The relation between eye contact and teacher interpersonal behavior differed between teachers: Joanne's agency effect was opposite and Lily's communion effect was non-significant¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · associational r1 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i1 With Joanne, the effect of eye contact on teacher agency was opposite to the pooled pattern (η² = 0.029), her agency being higher during student gazes at her face. → Haataja 2021 q2 i? With Lily, ANOVA did not yield a significant effect of eye contact on teacher communion. → Haataja 2021 (2) q2 i? In Fred's lesson, student-started eye contacts were frequent during low teacher communion, differing from the other teachers. → Haataja 2021 (3)

Evidence¶

Haataja 2021¶

Haataja, E., Salonen, V., Laine, A., Toivanen, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2021). The Relation Between Teacher-Student Eye Contact and Teachers' Interpersonal Behavior During Group Work: a Multiple-Person Gaze-Tracking Case Study in Secondary Mathematics Education. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09538-w

q2 · i1 · associational · r1

The per-teacher ANOVA in the case study found that for Joanne the effect of eye contact on teacher agency was opposite, with printed effect size η² = 0.029; her agency was significantly higher during student gazes at teacher face than during student-started eye contacts.

"With Joanne, the effect of eye contact on teacher agency was opposite ( F(3, 476) = 4.70, p =. 0 0 3 ,η2 = 0.029)."

Haataja 2021 (2)¶

Haataja, E., Salonen, V., Laine, A., Toivanen, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2021). The Relation Between Teacher-Student Eye Contact and Teachers' Interpersonal Behavior During Group Work: a Multiple-Person Gaze-Tracking Case Study in Secondary Mathematics Education. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09538-w

q2 · i? · associational · r1

In Lily's class the per-teacher ANOVA on communion was non-significant (F(3, 481) = 1.07, p = .360), although this gaze category had the second-highest mean of teacher communion; equivalence was not tested.

"With Lily, ANOVA did not yield a significant effect of eye contact on teacher communion (F(3, 481) = 1.07, p = .360)"

Haataja 2021 (3)¶

Haataja, E., Salonen, V., Laine, A., Toivanen, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2021). The Relation Between Teacher-Student Eye Contact and Teachers' Interpersonal Behavior During Group Work: a Multiple-Person Gaze-Tracking Case Study in Secondary Mathematics Education. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09538-w

q2 · i? · associational · r1

The per-teacher analysis found Fred's results differed from the others: "the studentstarted eye contacts were frequent during low teacher communion", which the authors interpreted as the reciprocal nature of scaffolding interaction with sometimes unproductive student initiatives.

"In this gaze category, Fred 's results differed from the others. In his lesson, the studentstarted eye contacts were frequent during low teacher communion."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• One-sided face-targeted gazes were more frequent than dyadic eye contacts, and student-started eye contacts outnumbered teacher-started ones — related
• Students gaze at their teacher's face more often and with longer durations during high teacher communion during small-group problem solving — related
• Student-started eye contacts occur when teacher agency is low, and their durations increase as teacher agency decreases — reports the opposite
• Teacher gazes at student faces and teacher-started eye contacts occur during high teacher agency, and teacher-started eye contacts are shorter when agency is higher — related
• Teachers and students use gaze to express agency and communion during classroom problem-solving — a broader claim this one bears on