Charlotte Dignath

Prof. Dr. Charlotte Dignath

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications

1 January 2008 in Educational Research Review
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CDCharlotte Dignath
Charlotte Dignath
GBGerhard Buettner
Gerhard Buettner
HLHans-Peter Langfeldt
Hans-Peter Langfeldt

15 July 2020 in Educational Psychology Review
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CDCharlotte Dignath
Charlotte Dignath
MVMarcel V. J. Veenman
Marcel V. J. Veenman
Despite the consensus about the importance of self-regulated learning for academic as well as for lifelong learning, it is still poorly understood as to how teachers can most effectively support their students in enacting self-regulated learning. This article provides a framework about how self-regulated learning can be activated directly through strategy instruction and indirectly by creating a learning environment that allows students to regulate their learning. In examining teachers’ instructional attempts for SRL, we systematically review the literature on classroom observation studies that have assessed how teachers support their students’ SRL. The results of the 17 retrieved studies show that in most classrooms, only little direct strategy instruction took place. Nevertheless, some teachers provided their students with learning environments that require and thus foster self-regulated learning indirectly. Based on a review of classroom observation studies, this article stresses the significance of (1) instructing SRL strategies explicitly so that students develop metacognitive knowledge and skills to integrate the application of these strategies successfully into their learning process, and (2) the necessity of complementing classroom observation research with data gathered from student and teacher self-report in order to obtain a comprehensive view of the effectiveness of teacher approaches to support SRL. Finally, we discuss ten cornerstones for future directions for research about supporting SRL.

23 June 2010 in Metacognition and Learning
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SKSaskia Kistner
Saskia Kistner
KRKatrin Rakoczy
Katrin Rakoczy
BOBarbara Otto
Barbara Otto
CDCharlotte Dignath
Charlotte Dignath
GBGerhard Büttner
Gerhard Büttner
EKEckhard Klieme
Eckhard Klieme


26 August 2022 in Educational Psychology Review
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CDCharlotte Dignath
Charlotte Dignath
SRSara Rimm-Kaufman
Sara Rimm-Kaufman
REReyn van Ewijk
Reyn van Ewijk
MKMareike Kunter
Mareike Kunter
Teachers’ belief systems about the inclusion of students with special needs may explain gaps between policy and practice. We investigated three inter-related aspects of teachers’ belief systems: teachers’ cognitive appraisals (e.g., attitudes), emotional appraisal (e.g., feelings), and self-efficacy (e.g., agency to teach inclusive classrooms). To date, research in this field has produced contradictory findings, resulting in a sparse understanding of why teachers differ in their belief systems about inclusive education, and how teachers’ training experiences contribute to their development of professional beliefs. We used meta-analysis to describe the level and range of teachers’ beliefs about inclusive education, and examine factors that contribute to variation in teachers’ beliefs, namely (1) the point in teachers’ career (pre-service versus in-service), (2) training in special versus regular education, and (3) the effects of specific programs and interventions. We reviewed 102 papers (2000–2020) resulting in 191 effect sizes based on research with 40,898 teachers in 40 countries. On average, teachers’ cognitive appraisals, emotional appraisals, and efficacy about inclusion were found to be in the mid-range of scales, indicating room for growth. Self-efficacy beliefs were higher for preservice (M = 3.69) than for in-service teachers (M = 3.13). Teachers with special education training held more positive views about inclusion than regular education teachers (d = 0.41). Training and interventions related to improved cognitive appraisal (d = 0.63), emotional appraisal (d = 0.63), and self-efficacy toward inclusive practices (d = 0.93). The training was particularly effective in encouraging reflection of beliefs and, eventually, facilitating belief change when teachers gained practical experience in inclusive classrooms. Six key findings direct the next steps.