Abstract
Background: Microteaching has been implemented as a teaching strategy in teacher education since the early 1960s. More recently, with the integration of information and communication technologies (ICTs) into education and the impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), research has revealed that technology-enhanced models of microteaching have become increasingly adopted into initial teacher education.
Aim: This qualitative study aims to explore pre-service teachers’ (PSTs’) experiences with a piloted online microteaching model and their perceived value for their professional development.
Setting: This study is conducted on fourth-year Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) students who attend a private higher education institution on a contact campus in Durban, South Africa.
Methods: A qualitative research design was used in this study. Data were collected through focus group interviews. The raw data were analysed through reflexive thematic analysis.
Results: The key findings of this study reveal that fourth-year B.Ed students perceived the online microteaching model as a valuable learning experience that enhanced their preparedness to teach across diverse educational contexts.
Conclusion: When embedded within a carefully designed framework for experiential learning, online microteaching is an innovative practical learning opportunity for the development of PSTs in the 21st century.
Contribution: This article highlights the potential of online microteaching as a strategy in teacher education to enhance PSTs’ pedagogical skills and ICT integration capabilities.
Keywords: microteaching; online teaching; pre-service teachers; 21st-century teachers; information and communication technology.
Introduction
Microteaching, initially introduced at Stanford University’s Secondary Teacher Education programme in the early 1960s, is used as a teaching strategy in training both in-service and pre-service teachers (PSTs). Traditionally, microteaching is a scaled-down teaching encounter in which teachers practice teaching with a smaller group of learners or peers for a shorter time (Allen 1966). In the early years of using microteaching in teacher education, Allen and Cooper (1970) found that performance in microteaching could accurately predict subsequent classroom performance. Since then, microteaching has been widely adopted as a teaching strategy in initial teacher education, allowing PSTs (referred to in this article as PSTs) to connect theory with practice outside of the typical classroom setting. Over the years, various models of microteaching have been adopted into the training of teachers, and much research has been done on the efficacy of microteaching as a strategy to develop teaching practice. More recently, with advances in technology and its impact on education, studies have begun to look at the role technology can play.
Literature review
This literature review examines how microteaching is used as a strategy in teacher education and analyses the literature on contemporary approaches to microteaching that incorporate technological advancements, including online microteaching and mixed reality simulations. Furthermore, the review of the literature examines the perceived value of various approaches to microteaching in the development of future teachers.
Microteaching 1.0: Traditional peer teaching (online or face to face)
Microteaching has its roots in experiential learning and reflective practice theories (Ledger & Fischetti 2019). Traditionally, models of microteaching in teacher education have followed four stages: (1) The preparation stage, where the student plans the lesson and resources; (2) the teach stage, where the student teaches the scaled-down lesson; (3) the critique stage, where feedback is provided to the student by peers and/or the supervisor and (4) the re-teach stage, whereby the lesson is re-developed and re-taught at a later stage (Hama & Osam 2021). Key to microteaching is the premise that learning is not an automatic result of experience. Instead, deliberate engagement with the experience is required for learning to occur.
Peer or supervisor feedback, video recordings and structured opportunities for critical self-reflection are central to microteaching. Peers and supervisors play an essential role, critically observing the lesson and offering constructive feedback. According to Wangchuk (2018), peer and supervisor feedback enables PSTs to identify their strengths and rectify their errors. In some microteaching models, this involves using evaluation tools, rubrics or checklists and, in other cases, real-time group discussions or individual written feedback. Although the video recording of microteaching has been widely adopted as part of the microteaching process since its inception, technological advances have made it even easier to implement, allowing PSTs to pause, review and meticulously analyse their teaching. According to the research, video recording the microteaching session is an almost essential part of modern approaches to microteaching, providing an opportunity for PSTs to reflect on their performance and identify their strengths and areas for improvement (Deneme 2020; Esiobu & Maduekwe 2008; Menon & Ngugi 2022; Msimanga 2021).
The integration of technology into traditional approaches of microteaching, such as the use of online conferencing tools and platforms, has been explored in several studies. Kusmawan (2017) proposed that microteaching can be effectively implemented through online media, highlighting the benefits of recording traditional microteaching sessions and making them accessible online to enhance PSTs’ engagement in reflective practice. Zalavra and Makri (2022) reported their experiences moving microteaching online using Microsoft Teams. In this study, each group of PSTs had to ‘teach’ the learning design, incorporating Web 2.0 in a simulated online context, with their peers playing the role of the learners. Mahmud (2021) revealed the value of using Padlet to provide real-time online feedback from peers and supervisors in the microteaching session. According to Mahmud (2021:117), the written feedback on Padlet from peers and supervisors becomes ‘a vital source of information for the teacher candidates to reflect on their teaching performance from others’ perspective’. Furthermore, using Padlet as a technological tool for feedback after the microteaching activity can ‘enhance PST’s collaborative skills, promote student-centred learning and maximise the learning engagement between teachers and students’ (Mahmud 2021:116).
Microteaching 2.0: Mixed reality learning environments
The influence of technological advancements, particularly in the form of mixed-reality learning environments, on microteaching cannot be ignored. Ledger and Fischetti (2019) introduced Microteaching 2.0, combining traditional microteaching with Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) simulation technologies. According to Ledger and Fischetti (2019), Microteaching 2.0 adopts technology as the classroom rather than in the classroom by offering a synchronous mixed-reality learning environment where students are represented by avatars and the learning scenario is controlled and directed by the lecturer and the student’s learning design (Mariana et al. 2023). This model of microteaching does not require the participation of peers, and the simulation can be recorded for later analysis, reflection and assessment. Microteaching 2.0 has been found to be an effective strategy to prepare PSTs for real classrooms in a controlled learning environment (Donnelly et al. 2023; Ledger & Fischetti 2019; Mariana et al. 2023).
In South Africa, the disruption to school-based, work-integrated learning (WIL) opportunities because of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to an increased interest in simulated practical teaching opportunities. Recent findings suggest that mixed-reality learning environments have the potential to enhance experiential learning opportunities for PSTs in South Africa, where high-quality school environments for practical teaching can be a significant challenge (Gravett et al. 2023; Nel, Marais & Dieker 2020).
The value of microteaching as a teaching strategy in initial teacher education
The value of microteaching as a teaching strategy has been widely researched since its adoption into initial teacher education and teacher professional development. Wangchuk (2018) found that the key skills enhanced through microteaching were the ability to effectively introduce a lesson, connect new lessons with previous ones and conclude a lesson effectively. These findings were supported by Murtafiah and Lukitasari (2019), who revealed that microteaching led to improvements in PST’s lesson planning skills, as well as enhancements in the quality of their lesson introductions and closures. The experiential learning opportunity of microteaching allows PSTs to practise and refine their teaching skills in a controlled environment. Studies have found that microteaching contributes to developing PST’s self-confidence by establishing a safe and supportive learning environment for practice.
In a recent study looking at South African student teachers’ experience of microteaching, Msimanga (2021:167) found that the microteaching opportunities ‘boost student teachers’ confidence and cooperation, especially in their first years of study’. Furthermore, Deneme (2020) and Kusmawan (2017) argued that microteaching in teacher education fosters critical thinking and encourages reflective practice. Deneme (2020) specifically found that students improved their self-evaluation and recognising their strengths and weaknesses by reflecting on their microteaching lessons. Additionally, Li and Li (2020) and Menon and Ngugi (2022) also found that microteaching facilitated the development of reflective practices among teachers. These skills are argued to be essential skills for 21st-century teachers, with the potential to promote continued professional development in the ever-evolving landscape of education.
There is a global movement towards better equipping teachers with the skills to effectively integrate information and communication technology (ICT) and digital tools into their teaching practices. In South Africa, the Professional Development Framework for Digital Learning provides guidelines for professional development, specifically in order to ensure competent educators who use ICT to enhance teaching and learning (Department of Basic Education 2018). A review of the research revealed that technology-enhanced microteaching opportunities have the potential to develop the ICT integration skills of PSTs. This is of particular importance in the South African context, as we consider that not all PSTs will have the opportunity for practical learning in a classroom equipped for ICT integration. A commonality within Akyuz and Tuluk (2021), Mahmud (2021), Donlon et al. (2022) and Zalavra and Markri’s (2022) research was that PSTs used a variety of technological tools in their microteaching. Mahmud (2021) argued that online microteaching presented opportunities for student teachers to engage with various technological tools, contributing to developing technology integration skills. Furthermore, online microteaching experiences serve as a platform for PSTs to practice teaching online, addressing the growing importance of adaptability to various educational contexts (Donlon et al. 2022). According to Mahmud (2021:118), online microteaching should become an ‘indispensable part of the teacher education program’ in preparing teachers to teach in the 21st century.
This research examined participants’ experiences of the online microteaching model piloted at a private provider of initial teacher education in South Africa. The study sought to answer the following research questions:
- How did PSTs perceive the stages in the online microteaching model to contribute to their learning experience?
- How did PSTs perceive the online microteaching model to develop their teaching practice for teaching in the 21st century?
Theoretical framework
Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory provides a theoretical grounding for microteaching. According to Kolb (1984), there are four primary modes of learning through experience: (1) concrete experience (CE): In this mode, learners acquire knowledge through direct, hands-on experience. They engage in new situations or tasks and observe what happens; (2) reflective observation (RO): In this mode, learners step back from the experience and observe it from different perspectives. They analyse and reflect on what they have experienced; (3) abstract conceptualisation (AC): In this mode, learners use their reflections to form concepts or generalisations that can be applied to other situations. They use logic, theories and models to make sense of their experiences and (4) active experimentation (AE): In this mode, learners test their new knowledge by applying it to new situations or problems. The four learning modes from Kolb’s experiential learning theory were intentionally applied to the online microteaching model piloted in this study, enhancing the learning experience for PSTs.
The online microteaching model
The researchers conceptualised a three-stage online microteaching model based on Kolb’s (1984) four major modes of experiential learning, traditional microteaching models and the affordances of new technologies. This online microteaching model represents a technology-enhanced adaptation of traditional microteaching. It does not seek to emulate more recent advancements such as Microteaching 2.0, which is characterised in the literature by its use of mixed-reality simulations as the classroom environment. Instead, grounded in the principles of experiential learning, this model is designed around deliberate points of engagement aimed at effectively promoting the learning and development of PSTs. It is important to note that the online microteaching activity formed a small component of the Bachelor of Education, fourth-year WIL module. Furthermore, PSTs prepared for online microteaching as part of their WIL module, with allocated lecture sessions, additional support sessions and a learning unit embedded in the module material and learning management system. The online microteaching model is summarised as follows:
Stage 1: Before the microteaching session
Lesson design – With regard to lesson design, PSTs are required to design a detailed lesson plan for a selected subject and topic suitable for online teaching and showcasing ICT integration. The institutional lesson plan template is designed to encourage PSTs to intentionally consider and demonstrate pedagogical decisions. They then choose a part from this lesson to teach during the online microteaching session for 15 min.
Lesson rationale – The lesson rationale encourages PSTs to think critically about the choices made in their lesson design for online microteaching. The lesson rationale also provides peers and the supervisor with the lesson details and orientates the slice of the lesson. Furthermore, PSTs are asked to write up their rationale under the following headings: (1) General lesson details; (2) How does the 15-min part that you are teaching online fit into this lesson? and (3) How have you adapted this lesson for online teaching?
Stage 2: During the online microteaching session
Presentation of the rationale – In this regard, PSTs have 5 min to present their lesson rationale using a presentation tool online during the online microteaching session.
Teach live – In this regard, PSTs teach a 15-min part of the above lesson online on Blackboard Collaborate.
Stage 3: After the microteaching session
Written feedback – Peers and the supervisor are required to provide real-time written feedback in the form of a post on Padlet.com. The following prompts are provided to promote constructive feedback: What did you like about the lesson? What can be improved in the lesson? How well did this lesson make use of ICT tools? What does the teacher need to consider for the teaching of this lesson in the classroom?
Reflection – In this regard, PSTs review their written feedback on Padlet.com and watch their recording before writing up their final reflection on the online microteaching experience.
Research methods and design
A qualitative research approach was employed in this study. Working within an interpretivist worldview, this study adopts a hermeneutic phenomenological approach to interpret participants’ lived experiences of the online microteaching model. Through this approach, meaning was co-constructed with participants to gain a deeper understanding of their perceptions of the learning experience. This allowed the researchers to gain a unique understanding of PSTs experiences of the online microteaching model and the perceived impact on their development as future teachers.
Participants
The type of sampling used in this study was non-probability sampling, more specifically, convenience sampling, as participants were those most accessible to the researchers. The target population consisted of 16 final-year Bachelor of Education students (PSTs) enrolled in a full-time contact programme at a private provider of initial teacher education in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The target population were students who were registered for their final WIL module and, as a requirement of this module, would spend 8 weeks in school-based WIL and, as a supplement to this, participate in the newly developed online microteaching model. For participants to be selected to participate in the research study, they needed to be part of the two researchers’ supervisory group of PSTs for the teaching practical.
From the target population of 16, 10 PSTs volunteered to participate in this research study. The two researchers involved in this article supervised the online microteaching sessions, which meant that the researchers could control all aspects of the online microteaching session, and all participants had the same experience in terms of preparation and implementation. The results can be used to gain an in-depth understanding of the research problem that we are exploring. Pseudonyms were used in the presentation of the findings to preserve the anonymity of the participants.
Data collection
The study employed focus groups as a data collection method. As many as 10 participants agreed to take part and selected their groups by choosing a convenient timeslot. The final composition of the focus groups was determined by the timeslot selections, with each focus group consisting of five participants. The focus groups were conducted using the online conferencing tool Microsoft Teams, which was facilitated by the researchers themselves and recorded. As suggested by Strydom and Bezuidenhoudt (2014), broad themes and questions were identified in advance to guide the discussion, with the aim of understanding how participants experienced the online microteaching model.
Data analysis
The researchers selected reflexive thematic analysis as the most appropriate method of data analysis for this study. In 2006, Braun and Clarke first put forward a framework for thematic analysis that comprises six distinct phases, defining thematic analysis as ‘a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within the data’ (2006:76). Reflexive thematic analysis is regarded as a reflection of the researcher’s interpretive analysis of the data, conducted at the intersection of: (1) the dataset, (2) the theoretical assumptions underlying the analysis and (3) the researcher’s analytical skills and resources (Braun and Clarke 2019). Braun and Clarke (2019) advocate for thematic analysis as a creative, reflexive and subjective approach to qualitative research that emphasises the researcher’s active involvement in knowledge creation (Braun & Clarke 2019). As there was more than one researcher involved in the reflexive thematic analysis process in this research study, a collaborative and reflexive approach between the two researchers was required with the aim to achieve richer interpretations of meaning (Byrne 2022). Recordings of the focus groups were transcribed, and the researchers adhered to the six phases of thematic analysis, as outlined in the following paragraph.
The thematic analysis process began with Phase 1: Familiarising Yourself with Your Data, where the researchers immersed themselves in the data by reading, re-reading, reflecting, noting and comparing notes to gain a comprehensive understanding of its content and context. This step allowed the researchers to identify initial patterns to our research question. In Phase 2: Coding, the researchers coded the data to organise and categorise it; these codes would later become the building blocks of themes. According to Byrne (2022), ‘codes’ in reflexive thematic analysis can be shorthand interpretive labels for pieces of information that may be relevant to the research question(s). The codes that were identified in this research study included lesson rationale, feedback, reflection, video recording, reflection, skills, peers, attitudes, classroom teaching, online teaching and digital tools. Phase 3: Searching for Themes involved the grouping of related codes, aiming to uncover broader patterns within the data. Themes were produced by organising codes around a ‘central organising concept’ (Braun & Clarke 2019). During Phase 4: Reviewing Themes, we reviewed and refined the identified themes to ensure they accurately represented the data, reassessing their relevance. In Phase 5: Defining and Naming Themes, each theme was clearly defined and given a descriptive name to ensure effective communication in the final report. Finally, Phase 6: Producing the Report involved compiling the findings into a comprehensive report, presenting the analysis, interpretation and implications of the data and providing a clear and structured overview of the research outcomes (Braun & Clarke 2006).
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Independent Institute of Education Ethics Committee on 23 July 2022 (reference no: R0054 [REC]). Participants completed electronic consent forms prior to their participation in the study. Participation was voluntary while maintaining confidentiality and the anonymity of the participants. The research study used pseudonyms to respect participants’ confidentiality. Participants were free to withdraw from the research at any time. The participants in the study were informed that the data gathered would be used for dissemination to assist in the generation of knowledge. The following ethical principles were adhered to within the study: (1) informed consent, (2) voluntary participation, (3) confidentiality, (4) ensuring no harm was caused to participants because of participation and (5) the process from sampling, collection and analysis was fair and equitable. The study involved fourth-year Bachelor of Education students at The IIE Varsity College, Durban North Campus, KwaZulu-Natal.
Results
Six key themes were identified relating to the research questions. These were: (1) The role of the lesson rationale in online microteaching, (2) the value of written feedback, (3) reflection as a tool for learning, (4) better prepared to teach the lesson in the face-to-face classroom, (5) developing the skills and confidence to teach online and (6) developing skills to effectively integrate technology and digital tools into teaching and learning. The findings that follow are presented under these six themes.
The role of the lesson rationale in online microteaching
An analysis of the data found that most participants felt that completing the lesson rationale alongside their lesson planning for online microteaching helped them think more critically about their lesson design. Some participants also felt that presenting their lesson rationale before teaching provided the context needed to position the part of the lesson they chose to teach. Although most participants found value in the lesson rationale, some expressed negative feelings about the presentation of the lesson rationale during the live online session before microteaching. Suggestions were made for future adaptations, which included presenting the lesson rationale post-teaching or submitting the lesson rationale in written format for review by the supervisor and peers before the online microteaching:
‘The rationale helped me to think more deeply about my planning for this lesson.’ (Thulani, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
‘The lesson rationale is valuable to give the context to your supervisor and your peers.’ (Njabulo, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
‘There is a change of pace between presenting the rationale and teaching the online lesson, so I would prefer not having a rationale during the online session.’ (Anika, Bachelor of Education, Foundation Phase, 4th Year)
The value of written feedback
Participants of this study viewed peer and supervisor feedback as critical to their learning and development. They expressed that the feedback helped them reflect more critically on their own teaching online and in the classroom. Positive feedback from peers and supervisors boosted students’ confidence. Furthermore, participants expressed great value in using Padlet.com as an online tool for immediate written feedback from peers and the supervisor. It was expressed that the tool was user friendly and easy to access. Participants felt that having access to the written feedback on the Padlet after the microteaching lesson meant they could think more critically about their lessons and how to improve them:
‘It was very useful to me. I could pick up on what worked well, what I had to change, and the peer feedback really helped me to plan for teaching this lesson in a school.’ (Jaya, Bachelor of Education, Foundation Phase, 4th Year)
‘It definitely was a confidence booster. I feel better about my lesson planning after this experience.’ (Julie, Bachelor of Education, Foundation Phase, 4th Year)
‘I think the Padlet added value because we can always go back and look at it when we want to reflect and improve on everything we’ve done.’ (Janet, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
Reflection as a tool for learning
Participants expressed that by observing the recording of their online microteaching, they had the unique experience of seeing their strengths and areas for improvement, which most had never experienced before. Access to the written feedback, alongside the recording, provided further opportunity to reflect, which informed their future practice. Participants expressed that through the structured opportunity for reflection, they learnt how to improve their teaching of this lesson:
‘Recording the lesson was very important because we can go back and watch and reflect on how you taught the lesson and any mistakes that you made.’ (Anika, Bachelor of Education, Foundation Phase, 4th Year)
Better prepared to teach the lesson in the face-to-face classroom
An analysis of the data found that after the online microteaching experience, PSTs felt better prepared to teach this lesson in the classroom. Participants expressed that they now felt more confident in teaching the lesson in the classroom:
‘The experience forced me to practice my lesson. So, I thought it was helpful, and I feel way more comfortable.’ (Njabulo, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
‘I was able to build confidence though – so I have rehearsed it now, so I have practiced and explained the terms out loud before teaching it, so I feel better prepared.’ (Anika, Bachelor of Education, Foundation Phase, 4th Year)
Developing the skills and confidence to teach online
Participants expressed that they had grown in confidence in teaching online and learnt how to keep learners engaged in a virtual environment. Most participants felt they would like more opportunities for online microteaching and even a module specific to teaching online. Furthermore, participants expressed that online microteaching developed them as well-rounded teachers and made them more confident to teach in both the traditional classroom and online environment. Analysis of the data revealed that participants felt they were more employable as a teacher because of the online microteaching experience:
‘What it has taught me is that it’s boosts my confidence to teach another online lesson and because I never thought I would ever see the day we would have to teach online.’ (Njabulo, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
‘I think if we could have more opportunities for online microteaching and even a module focussed on improving this skill it would be very good.’ (Mpilo, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
‘Something that you can put on your resume and then future employers would see it and it’d be like this person has experience teaching online and that’s another asset to getting hired and helping you in the future.’ (Anika, Bachelor of Education, Foundation Phase, 4th Year)
Developing skills to effectively integrate technology and digital tools into teaching and learning
It is evident in the data that participants found value in the experiential opportunity to implement technology and digital tools in their lessons. Various digital tools were used across all participants, including Classroom Dojo, Microsoft Forms, Canva, Emojis, Google Forms, Quizlet, Kahoot, PowerPoint, Voice notes, YouTube, Google Slides, Escape Rooms, Word documents and No Hands! Many participants also used digital tools within the online video conferencing tool Blackboard Collaborate, where the online micro-teach was conducted. Digital tools such as the chat box, shapes, polling tool, drawing tool and breakout groups were used. The data revealed that PSTs researched and integrated these digital tools into their online microteaching session and felt more confident to integrate technology and digital tools into their teaching in the physical classroom. Furthermore, participants placed in low-resourced schools for their school-based WIL appreciated the opportunity to think about teaching this lesson with ICT integration, despite being unable to use technology to re-teach it in the classroom:
‘It was nice to spend time researching different digital tools that are available to use. I developed my skill to use this – I can create different resources on this platform now that I can take into my school.’ (Njabulo, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
‘I have already started planning to see how I will adapt on the interactive board in the classroom, so I have all these ideas. So, it really helped me prepare to teach this lesson.’ (Nadia, Bachelor of Education, Foundation Phase, 4th Year)
‘I am in a low resource so I cannot use the digital tools. It also allowed me to prepare to teach a Grade 7 lesson using different digital tools that I would not have done otherwise.’ (Simphiwe, Bachelor of Education, Intermediate Phase, 4th Year)
Discussion
In exploring participants’ experiences of the online microteaching model, the research posed the following questions: (1) How did PSTs feel each stage in the online microteaching model contributed to their learning experience? (2) How did PSTs feel the experience of online microteaching developed their teaching practice for teaching in the 21st century? A discussion of the findings is presented in the following, considering the research questions.
The online microteaching model adopted a three-stage approach, grounded in Kolb’s (1984) four modes of experiential learning, traditional microteaching methods and the affordances of new technologies. The findings revealed that each stage of the online microteaching model contributed to PSTs’ overall learning experience. The lesson rationale proved to be a valuable tool for enhancing PSTs’ critical thinking during lesson planning, forcing them to think deeply about their choices. Furthermore, by presenting the lesson rationale before the microteaching, PSTs felt they were able to contextualise the part of the lesson and justify their pedagogical choices. However, some participants recommended adapting how the rationale is presented to improve the student experience.
Kolb (1984:30) argued that in experiential learning, students ‘must be able to reflect on and observe their experience from many different perspectives’. Watching the microteaching lesson recording provided PSTs the unique opportunity to observe themselves in practice, identifying their own strengths and areas for improvement. This supports the findings of Deneme (2020) and Şen (2009), who highlighted the importance of the video recording as a necessary part of the learning experience. Consistent with existing literature (Deneme 2020; Ledger & Fischetti 2019; Wangchuk 2018), the study revealed that feedback from peers and supervisors was pivotal in fostering reflective practice. The analysis of data supported Mahmud (2021), who found Padlet.com an effective digital tool for providing real-time, written feedback during online microteaching for later reflection. This gives important insights for other institutions looking at ways of developing technology-enhanced models of microteaching. In the final stage of the online microteaching model, PSTs were required to write up their reflections on the experience. This process, which incorporates Kolb’s (1984) RO and AC stages, allowed PSTs to adjust their teaching practices. Subsequently, in the AE phase, they applied these adjustments before re-teaching the lesson in the classroom, closing the experiential learning loop.
The online microteaching experience bolstered participants’ confidence in delivering lessons in the physical classroom. By practising lesson delivery in a simulated and controlled environment, PSTs felt more prepared for face-to-face classroom teaching, echoing the findings from studies by Msimanga (2021) and Ledger and Fischetti (2019). Furthermore, PSTs developed their skills and confidence to teach online in a virtual environment, adapting their teaching practice to a new educational context. This aligns with Mahmud’s (2021) assertion that online microteaching equips PSTs with the adaptability required for 21st-century teaching. The data revealed a strong desire among participants for additional opportunities to practise online teaching, reflecting the growing demand for online teaching competencies in global and local education systems.
The study highlighted the potential of online microteaching to enhance PSTs’ skills in integrating technology and digital tools into their lessons. These findings align with the research of Akyuz and Tuluk (2021), Mahmud (2021), Donlon et al. (2022) and Zalavra and Makri (2022), who found that PSTs employed a variety of technological tools in their online microteaching lessons, preparing PSTs for ICT integration in education. This preparation was especially critical in the South African context, where disparities in school resources can impact practical teaching opportunities (Nel et al. 2020). Fergencs et al. (2020) revealed that many schools in South Africa face significant challenges implementing technology-enhanced learning as they do not have the technological infrastructure. However, PSTs in this study reported feeling more confident in their ability to integrate technology into their future teaching practice. Additionally, those placed in low-resourced schools, during their WIL, found value in planning and teaching technology-enhanced lessons, even though the lack of infrastructure in their host schools meant they could not implement these technologies in the classroom.
Conclusion
The study highlights the potential of online microteaching as an innovative teaching strategy that effectively prepares PSTs for teaching in the 21st century and the ever-evolving educational landscape. Online microteaching enhanced PSTs’ confidence in both physical and virtual classrooms, equipping them with adaptable teaching skills and reinforcing the need for more opportunities to develop online teaching competencies. The findings of this study support the need for online microteaching to be embedded within a carefully designed framework for experiential learning and revealed that what happened before, during and after the online microteaching session was critical to ensuring PSTs could deliberately engage with and learn from the experience.
Future research should explore how online microteaching models can be further developed to enhance teacher preparation. A key recommendation is for institutions to embed online microteaching within a structured experiential learning framework that integrates pre-lesson planning, microteaching delivery, feedback and reflection. Additionally, the study underscores the need for further research focused on enhancing PSTs’ abilities to integrate ICT into teaching and learning, particularly in the context of global and national educational priorities.
Acknowledgements
The research is based on an academic initiative that both authors were involved in implementing at one campus of a private higher education institution to support fourth-year Bachelor of Education pre-service teachers’ information and communication technology (ICT) and pedagogical skills.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Authors’ contributions
Both authors collaborated to produce the manuscript. J.P.W. contributed to the introduction, theoretical framework, initial teacher education focus in the literature review, results, discussion and overall language editing. I.G.D.A. focused on information and communication technology (ICT) aspects of the literature review regarding online microteaching, methodology, results analysis, ethical considerations and referencing.
Funding information
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Data availability
The research data are available from the corresponding author I.G.D.A. upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
References
Akyuz, H.I. & Tuluk, G., 2021, ‘Preservice mathematics teachers’ opinions on online micro-teaching experience’, in S. Jackowicz & I. Sahin (eds.), Online education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Issues, benefits, challenges, and strategies, pp. 157–182, ISTES Organisation, Monument, CO.
Allen, D.W., 1966, ‘Micro-teaching – A new framework for in-service education’, The High School Journal 49(8), 355–362.
Allen, D.W. & Cooper, J.M., 1970, Eric report resume: Microteaching, PREP-17 (Report no. PREP-17), Eric Clearinghouse on Reacher Education, Washington, DC.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V., 2006, ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’, Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V. & Clarke, V., 2019, ‘Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis’, Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Byrne, D., 2022, ‘A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis’, Quality & Quantity 56, 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
Deneme, S., 2020, ‘Teacher trainees’ opinions regarding video-recorded microteaching sessions’, Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 19(2), 24–33.
Department of Basic Education (DBE), 2018, Professional development framework for digital learning: Building educator competencies in facilitating learning with digital tools and resources, Government Printer, Pretoria, viewed 22 April 2024, from https://www.education.gov.za/Portals/0/Documents/Publications/Digital%20Learning%20Framework.pdf?ver=2018-07-09-101748-95.
Donlon, E., Conroy Johnson, M., Doyle, A., McDonald, E. & Sexton, P.J., 2022, ‘Presence accounted for? Student-teachers establishing and experiencing presence in synchronous online teaching environments’, Irish Educational Studies 41(1), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.2022520
Donnelly, D., Fischetti, J., Ledger, S. & Boadu, G., 2023, ‘Using a mixed-reality micro-teaching program to support “at risk” pre-service teachers’, in M. Winslade, T. Loughland & M.J. Eady (eds.), Work-integrated learning case studies in teacher education: Epistemic reflexivity, pp. 273–285, Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore.
Esiobu, G.O. & Maduekwe, A.N., 2008, ‘Interactive and reflective learning using multi-media: Insights from preservice teachers’ microteaching experience’, in Proceedings of the NAEMT Conference, Lagos.
Gravett, S., van der Merwe, D., Ramsaroop, S., Tshabalala, P., Bremner, C. & Mello, P., 2023, ‘Mixed-Reality Simulation to Support Practice Learning of Preservice Teachers’, Education Sciences 13, 1062. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13101062
Hama, H.Q. & Osam, Ű.V., 2021, ‘Revisiting microteaching in search of up-to-date solutions to old problems’, SAGE Open 11(4), 21582440211061534. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211061534
Kolb, D.A., 1984, Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, pp. 148–152, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Kusmawan, U., 2017, ‘Online microteaching: A multifaceted approach to teacher professional development’, Journal of Interactive Online Learning 15(1), 42–56.
Ledger, S. & Fischetti, J., 2019, ‘Micro-teaching 2.0: Technology as the classroom’, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 36(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4561
Li, X. & Li, J., 2020, ‘Microteaching in teacher education: A review of research from 2009 to 2019’, Journal of Education for Teaching 46(3), 297–313.
Mahmud, Y.S., 2021, ‘Online microteaching: A transformation of teaching practices in teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic’, in S.R. Murtiningsih, I.W. Lestari & E.D. Hatmanto (eds.), Best Practices and Research in ELT Classrooms, pp. 113–122, Pustaka Ilmu.
Mariana, N., Zuhdi, U., Rappa, N., Ledger, S. & Fischetti, J., 2023, ‘Identifying teaching skills of Indonesian prospective elementary teachers with microteaching technology 2.0’, Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Arts and Humanities 724, 570–576. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-008-4_63
Menon, D. & Ngugi, R., 2022, ‘Preservice secondary STEM teachers’ reflective practice in microteaching: An analysis of journal writing and video-mediated reflections’, Teacher Education Quarterly 49(1), 29–52.
Msimanga, M.R., 2021, ‘The impact of micro teaching lessons on teacher professional skills: Some reflections from South African student teachers’, International Journal of Higher Education 10(2), 19415–19415. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n2p164
Murtafiah, W. & Lukitasari, M., 2019, ‘Developing pedagogical content knowledge of mathematics pre-service teacher through microteaching lesson study’, Online Submission 13(2), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.22342/jpm.13.2.7663.201-218
Nel, C., Marais, E. & Dieker, L., 2020, ‘TeachLivE™: Learning from practice in a mixed-reality teaching environment’, in N. de Beer, N. Petersen & H.J. van Vuuren (eds.), Becoming a teacher: Research on the work-integrated learning of student teachers, pp. 43–64, AOSIS Publishing, Cape Town.
Şen, A.İ., 2009, ‘A study on the effectiveness of peer microteaching in a teacher education program’, Education and Science 34(151), 165–174.
Strydom, A. & Bezuidenhout, R.M., 2014, ‘Qualitative data collection’, in C. du Plooy-Cilliers, F. Davis & R.M. Bezuidenhout (eds.), Research matters, p. 188, Juta, Claremont.
Wangchuk, S., 2018, ‘Effects of microteaching on the pre-service teachers’ teaching competence – A case in Bhutan’, National Teacher Education Journal 11(3), 21–29.
Zalavra, E. & Makri, K., 2022, ‘Relocating online a technology-enhanced microteaching practice in teacher education: Challenges and implications’, Electronic Journal of e-Learning 20(3), 270–283. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.3.2180
|
Hide
Show all
Email this article (Login required)
