Effects of professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 81-112

  Desimone, Laura M ^a   Porter, Andrew C ^a   Garet, Michael S ^a   Yoon, Kwang Suk ^a   Birman, Beatrice F ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Changing teaching practice; Content; Evaluation; Longitudinal study; Mathematics and science; Professional development

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036622895     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/01623737024002081     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: Author.
2. Ball, D.L., Lubienski, S.T., & Mewborn, D.S. (2001). Mathematics. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 433-456). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3. Birman, B., Desimone, Garet, M., & Porter, A. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership, 57(8), 28-33.
4. Birman, B.F., Reeve, A.L., & Sattler, C.L. (1998). The Eisenhower professional development program: Emerging themes from six districts. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
5. Birman, B.F., Kirshstein, R.J., Levin, D.A., Matheson, N., & Stephens, M. (1997). The effectiveness of using technology in K-12 education: A preliminary framework and review. Paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
6. Burstein, L., McDonnell, L.M., Van Winkle, J., Ormseth, T., Mirocha, J., & Guitton, G. (1995). Validating national curriculum indicators. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
7. Bryk, A., & Raudenbush, S.W. (1988). Toward a more appropriate conceptualization of research on school effects: A three-level hierarchical linear model. American Journal of Education, 65-107.
8. Bryk, A.S., & Raudenbush, S.W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9. Carey, N., & Frechtling, J. (1997). Best practice in action: Follow-up survey on teacher enhancement programs. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
10. Cohen, D.K. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 311-329.
11. Cohen, D.K., & Hill, H.C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102(2), 294-343.
12. Cohen, D.K., & Hill, H.C. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University. (1994). Multimedia environments for developing literacy in at-risk students. In B. Means (Ed.), Technology and education reform (pp. 23-56). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
14. Council of Chief State School Officers (2000). Using data on enacted curriculum in mathematics and science. Washington, DC: Author.
15. Darling-Hammond, L. (1997b). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
16. Elmore, R.F., & Burney, D. (1999). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and instructional improvement. In L. Darling-Hammond and G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
17. Elmore, R.F., & Burney, D. (1996, March). Staff development and instructional improvement: Community District 2, New York City. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
18. Fennema, E., Carpenter, T.P., Franke, M.L., Levi, L., Jacobs, V.R., & Empson, S.B. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children's thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 403-434.
19. Gamoran, A., Porter, A.C., Smithson, J., & White, P.A. (1997). Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(4), 325-338.
20. Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L. Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Analysis of a national sample of teachers. American Education Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
21. Garet, M., Birman, B., Porter, A., Desimone, L., & Herman, R. with Yoon, K.S. (1999). Designing effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
22. Guskey, T.R. (1997). Research needs to link professional development and student learning. Available: http://www.nsdc.org/library/jsd/jsdgusk.html.
23. Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 3-19.
24. Kennedy, M.M. (1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education (Research monograph no. 13). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
25. Koretz, D., Stecher, B., Klein, S., & McCaffrey, D. (1994). The Vermont portfolio assessment program: Findings and implications. Issues and Practice, 13(3), 5-16.
26. Little, J.W. (1993). Teachers' professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129-151.
27. Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P.W., Love, N., & Stiles, K.E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
28. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwar, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Mayer, D.P. (1999). Measuring instructional practice: Can policymakers trust survey data? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(1), 29-45.
30. Means, B. (Ed.). (1994). Technology and education reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
31. Means, B., Blando, J., Olson, K., Middleton, T., Morocco, C.C., Remz, A.R., & Zorfas, J. (1993). Using technology to support education reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
32. Means, B., & Olson, K. (1995). Technology's role in education reform: Findings from a national study of innovating schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
33. Mitchell, K.J. (1996). Reforming and conforming: NASDC principals discuss school accountability systems. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
34. Mullens, J. (1998). Validating teacher responses on instructional practice self-report surveys: Findings from a recent field-test. Prepared for the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management Research Conference, New York.
35. Mullens, J.E., & Gayler, K. (1999). Measuring classroom instructional processes: Using surveys and case study field test results to improve item construction. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
36. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
37. National Commission on Teaching & America's Future. (1996, September). What matters most: Teaching for America's future. New York: Author.
38. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1998). Principles and standards for school mathematics: Discussion draft. Reston, VA: Author.
39. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
40. Newmann, F., & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
41. Porter, A.C. (1998). Curriculum reform and measuring what is taught: Measuring the quality of education processes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, New York.
42. Porter, A.C., Kirst, M.W., Osthoff, E.J., Smithson, J.L., & Schneider, S.A. (1993, October). Reform up close: An analysis of high school mathematics and science classrooms. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.
43. Porter, A.C., Garet, M.S., Desimone, L., Birman, B.F., Suk Yoon, K. (2000). Does professional development change teaching practice? Results from a three-year study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
44. Raizen, S.A. (1998). Standards for science education. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 66-121.
45. Richardson, V. (Ed.). (2001). Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
46. Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 905-947). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
47. Romberg, T.A. (1998). Comments: NCTM's curriculum and evaluation standards. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 8-21.
48. Shavelson, R., & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers' pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51, 455-498.
49. Shields, P.M., Marsh, J.A., & Adelman, N.E. (1998). Evaluation of NSF's Statewide Systemic Initiatives (SSI) Program: The SSIs' impacts on classroom practice. Menlo Park, CA: SRI.
50. Sivin-Kachala, J., & Bialo, E. (1996). Report on the effectiveness of technology in schools, '95-'96. Washington, DC: Software Publishers Association.
51. Smith, M.S., & O'Day, J. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S.H. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing: The 1990 yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (pp. 233-267). Bristol, PA: Falmer Press.
52. Smithson, J.L., & Porter, A.C., (1994). Measuring classroom practice: Lessons learned from efforts to describe the enacted curriculum-the Reform Up Close study. CPRE Research Report Series #31. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
53. Snyder, T.D., Hoffman, C.M., & Geddes, C.M. (1999). Digest of education statistics 1998. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
54. Stigler, J.W., & Hiebert, J., (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: The Free Press.
55. Sykes, G. (1996). Reform of and as professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(7), 465-489.
56. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. 4th Edition. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
57. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1999a). Teacher quality: A report on the preparation and qualifications of public school teachers (NCES 1999-080). Washington, DC: Author.
58. Weiss, I.R., Montgomery, D.L., Ridgway, C.J., & Bond, S.L. (1998). Local systemic change through teacher enhancement: Year three cross-site report. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.
59. White, R. (2001). The revolution in research on science teaching. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 457-471). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
60. Wilson, S.M., & Lowenberg, D. (1991). Changing visions and changing practices: Patchworks in learning to teach mathematics for understanding. Research Report 91-2. East Lansing, MI: The National Center for Research on Teacher Education.