Observational Tools Included | AAAS Category | Interactions | Main Findings | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Science Laboratory Interaction Categories (SLIC)- Student | Segmented | Verbal and non-verbal | Most time was spent on transferring information | (Kyle et al., 1979) |
N/A | N/A | Verbal | Most of the laboratory interactions were about laboratory procedures | (Lehman, 1990) |
A Modified-Revised version of the Science Teacher Behaviour Inventory (MR-STBI) | Segmented | Verbal and non-verbal | Instructor behaviours are different in U.S. and German institutions of higher education | (Hilosky et al., 1998) |
Modified from Science Laboratory Interaction Categories (SLIC) | Segmented | Verbal and non-verbal | Instructors varied in the six science disciplines | (Ajaja, 2013) |
Computerised Real-time Instructor Observation Tool (RIOT) | Continuous | Verbal and non-verbal | S-I interaction varied in both small group and whole class observations. | (West et al., 2013) |
Teaching Assistant Inquiry Observation Protocol (TA-IOP) | Holistic | Verbal and non-verbal | Peer reflection can help TAs’ teaching in inquiry laboratories. | (Miller et al., 2014) |
TA Observation Form (TA behaviours) On-off task form (student engagement) | Segmented | Verbal | S-I interactions could possibly predict the student engagement | (Stang & Roll, 2014) |
Laboratory Observation Protocol for the Undergraduate STEM (LOPUS) | Segmented | Verbal and non-verbal | Students’ behaviours were independent from the instructor’s style. The nature of interactions is related to laboratory activities. | (Velasco et al., 2016) |