsshould caution students not to evaluate ("it's bad") or interpret ("thestudent is off task") at this level. Instead, viewers should seek todescribe as clearly as possible what they perceive ("the student istwisting a pencil and looking out the window"). The literal levelsharpens preservice teachers' observation and recording abilities andteaches them to separate evaluative from observational comments, animportant teaching skill. During this level there is no cross-talkamong group members, in order to give all participants an opportu-nity to speak.

1-1. After viewing, group members read their notes alouddescribing what they have seen and heard. This level is literal. Theyshould describe only what they have observed in the text—interpreta-tion will come later.

1-2. Summarize. Remain brief, but state what each observerbelieves or perceives is the most important point of his or her obser-vation. The recorder should note comments.

1-3. Each group reports their findings to the whole group in oral,pictorial, and/or written forms.

Level Two: Interpretation

The purpose of this level is to explore a variety of interpretivestrategies based on the data collected in the first level. Instructorsmay want to model strategies described below. Any of the strategiesmay be used for any of the code categories. Comments in smallgroups should move from concrete observations of the video, likesummarizing or concluding, to more interpretive responses likehypothesizing or questioning. During this level there is no cross-talkin groups, in order to encourage a range of observations.

2-1. Go around the table in groups again, but diis time eachviewer makes an observation. These observations are now based uponparticipants' responses to the text. Note what is present in the textandvrhzt is missing. Viewers should begin with observations that arereadily apparent and move to more inferential levels as they continue.

142

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

2-2. Talk at this level continues until readers agree that theirobservations are complete and they are ready to move on to the thirdlevel. Groups again stop and share a summary of their findings withthe whole group.

Examples of Strategies for Level Two Analysis

Action/Sequence. Summarize: "The lesson took 20 minutes. Xtalked for 15 minutes. She or he talked about a, b, and c, but spent10 minutes on c. Students asked questions for 2 minutes and Xanswered." Conclude: "X talked a great deal more than the students; cwas the main idea."

Semes/Forms. Observe: "There were three visual diagrams on theoverhead and the students received a photocopied handout. The classseemed more interested in the overhead." Compare/Contrast: "Theoverhead had colors, but the handout was in black and white." Posithypotheses: "Using colorful materials may improve student interest."

Sound/Discourse. Question: "X says, "you know" a great deal andtalks very quiedy. I wonder how students understand him?" Identifyrepeated terms: "[The teacher] repeats phrases like, 'write creatively'and 'critical diinking.'" Note what is missing: "She doesn't define theseterms or provide examples." Connect: "She might use the organizingidea activities we learned in content area reading to introduce thoseterms."

Proximity/Movement. Note patterns: "She moved three timesduring the lesson to the right, but she never went to the left side ofthe room. Since this is a collaborative format, this seems inappro-priate." Form alternative observations: "Maybe this is because theroom is crowded, the students to the left are on task, or she wasnervous." Identify positive strategies: "The teacher points at the boardeach time she introduces a vocabulary word. This gesture seems toreinforce learning."

Culture/Context. "He refers to 'literature' many times and talksabout 'good' literature." Identify others' perspectives: "Compared toother educators or students, how does [this teacher] define good liter-ature?" Identify personal perspectives: "[The teacher] talks a great dealabout the westward movement, but only from the viewpoint of thepioneers. I wonder what would happen if she asked the NativeAmerican student for his ideas."

Effects/Process. Make new observations: "I didn't see the studentsat the back talking when I was teaching." Note limitations of

143

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

observation: "The camera focuses only on the teacher and not the stu-dents' faces. We can't be sure what their responses are to this lesson."Set goals: "This observation shows me diat I need to use more hands-on activities. For example, I could use the manipulatives we used inmath methods to. . . ."

Level Three: Evaluation and Application

During this level there is no cross talk until each participant hashad two uninterrupted turns; then, viewers may talk in any order andquestion each other. The purpose of this level is to synthesize,evaluate, and apply the information and interpretations made explicitin the first two levels. In this level, participants should start with theircode focus, and then progress to a discussion of the other codes.

3-1. Besides broader and more speculative inferences, partici-pants will now indicate their likes and dislikes about what they haveseen and heard. They should draw upon personal experiences andcollective perceptions in their discussions about the text. In smallgroups, participants should pose questions, frame problems, anddiscuss possible solutions to what they have seen and heard. Thefacilitator may need to be especially alert at this level to keep partici-pants on task. Level three talk continues until participants feel theyhave nothing more to say, but groups should allow for pauses in thediscussion, so that participants may process and reflect about what isbeing discussed.

3-2. Groups identify questions and general themes and reportfindings back to the whole group.

Teacher educators may draw from extension questions and activi-ties during and after a deep viewing session. These activities haveseveral things in common: (a) they build on skills and methods com-monly used by teachers in classroom situations, (b) they allow closeexamination of specific aspects of teaching, and (c) they developawareness of cognitive and experiential elements that influenceteaching practice. Questions and "think about" activities may be usedto stimulate further discussion at the end of the video session or todevelop journal entries, research topics, improved lesson plans, orfuture teaching goals.

144

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Questions and Extension Activities for Deep Viewing of Videos:A Guide for Observation, Discussion, and Reflection

Action/Sequence

Questions

1. What is the order of the events that occur? Is this a logicalorder? Would you change the lesson sequence in any way? Why orwhy not? For example, do you have previewing or "before" activitiesas well as a closure or "after'' activities? Why or why not?

2. If using a cooperative format, how much time are the studentson task? Did you allow enough time for students to complete dietask? In a lecture format, how much time is spent giving directions,on transitions between activities, in discussion, and on studentresponses?

3. Examine relations of time in this lesson. For example: Whatdo you spend the most time doing? What do you spend the least timedoing? What do the students spend the most and least time doing?Do these relations of time reflect student needs and yourinstructional goals?

4. Planning and implementation—is the time spent consonantwith your instructional objectives? What things happened that youdid or didn't allow time for? Did anything happen that took more orless time than you planned? What did you do? What might you dodifferently next time?

Think About

• How can time be used to implement effective classroommanagement?

• How can you plan and use time more effectively?• In this lesson, do you appear organized? Why or why not? You may

want to make a flow chart or story board of this lesson. Identifywhen you use time effectively and not so effectively. Are there anypatterns? Based on your findings, develop some strategies that willenable you to address down time or less effective time.

• What do the ways you use time in your classroom reveal about youas a teacher? What does use of time reveal about your beliefsconcerning student and teacher roles (e.g., teacher as giver ofknowledge or teacher as facilitator), your philosophy of teaching(e.g., content-based or student-centered curriculum; who shouldhave power in die instructional setting), and your strengths andweaknesses as a teacher?

145

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Semes/Forms

Questions

1. Look around the setting. What is in the classroom? What ismissing from the classroom?

2. During the lesson who uses what objects? (e.g., Do thestudents write on the board or just the teacher?) Who handles mate-rials more, students or the teacher? Why?

3. What objects are the students using? Do they have neededmaterials? (e.g., Are they prepared for class? Do you spend a greatdeal of time handing out materials?) Could they use other objects fora more effective lesson?

4. How effectively are you using materials? Do they enhance ordetract from the instructional process? Why? What might you do dif-ferently?

5. Do you need to learn to use specific equipment (e.g., com-puters or audio visual equipment) in order to teach more effectively?How could you get this equipment and learn to use it?

6. How are you dressed? What messages do colors and ways ofdress send to students? How could you use your appearance to be amore effective teacher?

7. What objects can the students touch and not touch? (e.g., Arethere books? Are there instructional materials for students to usewhen they finish work?)

8. What do objects in classrooms communicate about the natureof the instructional process, tell the students about their roles in theeducational process, and communicate about what type of learningwill take place? (e.g., What is on the walls? How are the studentsseated? In what condition is the setting? Is the setting comfortableand inviting?)

Think About

• List the most noticeable objects in your classroom and the objectsyou use most during this lesson. What do these objectscommunicate to students and others? You may want to make asso-ciation lists or concept maps to better understand what messagesthe objects you use and do not use send to your students. Forexample, write the word "worksheet" in the middle of a piece ofpaper. Brainstorm and write as many words as you can that youconnect with this object. A partial list might be: "dittoes," "vocabu-lary," "structure," "individual," "seatwork," "practice,"

146

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

convenience, grading, literal, boring, and assessment.Next, identify common themes that emerge from the associatedmeanings of an object. In this case, the themes might be: "contentbased," "discipline," "individual," and "work." Think about diemessages you send to students through the objects you use. Arethese themes consonant with your goals and philosophy as ateacher?

• What is missing that should be in your classroom? How could youacquire and use these objects in the future?

• Why did you choose the objects you used for this lesson? If you hadpresented die lesson by teaching with other objects, how would thelesson have changed? (e.g., Use chalk to create a visual diagram onthe board or a handout instead of describing a process or topic.) Inthe future, what might you change and why?

Sound/Discourse

Questions

1. What words or phrases (e.g., "urn," "like," or "you know") doyou repeat? What types of language (e.g., formal, conventionalEnglish, slang) do you use most often? Why?

2. What are the tone and volume of your voice? What is therate? Can the students hear and understand you? Do these verbalfactors change or remain constant? Why or why not? Are these factorsappropriate for the situation?

3. Examine particular elements of instructional discourse: Doyou use more statements or questions? Do you ask open-ended orclosed questions? Do you summarize, extend, or connect what thestudents say to you to die topic at hand? Do you praise? How? Howoften?

4. Examine how you give directions. Count wait time. Do youknow what the terms you use mean? Did you explain them in a waydiat your students could understand?

5. Do you use metaphors or other figurative language when youteach? If so, why? If not, why? If you use metaphors, what types doyou use and what meanings do they convey?

6. Do you and the students use analogies or personal experiencesin die classroom? How often? What types? Why or why not?

7. Do you use the students' names when you address them?Why or why not?

8. Who talks more? You or your students? Do all students speak?Why or why not?

147

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

9. What type(s) of talk (e.g., yes or no answers, elaboration,questions) do the students use? Is diis language (e.g., slang,conventional English) appropriate for your lesson? Why or why not?

10. To whom (to you, to each other) do the students talk?11. What methods do you use to determine if the students

understand you and the lesson?12. Is the topic of the lesson clear from your discourse? Is the talk

you hear appropriate for the lesson objectives? Why or why not?What might you change?

13. What do you hear (e.g., background noise, students talking,silence) as you teach?

Think About

• After you have watched yourself teach, go back and do a selectiveverbatim. Choose one kind of discourse for closer examination:questioning techniques, presentation of content, clarity ofdirection, praise, elicitation of student feedback, or personalcommunication strategies. Identify strengths and weaknesses anddevelop strategies for the future.

• How does your language encourage or discourage student participa-tion and learning? How does it further or detract from yourinstructional objectives?

• What do the repeated words, phrases, or most noticeable elementsof your discourse communicate to you and the students? What docharacteristics like pitch, language, and tone reveal about you as ateacher (e.g., your feelings, your knowledge)?

• What do the metaphors, repeated language, and figurative languageyou use most reveal about your beliefs? (e.g., Do you repeat certainreferences to images of linearity like "the conduit metaphor" orallude to growth?) What does your discourse reveal about yourassumptions about classroom roles for students and teachers; oryour beliefs about the nature of the educational process? Are thesethe messages you want to communicate?

• Communities arise through shared meanings and language. Do youand your students share an understanding of the terms you use?What activities do you use to promote a shared discourse in yourclassroom? What activities could you use? What are the greateststrengths and weaknesses of your discourse? How can you build onyour strengths and improve upon your weaknesses?

• How can you make your classroom more stimulating usingactivities involving sound? Develop a number of lessons that usetalk, music, or reading aloud.

148

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Proximity/Movement

Questions

1. Where are you standing? Where do you move? How often?Why? Are these movements effective?

2. Where are you in relation to the students? Do you haveobjects like a podium or desk between you and the students? Why orwhy not? Do you move closer or farther away from the studentsthroughout the lesson? Why?

3. Do you ever touch the students? Why or why not? If so, whenand how?

4. When you speak, where do you look (e.g., at the students, atthe blackboard)?

5. Do you know what is going on in every part of the room?Why or why not?

6. Is there a difference in student action or behavior based onproximity? Do students who are close to you behave differently (e.g.,on task, talk more or less) than the ones who are farther away?

7. What gestures do you use? Do they enhance or detract fromthe instructional process? Do your gestures promote positive or nega-tive student behavior?

8. Do you and the students share any nonverbal signals (e.g.,hands raised)? What do these signals mean? Are they effective? Whydo you use them? Do you need to develop some shared signals?

9. Is the room set up to allow for easy and efficient movement?If so, what features make it efficient? If not, how might you changeit?

10. What nonverbal gestures do the students use? What are theycommunicating to you through these gestures? Do you notice andacknowledge these student nonverbal communications during thelesson? Why or why not?

11. What students are moving? How are they moving? Where arethey moving? Did you plan for this movement?

12. Note transitions between activities. Do students spend toomuch time moving between activities? What could you do to makemovement in the classroom more effective?

Think About

• You may want to do a movement chart of your own or yourstudents' movements. Note where you and the students go anddon't go. Why? Could you use your personal movement and

149

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

classroom space more effectively? How? What, if any, changes doyou need to make?

• Do you need to develop or eliminate gestures and movements thatwould make your teaching more effective? How could you do this?

• How could you use nonverbal communication to create a commu-nity in your classroom?

• Are gestures and proximity culturally determined? How couldpeople from other cultures interpret your gestures, movements, anduse of space? Would these interpretations be the same as your own?

• How is student and teacher movement related to instructionaleffectiveness or time and classroom management? Are there anyconnections between degree of movement and student attention,interest, discipline, and learning? How can you use movement andproximity to promote learning?

Culture/Context

Questions

1. What references do you make to die mainstream culture of dieUnited States in your speech? What references do you make to odiercultures in your speech? What are the relations between thesereferences? Do you seem to value one culture above another?

2. Do your students understand the cultural references youmake? How do you know? Do you explain cultural references tostudents?

3. What cultural knowledge do you refer to most? Why? Do youfind that diere are cultural gaps in your knowledge? How might youfill these gaps?

4. Do you use materials or methods that might be offensive orexclude students from certain ethnic or cultural groups? Do you havematerials (e.g., literature, visual aids) in your classroom that reflect abroad array of cultural perspectives? Why or why not?

5. What do you do to identify students' cultural points of view?What methods and materials do you use to accommodate differentcultural perspectives and encourage students to share their culturalbackgrounds?

6. How does your discourse and nonverbal communicationreveal your own cultural perspective? Do these types of communica-tion (e.g., body space, language) fit with the students? What do thestudents' verbal and nonverbal messages reveal about their owncultural perspectives and biases?

150

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Think About

• What is your own ethnic and cultural background? Whatassumptions and beliefs do you bring to your teaching aboutcontent, your students, and learning as a result of this culturalbackground? How does your cultural background affect yourteaching and your interactions with students? In order to discoverthese assumptions and values, write an autobiographical culturalnarrative that allows you to examine your own cultural heritage.

• What are the ethnic and cultural backgrounds of your students?How (e.g., student interviews or biographies, collaborative learning,a wide variety of literature) do you help yourself and your studentsunderstand more about varied cultures? What methods could youuse to extend multicultural understanding in your classroom? Makea list of possible activities and resources.

• Do you feel that your classroom is a safe and positive place for stu-dents to share and express their cultural perspectives? Why or whynot? What could you do to develop greater cultural understandingin your classroom?

• Think about materials that you use, methods you teach, and inter-actions among individuals. Are these activities meaningful to youand the students? Where could you learn about instructional strate-gies that would extend multicultural awareness in your classroom?Make a list of possible resources, research them, and report back toclass.

• View this video widi someone from a culture that is different fromyours. Compare your responses. Do your observations and interpre-tations match? What new insights can you gain into your teaching?

Effects/Process

Questions

1. In this video, how does the angle of perception influence yourunderstanding of events? (e.g., When you sit at the back of the roomrather than in the middle or front, what changes occur in what youobserve? What happens when the camera focuses on the teacher butnot the students?)

2. What do you first see and hear? What do you not see andhear? What did you expect?

3. Is the video format used to observe and record appropriate forwhat you want to examine? If so, why? If not, what could you dodifferently in the future?

151

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

4. How does the camera or you as an observer influence the out-comes in the classroom? (e.g., Are you intrusive or disruptive? Are thestudents acting as they usually do?)

5. In die future, how could you develop more accurateobservation or recording techniques (e.g., pan the camera around theroom; move around as students work, sit in different locations, talkto students, learn to work recording equipment)?

6. What is the most noticeable thing you see or hear? Are the ele-ments that you notice most, consonant with your teaching objectives?For example, if you are teaching a collaborative lesson, do thestudents do most of the talking? If you are stressing critical thinking,are the students using language that reveals this process? How doeswhat you observe on the video differ from what you remember aboutthe observation and your objectives?

7. How could you make your lesson more effective based on yourobservations and comments?

8. How do you feel as you watch this? What are you thinking?

Think About

• Watch your video again by yourself. Do a think aloud protocol andrecord your reactions to what you see, hear, and/or remember. Lookfor patterns in your observations. Also note what is missing. Forexample, by observing at the back of the classroom can you see thestudents' reactions to the teacher? If the camera focuses only on onegroup of students, are others engaged in very different sorts ofbehaviors? Note your personal reactions as well. Does the camerareveal a behavior or situation that you missed during the actualevent or record a situation diat differs from what you remember?Were you confident, scared, surprised, or confused at specific timesin your lessons? Be sure to note the times you feel positive aboutthe lesson. You may find that you appear more competent than youfeel. Note the events that caused negative feelings. What is goingon? How can you change these situations?

• Discuss or write about die strengths and weaknesses of differentmethods and tools of observation (e.g., compare using a videocamera with note-taking). Note what observation techniques aremost appropriate for certain types of situations.

• Brainstorm all the ways you could receive feedback about yourteaching. Brainstorm how you would know if your students under-stand what you are teaching.

152

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

• If you were an objective observer watching your video or recordingyour lesson, what would you notice first? Is what you perceive whatyou want for your teaching? Why or why not? Focus on oneelement of your lesson and develop a plan to improve it for the nextobservation. What is missing from the data? Develop a plan thatincludes target topics and appropriate observation techniques forthe next analysis of your teaching.

Conclusion

The following comments are taken from undergraduatepreservice teachers' talk and writing during a recent deep viewingsession. Their remarks illustrate some of the insights people can gaininto their thought processes and teaching practices using video tapes.I have found that students often begin with a critique of what theyobserve in their videos. They then formulate a problem and offersuggestions for future practice:

[X] never moved much in her lesson. I got sort of bored, and I think that'swhy those two students in the back were acting u p . . . . It's probablybetter to use activities that require student participation and where theteacher moves around. You could ask the kids to come up to the board orchange the ways the seats are set up so you can get around better.

Many individuals become more aware of how their cultural perspec-tives play out in instruction:

I was never aware of how much I referred to things I just assumeeverybody knows. I used slang a lot and referred twice to movie stars,three times to [popular] music, and five times to educational terms... .Would an ESOL student or someone from another culture reallyunderstand these concepts? I have to figure out ways to modify thesecultural references for different audiences.

Some consider their teaching behaviors and personal presentation asteachers:

He's dressed very casually.... What does informal dress mean in terms ofauthority and status? He said he wanted the class to be relaxed, but thekids were too relaxed. It's like they weren't paying much attention, and Ithink part of that was the messages he sent with the way he was dressed.Clothing really says things about respect and your role as a teacher...You dress professionally to show what you teach is important.

An observation of videos often leads to explorations of educationalvalues and priorities:

[X] talked all the time about the assignment.... She seemed moreconcerned with content than with the kids' responses.... Is one focus

153

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

more important than the other?... How do we know what to stress—thecontent, the process, or the kids feeling good about themselves?

Others use video information to connect theory with practice anduniversity/placement experiences:

I see what the book [means] when it talks about transitions now.. . . Ispend so much time just trying to get them in groups. That thing withassigning group leaders we talked about in [a previous] methods [course]would be good—or I could lay out all the materials ahead of time . . . onthe desks like we did here today.

Many use insights they gained from their observations of teachingvideos to guide future practice:

Wow. I never realized how much time I spend standing at the front [ofthe room], and I only asked really basic literal-type questions. Next time,I'm going to really focus on asking more in-depth questions. I think I'llcome up with response-type questions that really force the kids to thinkand put them in teams to answer. I bet they'd be more on task and get alot more out of i t . . . . That way, I could move around more and reallytalk with them.

The deep viewing method helps preservice teachers examine tiieirpersonal beliefs about teaching by demonstrating how their perspec-tives are manifested in classroom practices. It serves as a source forreflection and professional growth (Schon, 1983; Educating theReflective Practitioners, 1987) and builds on preservice teachers' priorknowledge of talk and collaborative learning. All preservice teachershave taken English courses. Deep viewing draws from strategies oftextual analysis that are familiar to students and serves as a bridgebetween content area knowledge and educational practice. Because ituses various methods of communication, it furthers preserviceteachers' literacy skills (Considine and Haley, 1992; Sinatra, 1986).Its use of video tapes, a medium with which preservice teachers arefamiliar, helps students to narrow gaps between learning and literacyexperiences in academic and personal contexts (Courage, 1993). Themethod assists preservice teachers to develop a repertoire of researchskills diat will serve them well in their own classrooms, as theyobserve children and assume roles as teacher/researchers.Additionally, deep viewing extends and illustrates topics in coursereadings and gives preservice teachers an authentic literacyexperience, which leads to empowerment (Duffy, 1991).

I have found ways to address several limitations of the method.Although the process itself is not difficult, its directions are lengthy,so instructors should give students copies of the directions before

154

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

class sessions for review. Initially, participants may have difficultyviewing critically. Many resist the data gathering and observationprocesses of the literal level, and instead attempt to move directly intointerpretation or evaluation and application responses. It is essentialto reiterate the purposes of each level, model appropriate responses,and monitor comments during the session. The process itself mayalso be quite time consuming. In most large methods courses, it isimpossible to deep view every student s video in its entirety.Instructors may select one or two tapes from student volunteers, use avideo from archival sources, or ask students to preview their tapes,choose a salient section, and show a five-to-ten minute portion foranalysis. It is also helpful to set time limits for group discussion, totell students to note additional points they may wish to explore inreflective journals, or to create question lists for subsequent classes.

An alternative is to assign students to collaborative viewinggroups outside of class after practicing die mediod as a whole group.Host teachers or supervisors should be encouraged to view with stu-dents. These meetings offer a safe environment for analysis, fosterstudent interaction, and promote understandings among partici-pants. In diis format, each group member takes a code category.Facilitators, recorders, and reporters are selected. The sequence isfollowed, deleting the whole group reporting. Instead, discussionoccurs within die group after each member has made level-appropriate responses. The recorder or reporter summarizescomments at the end of each level. Whole group response may beelicited in future classes through viewing of short clips; presentationof summaries, reflections, and diagrams; or by posing questions toclassmates. This option is particularly useful to determine commonconcerns of students and often leads to problem-solving sessions.Instructors may also use summaries, questions, or video selectionsgenerated by small group viewings throughout the semester as an ini-tiating activity for each class. Once students become accomplished indie method, they may also choose to focus on one area for analysis.For example, a student concerned with his or her questioningtechniques may perform only the sound/discourse code, based onpreconference goals set with university supervisors and host teachers.

In the last two years, I have taught the deep viewing method toundergraduates, graduate students, and faculty at several colleges anduniversities. One of the most common remarks I hear expressedduring these sessions is, "I never saw that before." I hope that themethod presented here will help teacher educators and preservice

155

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

teachers make better use of videos in order to gain new insights intoteaching.

References

Atwell, N. (1985). Writing and reading from the inside out. In J. Hansen, T. Newkirk,& D. Graves (Eds.), Breaking ground: Teachers relate reading and writing in the elementaryschool (pp. 147-165). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Barthes, R. (1974). S/Z (Miller, Richard, Trans.). New York: Hill and Wang/TheNoonday Press.

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Calderhead, J., & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: Student teachers' early con-

ceptions of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(1), 1-8.Calkins, L. (1983). Lessons from a child. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Considine, D. M., & Haley, G. E. (1992). Visual messages: Integrating imagery into

instruction. Englewood, CO: Teacher Ideas Press.Courage, R. (1993). The interaction of public and private literacies. College Composition

and Communication, 44(4), 484-496.Duffy, G. (1991). What counts in teacher education? Dilemmas in educating empow-

ered teachers. In J. Zutell & S. McCormick (Eds.), Learner factors, teacher factors: Issues in lit-eracy research and instruction (pp. 1-17). Chicago: The National Reading Conference, Inc.

Dyson, A. H. (1984). Reading, writing, and language: Young children solving thewritten language puzzle. In J. Jensen (Ed.), Composing and comprehending (pp. 165-174).Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Educating the reflective practitioner. (1987). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.Himley, M. (1991). Shared territory: Understanding children's writing as works. New

York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Hollingsworth, S. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach.

American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 160-189.Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Holubec, E. J., & Roy, P. (1984). Circles of learning:

Cooperation in the classroom. Minneapolis, MN: Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment.

Kagan, D. M., & Tippins, D. J. (1992). How U.S. preservice teachers "read" classroomperformances. Journal of Education for Teaching, 18(2), 149-158.

McIntyre, D. J., & Pape, S. (1993). Using video protocols to enhance teacher reflectivethinking. The Teacher Educator, 28(3), 2-10.

O'Brien, K., & Norton, R. (1991). Beliefs, practices, and constraints: Influences onteacher decision-making processes. Teacher Education Quarterly, 18(1), 29-38.

Robinson, R. S. (1992). Seeing our past: Using films to review the teaching of teachers.In J. Clark-Baca, D. G. Beauchamp, & R. A. Braden (Eds.), Visual communication: Bridgingacross cultures—Selected readings from the 23rd annual conference of the International VisualLiteracy Association (pp. 279-282). Flagstaff, AZ: International Visual Literacy Association.

Saint-Martin, F. (1990). Semiotics of visual language. Bloomington and Indianapolis,IN: Indiana University Press.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. NewYork: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers.

Sinatra, R. (1986). Visual literacy connections to thinking, reading, and writing.Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Weinstein, C. S. (1990). Prospective elementary teachers' beliefs about teaching:Implications for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(3), 279-290.

Winitzky, N., & Arends, R. (1991). Translating research into practice: The effects ofvarious forms of training and clinical experience on preservice teachers' knowledge, skill, andreflectiveness. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 52-65.

156

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 0

8:07

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14