Quality teaching
The standard
The rationale
Annotated bibliography
The standard
Staff development that improves the learning of all students deepens educators' content knowledge, provides them with research-based instructional strategies to assist students in meeting rigorous academic standards, and prepares them to use various types of classroom assessments appropriately.
The rationale
Successful teachers have a deep understanding of the subjects they teach, use appropriate instructional methods, and apply various classroom assessment strategies. These teachers participate in sustained, intellectually rigorous professional learning regarding the subjects they teach, the strategies they use to teach those subjects, the findings of cognitive scientists regarding human learning, and the means by which they assess student progress in achieving high academic standards.
Teachers may acquire deeper understanding of their subjects through various means. For example, they may serve summer internships in appropriate organizations, attend extended institutes with follow-up activities throughout the school year, take traditional university or electronically delivered coursework, perform the activities of individuals involved in that field (for instance, conduct historical research), or participate in face-to-face or electronic subject-area networks. Whenever possible, however, it is important that teachers experience firsthand as learners the instructional approaches they in turn will be using with their own students. They may also attend workshops and courses with classroom follow up, participate in study groups, visit or watch videotapes of highperforming classrooms, observe demonstration lessons, or receive classroom coaching. Because it is natural that teachers will teach as they themselves are taught, it is imperative that the instructional methods used with educators be congruent to the greatest extent possible with those they are expected to use in their classroom.
Teachers depend on other knowledge and skills to facilitate student success. Examples of such additional content include classroom management, fundamental technological skills that increase teacher productivity, as well as mentoring and coaching skills for teacher leaders. Again, teachers must experience appropriate staff development designs to facilitate the desired outcome for students.
Because classroom assessment when appropriately conducted can improve student learning as well as gauge achievement, it is essential that teachers have a range of methods at their disposal that promote learning as well as measure it. Therefore, successful professional development efforts regularly include opportunities for teachers to acquire formative classroom assessment techniques appropriate to the subject matter and types of performance called for in state or local standards.
Fortunately, teachers' acquisition of this knowledge and these skills can occur relatively simultaneously. For instance, teachers may be learning new instructional approaches and assessment techniques while they are deepening their understanding of curriculum content. Teachers who are learning research-based instructional skills may find that their progress is limited by a lack of subject-area knowledge in a particular area and request an on-the-spot explanation of a particular concept. Teachers who are developing or learning how to use a scoring rubric for assessment purposes may at the same time be deepening their content knowledge.
In their role as instructional leaders, district and school administrators make teacher content knowledge and skills related to curriculum, instruction, and assessment high priorities. They do so by designing teachers' work days to include ongoing professional learning and collaboration and by providing teachers with data to assist with formative classroom assessment. In addition, they create a district and school culture of innovation and continuous improvement by visiting classrooms regularly to observe instruction and by engaging in frequent conversations with teachers individually and collectively about instruction and student learning.
Annotated bibliography
NOTE: When resources in this list are available on the web, a link is provided.
Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Order from ASCD's web site:
http://www.ascd.org
This book provides a rationale for the development of classrooms based on constructivist learning. The authors describe five guiding principles for teaching derived from constructivism, (1) posing problems of emerging relevance to learners, (2) structuring learning around "big ideas" or primary concepts, (3) seeking and valuing students' points of view, (4) adapting curriculum to address students' suppositions, and (5) assessing student learning in the context of the teaching. The authors provide research support for and classroom examples of each principle.
Cawelti, G. (1999). Handbook of research on improving student achievement (2d edition). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. (ERIC Documentation Service No. ED 394 629)
Order from Educational Research Service's web site:
http://www.ers.org
This handbook identifies classroom practices that research has shown to result in higher student achievement. The fundamental premise is that efforts to improve instruction must focus on the existing knowledge base about effective teaching and learning. Although most studies rely on traditional kinds of achievement testing, a broader definition of achievement is used here. Integrated approaches within disciplines are included if they are judged appropriate. Each chapter contains a reference list of 60 to 90 items.
Cohen, D. & Ball, D. (1990). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 347-53.
Order from AERA by emailing
subscriptions@aera.net
David K. Cohen and Deborah Loewenberg Ball provide an overview of five case studies and ancillary essays on teacher implementation of the California Mathematics Curriculum Framework. They describe the dilemma of the teacher as the traditionalist versus the teacher as innovator. Research of this nature provides insights into how instructional policy and teaching practice affect each other.
Corcoran, T. & Goertz, M. (1995). Instructional capacity and high performance schools. Educational Researcher, 24(9),
27-31.
Order from AERA by emailing
subscriptions@aera.net
The authors suggest that "capacity" means the maximum production of a school or educational system if the product is defined as high quality instruction. The instructional capacity of a school appears to be determined by the intellectual ability, knowledge, and skills of the faculty; the quality and quantity of resources available for teaching; and the social organization of instruction. The authors describe nine issues related to capacity and capacity building drawn from their review of the research literature.
Corcoran, T. (1995, June). Helping teachers teach well: Transforming professional development. CPRE Policy Briefs. Rutgers, NJ: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 69-79.
Download in PDF form at
http://www.cpre.org/Publications/rb16.pdf
To meet rising expectations, teachers need to deepen their content knowledge and learn new methods of teaching. They need more time to work with colleagues, to critically examine the new standards being proposed, and to revise curriculum. Corcoran reviews what is known about professional development - where it is now and where it needs to be. The brief discusses professional development's organization, costs, and effects on practice. The brief also suggests some principles to guide professional development in the future and offers a framework for designing and assessing policies and programs.
Fenstermacher, G. & Richardson, V. (2005). On making determinations of quality teaching. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 186-213.
The authors examine the concept of quality teaching by exploring its conceptual, empirical, and normative properties. The authors begin by analyzing the concept of teaching, separating it into what teacher do (behaviors) and what students learn. Fenstermacher and Richardson assert that good teaching (what teachers do) is not the same as successful teaching (teaching that produces student learning). For teaching to be both good and successful, it must be conjoined with factors well beyond the range of control of the classroom teacher. The analysis of the concept of teaching is then used to explore three strands of research on teaching: process-product, cognitive science, and constructivist. The article concludes with an analysis of the policy implications of this explication of quality teaching.
Jackson, A. & Davis, G. (2000). Turning points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Order from Teachers College Press's hotline: 800-575-6566
Anthony Jackson and Gayle Davis update the Carnegie Corporation's 1989 report to integrate what is known from education research and practice within a coherent approach toward adolescent education that educators can use to transform middle grade schools. Their report emphasizes that, in addition to structural changes in classrooms and schools, educators must also make substantial, far-reaching changes in curriculum, student assessment, and instruction in order to improve student learning.
Kaufman, M. (1997). A professional development stance for equity. SSI Perspectives, 2(3), 4-5.
Read at
http://www.terc.edu/handsonIssues/f96/equity.html
The author describes a professional development process that assists teachers in implementing successful instructional strategies by using equity as a framing tool for decision making. Teachers are able to improve the educational outcomes for all students by creating a framework around which to initiate change. Teachers learned to approach change using the following elements: (1) a stance of critique and inquiry; (2) data-driven decision making; (3) investigation of best practices, including instruction, curriculum, and materials; and (4) teacher leadership development. This framework is a means of eliminating the fragmentation that typically accompanies the implementation of reform.
Kennedy, M. (1998). Education reform and subject matter knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 249-263.
Request from John Wiley & Sons: 212-850-6645 or
subinfo@wiley.com
This article explores what K-12 teachers need to know to teach mathematics and science well. The research literature is reviewed to reveal the kinds of knowledge teachers need to teach as described in reform documents. Kennedy concludes that teachers should have conceptual understanding of the subject, pedagogical content knowledge, beliefs about the nature of science and mathematics, and particular attitudes toward these disciplines. Two problems in the area of subject matter knowledge are the lack of research knowledge on how to foster teachers' deep understanding and reasoning ability and how to measure it, and the lack of evidence of how any of the characteristics of knowledge contribute to actual teaching practice.
Kennedy, M. (1999). Form and substance in mathematics and science professional development. National Institute for Science Education Brief, 3(2), 1-7.Read at
http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/Publications/Briefs/Vol_3_No_2/Vol.3,No.2.pdf
Mary Kennedy presents research and policy analyses that criticize the one-shot workshop approach to professional development and offer a number of proposals for how professional development should be designed and organized. The research indicates that (1) programs should be lengthy rather than brief, (2) teachers should have a role in defining the content rather than having the topics imposed on them, (3) the scheduled meetings should be interspersed with classroom practice rather than concentrated into a short period of time, and (4) teachers should work together in groups, rather than in isolation.
Killion, J. (1999). What works in the middle: Results-based staff development. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.
Download in PDF from
http://www.nsdc.org/midbook.cfm.
As project director for Results-Based Staff Development for the Middle Grades, Joellen Killion discusses processes and resources for selecting, designing, and evaluating staff development to improve student achievement. The guide describes 26 successful staff development programs in language arts, mathematics, science, social studies, and interdisciplinary programs that were studied and evaluated to ascertain their impact on student learning. It offers guidelines for selecting and/or designing initiatives to improve student performance.
Loucks-Horsley, S. (1996). Principles of effective professional development for mathematics and science education: A synthesis of standards. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education, NISE Brief 1(1). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 409 201)
Download in PDF form at
http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/Publications/Briefs/NISE_Brief_Vol_1_No_1.pdf
Susan Loucks-Horsely discusses some of conclusions from the Professional Development Project of the NISE. She presents seven principles that are found in excellent professional development experiences for science and mathematics educators: developing a clear, well-defined image of effective classroom learning and teaching; providing teachers with opportunities to develop knowledge, skills and teaching approaches; using instructional methods to promote learning for adults which mirror the methods used with students; strengthening the learning community of science and mathematics teachers; preparing and supporting teachers to be leaders; providing links to other parts of the educational system; and making continuous assessment part of the professional development process.
Marzano, R., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Order from ASCD's web site:
http://www.ascd.org
Robert Marzano, Debra Pickering, and Jane Pollock present some of the results of a McREL study designed to assess the effectiveness of instructional strategies that could be used by teachers in K-12 classrooms. This study evaluates nine different categories of instructional strategies affecting student achievement. In order from most effective to least effective, they are identifying similarities and differences; summarizing and note taking; reinforcing effort and providing recognition; homework and practice; nonlinguistic representations; cooperative learning; setting objectives and providing feedback; generating and testing hypotheses; and questions, cues, and advance organizers.
Newmann, F., Marks, H., & Gamoran, A. (Spring, 1995). Authentic pedagogy: Standards that boost student performance. Issues in Restructuring Schools, Report No. 8. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring Schools.
Order from Document Service, Wisconsin Center for Education Research 1025 W. Johnson St., Room 242, Madison, WI 53706
608-263-4214
In this report, a conception of instruction and assessment is offered that remains consistent with active learning but which emphasizes that all instructional activities must be rooted in a primary concern for high standards of intellectual quality. The report includes general criteria for authentic pedagogy, as well as more specific standards that can be used to judge the quality of assessment tasks, classroom lessons, and student performance.
Sparks, G. (1983). Synthesis of research on staff development for effective teaching. Educational Leadership, 41(3), 65-72.
Order from ASCD's web site:
http://www.ascd.org
Georgea Sparks briefly summarizes some of the research on appropriate content for staff development, as well as the appropriate context for staff development. The major focus of the article, however, is on the training process of staff development. Sparks combines some of the research on effective training activities to form a list: diagnosing and prescribing, giving information and demonstrating, discussing application, and coaching. Finally, she presents some of the research concerning the importance of designing staff development programs that are adapted to fit various teacher characteristics and attitudes.
Sparks, D. (1998). Making assessment part of teacher learning. Journal of Staff Development, 19(4), 33-35.
Read at
http://www.learningforward.org/news/jsd/joyce194.cfm
Dennis Sparks interviews Bruce Joyce regarding his advocacy for staff development that improves student learning. Joyce discusses the importance of continuous adult learning, studying implementation, assessment as part of instruction, formative evaluation, and some barriers to implementation.
Stiggins, R. (2001). Student-involved classroom assessment (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Order from Prentice Hall's web site:
http://vig.prenhall.com/
Richard Stiggins describes how to create high quality classroom assessments and use them to build student confidence and maximize student achievement. He emphasizes what teachers need to know to manage day-to-day classroom assessment effectively and efficiently and he focuses on student well-being and potential for self-assessment. He offers practical guidelines on how to use various assessment methods and how to match them with achievement targets. He offers time- and energy-saving ideas for teachers, and he connects the concepts in the book with traditional notions of validity and reliability.
Stigler, J. & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Order from Simon & Schuster's web site:
http://www.simonsays.com
James Stigler and James Hiebert use the results of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study to show that although American teachers are often competent at implementing American teaching methods, these teaching methods themselves are severely limited. They propose a new plan for improving classroom teaching in America. Their proposal is based on six principles: (1) expect improvement to be continual, gradual, and incremental; (2) maintain a constant focus on student learning goals; (3) focus on teaching, not teachers; (4) make improvements in context; (5) make improvement in the work of teachers; (6) build a system that can learn from its own experience.
Sykes, G. (1999). Make subject matter count. Journal of Staff Development, (2), 50-51.
Read at
http://www.learningforward.org/news/jsd/sykes202.cfm
Gary Sykes discusses recent reports suggesting that research on teaching has been overlooking the importance of subject matter, the content of instruction. He offers some strategies for correcting this, such as engaging teachers simultaneously in learning about the subject matter and the teaching of the subject matter and grounding the content of professional development in part in the content of the student curriculum.
Weiss, I. R. & Pasley J. D. (2006). Scaling up instructional improvement through teacher professional development: Insights from the local systemic change initiative. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) Policy Briefs.
Read at
http://www.cpre.org/Publications/rb44.pdf
Weiss and Pasley share results from the Local Systemic Change Initiative (LSC) and conclude that PD to enhance mathematics and science teaching can be implemented effectively at scale. When carefully designed and energetically supported, ambitious PD focused on instructional content and materials and sustained over time can change what happens in classrooms; impacts on teachers and their teaching were typically evident after approximately 30 hours of PD, with further impacts detected through 80 hours of PD. The LSDC evaluation suggests some implications of importance to those considering similar large-scale instructional reform through PD. First, if PD is going to have an impact, it needs to be focused on clear goals and delivered over time by well-trained providers. Competing and distracting PD efforts should be discouraged. Second, if PD is to move beyond business as usual, it must be based on content and practice and planned as a coherent set of strategies to develop teachers' content and pedagogical knowledge. This work is difficult, but it does not require starting from scratch; most districts have internal capacity-such as teachers who can lead PD and principals who can align instruction with a reform vision-that can be used to move instructional change to scale. Third, alignment of district policies with instructional reforms and garnering the support of school/district administrators is crucial to the success and long-term sustainability of these reforms. Finally, stakeholders need to be aware that change takes time-and work to help teachers gain that time for learning. The findings from the LSC program thus supports the consensus view about effective PD: the importance of content-based PD, aligned with curriculum and assessment, focused on student learning, sustained over time, with collaboration among teachers, and administrative support. The LSC experience also points to some ways to make sure the common sense of that consensus becomes common in practice.
Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A. (1998). Best practice: New standards for teaching and learning in America's schools, Second edition. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Order from Heinemann's web site:
http://www.heinemann.com
Steven Zemelman, Harvey Daniels, and Arthur Hyde encourage everyone involved in school reform to recognize, understand, appreciate, and start exploiting the remarkably coherent models for across-the-curriculum school reform that already have been built. They analyze a rich base of research and exemplary practice that points the way to school renewal through curriculum reform. They provide a compact and accurate summary of current "best practice" research in each of six teaching fields: reading, writing, mathematics, science, social studies, and fine arts. After describing each field's research base, they provide at least one example that shows how some teachers are implementing key content and processes in their classrooms.
