Although teacher noticing is regarded as a critical component of teacher expertise that matters for student learning, empirical evidence verifying the relationship between teacher noticing and student learning outcomes is scare. Using a relatively large-scale sample involving 189 middle school biology teachers from 156 schools and their students (n = 7,086), this quantitative study investigated the association between teachers’ level of noticing, measured by a standardized video-based instrument, and student achievement. An analysis utilizing two-level hierarchical linear modeling revealed a significant and positive association between teachers’ level of noticing and student learning outcomes. Specifically, the proportion of variance explained was 0.383. Our study offers robust and timely evidence that verifies the core assumption underpinning teacher noticing research as well as professional development efforts focusing on teacher noticing. Implications for teacher noticing research and teacher professional development are discussed.
AdamsR. J.WilsonM.WangW.-C. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(1), 1–23.
2.
AdamsR. J.WilsonM. R.WuM. L. (2020). ACER ConQuest: Generalised item response modelling software (Version 5). Australian Council for Educational Research.
3.
AlwastA.VorhölterK. (2022). Measuring pre—service teachers’ noticing competencies within a mathematical modeling context—An analysis of an instrument. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 109(2), 263–285.
4.
AmadorJ. M.BragelmanJ.SuperfineA. C. (2021). Prospective teachers’ noticing: A literature review of methodological approaches to support and analyze noticing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 99, Article 103256.
5.
BarnhartT.JohnsonH. J.Tekkumru-KisaM. (2024). Pre-service teachers notice student thinking: Then what?Journal of Teacher Education, 76, 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231220604
6.
BarnhartT.van EsE. (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among pre-service science teachers’ ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83–93.
7.
BlömekeS.GustafssonJ.-E.ShavelsonR. J. (2015). Beyond dichotomies: Competence viewed as a continuum. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie, 223(1), 3–13.
8.
BlömekeS.JentschA.RossN.KaiserG.KönigJ. (2022). Opening up the black box: Teacher competence, instructional quality, and students’ learning progress. Learning and Instruction, 79, Article 101600.
9.
BondT. G.FoxC. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Routledge.
10.
BriggsD. C.WilsonM. (2003). An introduction to multidimensional measurement using Rasch models. Journal of Applied Measurement, 4(1), 87–100.
11.
ChanK. K. H. (2023). Eliciting and working with student thinking: Preservice science teachers’ enactment of core practices when orchestrating collaborative group work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(5), 1014–1052.
12.
ChanK. K. H.XuL.CooperR.BerryA.van DrielJ. H. (2021). Teacher noticing in science education: Do you see what I see?Studies in Science Education, 57(1), 1–44.
13.
ChanK. K. H.YungB. H. W. (2015). On-site pedagogical content knowledge development. International Journal of Science Education, 37(8), 1246–1278.
14.
ChanM. C. E.ClarkeD. J.ClarkeD. M.RocheA.CaoY.Peter-KoopA. (2018). Learning from lessons: Studying the structure and construction of mathematics teacher knowledge in Australia, China and Germany. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(1), 89–102.
15.
Copur-GencturkY.RodriguesJ. (2021). Content-specific noticing: A large-scale survey of mathematics teachers’ noticing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 101, Article 103320.
16.
CowieB.HarrisonC.WillisJ. (2018). Supporting teacher responsiveness in assessment for learning through disciplined noticing. The Curriculum Journal, 29(4), 464–478.
DiamondB.Maerten-RiveraJ.RohrerR.LeeO. (2014). Effectiveness of a curricular and professional development intervention at improving elementary teachers’ science content knowledge and student achievement outcomes: Year 1 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 635–658.
19.
FieldA. (2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
20.
GoodwinC. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633.
21.
HattieJ. (2023). Visible learning: The sequel: A synthesis of over 2,100 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
22.
HoxJ. (1998). Multilevel modeling: When and why. In BalderjahnI.MatharR.SchaderM. (Eds.), Classification, data analysis, and data highways (pp. 147–154). Springer.
23.
HoxJ. J.MoerbeekM.Van de SchootR. (2017). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Routledge.
24.
HuangR.LiY. (2012). What matters most: A comparison of expert and novice teachers’ noticing of mathematics classroom events. School Science and Mathematics, 112(7), 420–432.
25.
JacobsV. R.LambL. L. C.PhilippR. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169–202.
26.
JacobsV. R.SpanglerD. A. (2018). Research on core practices in K–12 mathematics teaching. In CaiJ. (Ed.), Compendium for research in mathematics education (pp. 766–792). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
27.
JinH.ShinH.JohnsonM. E.KimJ.AndersonC. W. (2015). Developing learning progression-based teacher knowledge measures. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(9), 1269–1295.
28.
KaiserG.BlömekeS.KönigJ.BusseA.DöhrmannM.HothJ. (2017). Professional competencies of (prospective) mathematics teachers—Cognitive versus situated approaches. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 94(2), 161–182.
29.
KaiserG.BusseA.HothJ.KönigJ.BlömekeS. (2015). About the complexities of video-based assessments: Theoretical and methodological approaches to overcoming shortcomings of research on teachers’ competence. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 369–387.
30.
KangH. (2022). Teacher responsiveness that promotes equity in secondary science classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 40(2), 206–232.
31.
KanterD. E.KonstantopoulosS. (2010). The impact of a project-based science curriculum on minority student achievement, attitudes, and careers: The effects of teacher content and pedagogical content knowledge and inquiry-based practices. Science Education, 94(5), 855–887.
32.
KerstingN. B.GivvinK. B.SoteloF. L.StiglerJ. W. (2010). Teachers’ analyses of classroom video predict student learning of mathematics: Further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 172–181.
33.
KerstingN. B.GivvinK. B.ThompsonB. J.SantagataR.StiglerJ. W. (2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 568–589.
34.
KnievelI.LindmeierA. M.HeinzeA. (2015). Beyond knowledge: Measuring primary teachers’ subject-specific competences in and for teaching mathematics with items based on video vignettes. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 309–329.
35.
KönigJ.BlömekeS.KleinP.SuhlU.BusseA.KaiserG. (2014). Is teachers’ general pedagogical knowledge a premise for noticing and interpreting classroom situations? A video-based assessment approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 76–88.
36.
KönigJ.SantagataR.ScheinerT.AdleffA.-K.YangX.KaiserG. (2022). Teacher noticing: A systematic literature review of conceptualizations, research designs, and findings on learning to notice. Educational Research Review, 36, Article 100453.
37.
KunterM.KlusmannU.BaumertJ.RichterD.VossT.HachfeldA. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805–820.
38.
LamD. S. H.ChanK. K. H. (2020). Characterising pre-service secondary science teachers’ noticing of different forms of evidence of student thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 42(4), 576–597.
39.
LampertM.FrankeM. L.KazemiE.GhousseiniH.TurrouA. C.BeasleyH.CunardA.CroweK. (2013). Keeping it complex: Using rehearsals to support novice teacher learning of ambitious teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(3), 226–243.
40.
LandisJ. R.KochG. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.
41.
LeathamK. R.PetersonB. E.StockeroS. L.Van ZoestL. R. (2015). Conceptualizing mathematically significant pedagogical opportunities to build on student thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(1), 88–124.
42.
LeslieD.LorraineM. M.JulieM. A.DarrellE. (2018). Curricular noticing: A framework to describe teachers’ interactions with curriculum materials. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(5), 521–532.
43.
LuftJ. A.HuangY.SinghH.Ozen-TasdemirH.DeLucaJ.WatsonS.AyanoE.WhitworthB. A. (2024). Exploring the noticing of science teachers: What teachers’ notice and using video to capture teacher knowledge. School Science and Mathematics, 124(3), 159–170.
44.
LunaM.SelmerS. (2021). Examining the responding component of teacher noticing: A case of one teacher’s pedagogical responses to students’ thinking in classroom artifacts. Journal of Teacher Education, 72(5), 579–593.
45.
LunaM. J. (2018). What does it mean to notice my students’ ideas in science today? An investigation of elementary teachers’ practice of noticing their students’ thinking in science. Cognition and Instruction, 36(4), 297–329.
46.
MasonJ. (2002). Researching your own practice: The discipline of noticing. Routledge.
47.
Martínez AgudoJ. D. D. (2022). To what extent does parental educational background affect CLIL learners’ content subject learning? Evidence from research in Spain. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(2), 598–611.
48.
McDonaldS. P. (2016). The transparent and the invisible in professional pedagogical vision for science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 116(2), 95–103.
49.
MeschedeN.FiebranzA.MöllerK.SteffenskyM. (2017). Teachers’ professional vision, pedagogical content knowledge and beliefs: On its relation and differences between pre-service and in-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 158–170.
OrmeJ. G.Combs-OrmeT. (2009). Multiple regression with discrete dependent variables (Vol. 63). Oxford University Press.
53.
PeughJ. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48(1), 85–112.
54.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Sage.
55.
RobertsonA. D.ScherrR.HammerD. (2015). Responsive teaching in science and mathematics. Routledge.
56.
RothK. J.GarnierH. E.ChenC.LemmensM.SchwilleK.WicklerN. I. Z. (2011). Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 117–148.
57.
RothK. J.WilsonC. D.TaylorJ. A.StuhlsatzM. A. M.HvidstenC. (2019). Comparing the effects of analysis-of-practice and content-based professional development on teacher and student outcomes in science. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 121–1253.
58.
SabersD. S.CushingK. S.BerlinerD. C. (1991). Differences among teachers in a task characterized by simultaneity. Multidimensional, and Immediacy, 28(1), 63–88.
59.
SantagataR.AngeliciG. (2010). Studying the impact of the lesson analysis framework on preservice teachers’ abilities to reflect on videos of classroom teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(4), 339–349.
60.
SantagataR.KönigJ.ScheinerT.NguyenH.AdleffA.-K.YangX.KaiserG. (2021). Mathematics teacher learning to notice: A systematic review of studies of video-based programs. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 53(1), 119–134.
61.
SchackE. O.FisherM. H.WilhelmJ. A. (2017). Teacher noticing: Bridging and broadening perspectives, contexts and frameworks. Springer.
62.
SeidelT.StürmerK. (2014). Modeling and measuring the structure of professional vision in preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 51(4), 739–771.
63.
SherinM. G. (2007). The development of teachers’ professional vision in video clubs. In GoldmanR.PeaR.BarronB.DerryS. J. (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 383–395). Lawrence Erlbaum.
64.
SherinM. G. (2017). Exploring the boundaries of teacher noticing: Commentary. In SchackE. O.FisherM. H.WilhelmJ. A. (Eds.), Teacher noticing: Bridging and broadening perspectives, contexts and frameworks (pp. 401–408). Springer.
65.
SherinM. G.JacobsV. R.PhilippR. A. (2011). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes. Routledge.
66.
SirinS. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453.
67.
StahnkeR.SchuelerS.Roesken-WinterB. (2016). Teachers’ perception, interpretation, and decision-making: A systematic review of empirical mathematics education research. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 48(1), 1–27.
68.
StarJ. R.StricklandS. K. (2008). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107–125.
69.
SteffenskyM.GoldB.HoldynskiM.MöllerK. (2015). Professional vision of classroom management and learning support in science classrooms—Does professional vision differ across general and content-specific classroom interactions?International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 351–368.
70.
TalanquerV.BolgerM.TomanekD. (2015). Exploring prospective teachers’ assessment practices: Noticing and interpreting student understanding in the assessment of written work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(5), 585–609.
71.
van EsE. A.CashenM.BarnhartT.AugerA. (2017a). Learning to notice mathematics instruction: Using video to develop preservice teachers’ vision of ambitious pedagogy. Cognition and Instruction, 35(3), 165–187.
72.
van EsE. A.HandV.MercadoJ. (2017b). Making visible the relationship between teachers’ noticing for equity and equitable teaching practice. In SchackE. O.FisherM. H.WilhelmJ. A. (Eds.), Teacher noticing: Bridging and broadening perspectives, contexts, and frameworks (pp. 251–270). Springer International Publishing.
73.
van EsE. A.SherinM. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 571–596.
74.
van EsE. A.SherinM. G. (2021). Expanding on prior conceptualizations of teacher noticing. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 53(1), 17–27.
75.
WalkoeJ. (2015). Exploring teacher noticing of student algebraic thinking in a video club. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18, 523–550.
76.
WestermanD. A. (1991). Expert and novice teacher decision making. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(4), 292–305.
77.
WeyersJ.KönigJ.SantagataR.ScheinerT.KaiserG. (2023). Measuring teacher noticing: A scoping review of standardized instruments. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, Article 103970.
78.
WeyersJ.KönigJ.ScheinerT.SantagataR.KaiserG. (2024). Teacher noticing in mathematics education: A review of recent developments. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 56(2), 249–264.
WolffC. E.JarodzkaH.van den BogertN.BoshuizenH. P. A. (2016). Teacher vision: Expert and novice teachers’ perception of problematic classroom management scenes. Instructional Science, 44(3), 243–265.
81.
WrightB. D.MastersG. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. MESA Press.
82.
YangX.KönigJ.KaiserG. (2021). Growth of professional noticing of mathematics teachers: A comparative study of Chinese teachers noticing with different teaching experiences. ZDM —Mathematics Education, 53(1), 29–42.
83.
ZummoL.HauserM.CarlsonJ. (2022). Science teacher noticing via video annotation: Links between complexity and knowledge-based reasoning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 33(7), 744–763.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
