@article{BoernertRinglebWestphalZarubaetal.2020,
  author    = {B{\"o}rnert-Ringleb, Moritz and Westphal, Andrea and Zaruba, Nicole and Gutmann, Franziska and Vock, Miriam},
  title     = {The relationship between attitudes toward inclusion, beliefs about teaching and learning, and subsequent automatic evaluations amongst student teachers},
  series = {Frontiers in education},
  volume    = {5},
  journal   = {Frontiers in education},
  publisher = {Frontiers Media},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {2504-284X},
  doi       = {10.3389/feduc.2020.584464},
  pages     = {11},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Teachers' attitudes toward inclusion are frequently cited as being an important predictor of how successfully a given inclusive school system is implemented. At the same time, beliefs about the nature of teaching and learning are discussed as a possible predictor of attitudes toward inclusion. However, more recent research emphasizes the need of considering implicit processes, such as automatic evaluations, when describing attitudes and beliefs. Previous evidence on the association of attitudes toward inclusion and beliefs about teaching and learning is solely based on explicit reports. Therefore, this study aims to examine the relationship between attitudes toward inclusion, beliefs about teaching and learning, and the subsequent automatic evaluations of pre-service teachers (N = 197). The results revealed differences between pre-service teachers' explicit attitudes/beliefs and their subsequent automatic evaluations. Differences in the relationship between attitudes toward inclusion and beliefs about teaching and learning occur when teachers focus either on explicit measures or automatic evaluations. These differences might be due to different facets of the same attitude object being represented. Relying solely on either explicit measures or automatic evaluations at the exclusion of the other might lead to erroneous assumptions about the relation of attitudes toward inclusion and beliefs about teaching and learning.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ZarubaWestphalGutmannetal.2021,
  author    = {Zaruba, Nicole and Westphal, Andrea and Gutmann, Franziska and Vock, Miriam},
  title     = {Preservice teachers' implicit and explicit attitudes towards teaching and learning},
  series = {Frontiers in education},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Frontiers in education},
  publisher = {Frontiers Media},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {2504-284X},
  doi       = {10.3389/feduc.2021.619098},
  pages     = {14},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {When it comes to teacher attitudes towards teaching and learning, research relies heavily on explicit measures (e.g., questionnaires). These attitudes are generally conceptualized as constructivist and transmissive views on teaching and learning with constructivism often considered to be more desirable. In explicit measures, this can have drawbacks like socially desirable responding. It is for this reason that, in this study, we investigated implicit attitudes as well as explicit attitudes towards constructivism and transmission. N = 100 preservice teachers worked on a questionnaire and two Single-Target Implicit Association Tests (ST-IAT constructivism and ST-IAT transmission) before (T1) and after (T2) a single master's semester. One group (n = 50) did student teaching while a second group (n = 50) took master's courses. We evaluated preservice teachers' views on teaching at the end of their masters' studies. Participants agreed with transmission and constructivism (T1) on both an explicit and implicit level. Implicit measures seem to exceed explicit measures in differentially assessing constructivist and transmissive views on teaching and learning. After student teaching (T2), there was no overall effect of attitude development but changes in rank indicate that participants' implicit attitudes towards constructivism and transmission developed differently for each individual.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{JurczokKalinowskiZarubaetal.2021,
  author    = {Jurczok, Anne and Kalinowski, Eva and Zaruba, Nicole and Vock, Miriam},
  title     = {Kooperative Unterrichtsentwicklung an Grundschulen durch die Lesson Study-Methode},
  series = {Leistung macht Schule: F{\"o}rderung leistungsstarker und potenziell besonders leistungsf{\"a}higer Sch{\"u}lerinnen und Sch{\"u}ler},
  journal   = {Leistung macht Schule: F{\"o}rderung leistungsstarker und potenziell besonders leistungsf{\"a}higer Sch{\"u}lerinnen und Sch{\"u}ler},
  publisher = {Beltz},
  address   = {Weinheim},
  isbn      = {978-3-407-25883-0},
  year      = {2021},
  language  = {de}
}
@phdthesis{Zaruba2020,
  author    = {Zaruba, Nicole},
  title     = {Die Entwicklung von Lehrer{\"u}berzeugungen im Potsdamer Praxissemester},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {viii, 195},
  year      = {2020},
  language  = {de}
}