Pre-service teachers used sociocognitive controlling strategies significantly more frequently than in-service teachers during collaborative problem-solving¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2031: baselines and conditions change
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? Pre-service teacher groups showed a higher absolute frequency of sociocognitive controlling (f = 646 vs. f = 364), a statistically significant difference (U = 10, p < .001). → Faisal Channa 2026
Evidence¶
Faisal Channa 2026¶
Faisal Channa, Piia Näykki, Päivi Häkkinen, Kristóf Fenyvesi, Takumi Yada. (2026). Sequential patterns of challenges and socially shared regulation of learning: a comparison of pre-service and in-service teachers’ collaborative learning. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-026-09818-y
q2 · i? · associational · r1
Descriptive frequency analysis of 25.7 h of video from 22 groups (11 pre-service, 11 in-service) coded with an SSRL scheme; pre-service groups showed "a higher frequency of sociocognitive controlling (f = 646) than in-service teachers ( f = 364)". Mann–Whitney U tests on group-level frequencies confirmed the difference (U = 10, p < .001).
"Pre-service teachers demonstrated a higher frequency of sociocognitive controlling (f = 646) than in-service teachers ( f = 364) (see Table 1)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- In-service teachers used motivational regulation significantly more frequently than pre-service teachers during collaborative problem-solving — related
- In-service teachers more often followed socioemotional challenges with monitoring, and the groups differed in recurrent self-loops of controlling versus monitoring — related
- Most coding categories showed no statistically significant frequency differences between pre-service and in-service teachers — reports the opposite
- Pre-service teachers showed stronger sequential transitions linking controlling with monitoring and planning, while in-service teachers more often followed sociocognitive challenges with monitoring — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
pre-service-higher-sociocognitive-controlling-frequency |
title |
Pre-service teachers used sociocognitive controlling strategies significantly more frequently than in-service teachers during collaborative problem-solving |
description |
Pre-service teachers used sociocognitive controlling strategies significantly more frequently than in-service teachers during collaborative problem-solving |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
recheck_by |
2031 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — faisal-channa-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.