Preservice teachers' interpreting and shaping dimensions show the strongest co-occurrence across all three weeks of AI-based simulation interactions¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitativer2·q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? ENA models of 17 preservice teachers' noticing statements show interpreting–shaping co-occurrence was strongest in every week (0.57, 0.54, 0.63), indicating sense-making and eliciting were closely coordinated. → Selen Galiç 2026
Evidence¶
Selen Galiç 2026¶
Selen Galiç, Mathias Tejera, Sebastián Parodi, Markus Hohenwarter, Zsolt Lavicza. (2026). Preservice mathematics teachers' noticing in AI-based simulations: transitions among attending, interpreting, and shaping. ZDM – Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-026-01805-4
q2 · i? · qualitative · r2
Epistemic Network Analysis of coded noticing statements from 17 preservice teachers across a three-week AI-based simulation intervention. The ENA models visualised co-occurrences among attending, interpreting, and shaping, with the article reporting "the strongest co-occurrences were consistently observed between Interpreting and Shaping" with the printed edge values per week.
"Across the three weeks, the strongest co-occurrences were consistently observed between Interpreting and Shaping (Week 1: 0.57; Week 2: 0.54; Week 3: 0.63), indicating a close relationship between sense-making and eliciting."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Preservice teachers moved directly from attending to shaping more often than from attending to interpreting, and attending–interpreting links remained comparatively weak — related
- The dominant within-dimension noticing transition varied by week: attending in Week 1, interpreting in Week 2, and shaping in Week 3 — related
- Noticing in AI-based simulations was organised through both within-dimension continuity and between-dimension connections rather than a linear sequence — a broader claim this one bears on
- Epistemic network analysis provides a better account of temporal patterns between socio-cognitive events than coding-and-counting — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
interpreting-shaping-strongest-co-occurrence-ai-simulations |
title |
Preservice teachers' interpreting and shaping dimensions show the strongest co-occurrence across all three weeks of AI-based simulation interactions |
description |
Preservice teachers' interpreting and shaping dimensions show the strongest co-occurrence across all three weeks of AI-based simulation interactions |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-11 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — selen-galiç-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.