Professional Development in the Accountability Context: Building Capacity to Achieve Standards

Educational Psychologist

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 89-106

  Hochberg, Eric D ^a   Desimone, Laura M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77950898473     PISSN: 00461520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00461521003703052     Document Type: Article

References (108)

1. Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
2. Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S. T., & Mewborn, D. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers' mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 433-456). New York, NY: Macmillan.
3. Banilower, E. R., Heck, D. J., & Weiss, I.R. (2007). Can professional development make the vision of the Standards a reality? The impact of the National Science Foundation's Local Systemic Change Through Teacher Enhancement initiative. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 375-395.
4. Banilower, E., & Shimkus, E. (2004). Professional development observation study. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
5. Beatty, A. (2008). Common standards for K-12 education? Considering the evidence: Summary of a workshop series. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
6. Birman, B., Boyle, A., Le Floch, K. C., Elledge, A., Holtzman, D., Song, M., & Yoon, K. (2009). State and local implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act. Volume VIII-Teacher quality under NCLB: Final report. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, U.S. Department of Education.
7. Blank, R. K., de las Alas, N., & Smith, C. (2007). Analysis of the quality of professional development programs for mathematics and science teachers: Findings from a cross-state study. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
8. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
9. Borman, G. D. (2005). National efforts to bring reform to scale in high-poverty schools: Outcomes and implications. In L. Parker (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 29, pp. 1-28). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
10. Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for school improvement. New York: Russell Sage.
11. Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C., & Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children's mathematics thinking in classroom teach- ing: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 499-531.
12. Cassada, K., Stevens, C., & Wilson, J. (2005). Schoolimprovement-aligned! Educational Leadership, 62. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational leadership/summer05/vol62/num09/School_Improvement-Aligned!.aspx
13. Certo, J. L. (2006). Beginning teacher concerns in an accountability-based testing environment. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 20, 331-349.
14. Cohen, D. K. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 311-329.
15. Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1990). Relations between policy and practice: A commentary. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 331-338.
16. Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102, 294-343.
17. Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
18. Corcoran, T. B. (2007). Teaching matters: How state and local policymakers can improve the quality of teachers and teaching. CPRE Policy Brief. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
19. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181-199.
20. Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81-112.
21. Desimone, L., Smith, T., & Ueno, K. (2006). Are teachers who need sustained, content-focused professional development getting it? An administrator's dilemma. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42, 179-215.
22. Education Week.(2001).Quality counts 2001: A better balance.Washington, DC: Author.
23. Elmore, R. F., Abelmann, C. H., & Fuhrman, S. H. (1996). The new account- ability in state education reform: From process to performance. In H. F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 65-98). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
24. Elmore, R. F., & Burney, D. (1996). Staff development and instructional improvement: Community District 2, New York City. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
25. Finnigan, K. S., & Gross, B. (2007). Do accountability policy sanctions influence teacher motivation? Lessons from Chicago's low-performing schools. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 594-629.
26. Firestone, W., Mangin, M., Martinez, M., & Polovsky, T. (2005). Leading coherent professional development: A comparison of three districts. Education Administration Quarterly, 41, 413-448.
27. Fuhrman, S. H. (2003). Riding waves, trading horses: The twenty-year effort to reform education. In D. T. Gordon (Ed.), A nation reformed? American education twenty years after 'A Nation at Risk' (pp. 7-22). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
28. 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, 325-338.
29. Garet, M. S., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., & Silverberg, M. (2008). The impact of two professional development interventions on early reading instruction and achievement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
30. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915-945.
31. Gill, M. G., Ashton, P. T., & Algina, J. (2004). Changing preservice teachers' epistemological beliefs about teaching and learning in mathemat- ics: An intervention study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 164-185.
32. Glazerman, S., Dolfin, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Isenberg, E., Lugo-Gil, J., & Ali, M. (2008). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induc- tion: Results from the first year of a randomized controlled study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
33. Goertz, M. E. (2005). State education policy in the new millennium. In C. Van Horn (Ed.), The state of the states (4th ed., pp. 141-166).Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
34. Gregoire, M. (2003). Is it a challenge or a threat? A dual-process model of teachers' cognition and appraisal processes during conceptual change. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 147-179.
35. Haertel, E. H., & Herman, J. L. (2005). A historical perspective on validity arguments for accountability testing. In J. L. Herman, & E. H. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement (pp. 1-34). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.
36. Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development: A new consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 127-150). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
37. Heck, D. J., & Weiss, I. R. (2005). Strategic leadership for education reform: Lessons from the Statewide Systemic Initiatives program. CPRE Policy Brief. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
38. Herman, R., Dawson, P., Dee, T., Greene, J., Maynard, R., Redding, S., & Darwin, M. (2008). Turning around chronically low-performing schools: A practice guide (NCEE #2008-4020). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute for Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
39. Hess, F. M., & Petrilli, M. J. (2007). No Child Left Behind: Primer. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
40. Hill, H. C. (2004). Professional development standards and practices in elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 104, 215-231.
41. Hill, H. C. (2007). Learning in the teaching workforce. The Future of Children, 17, 111-127.
42. Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers' topic- specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 372-400.
43. Jackson, P. W. (1986). The practice of teaching. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
44. Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education [Monograph 13]. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
45. Kerr, K. A., Marsh, J. A., Ikemoto, G. S., Darilek, H., & Barney, H. (2006). Strategies to promote data use for instructional improvement: Actions, outcomes, and lessons from three urban districts. American Journal of Education, 112, 496-520.
46. Klein, S. P., Hamilton, L. S., McCaffrey, D. F., & Stecher, B. M. (2000). What do test scores in texas tell us? Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
47. Leithwood, K., Menzies, T., & Jantzi, D. (1994). Earning teachers' commit- ment to curriculum reform. Peabody Journal of Education, 69(4), 38-61.
48. Lieberman, A. (1996). Creating intentional learning communities. Educational Leadership, 54(3), 51-55.
49. Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Betebenner, D. W. (2002). Accountability systems: Implications of requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Educational Researcher, 31(6), 3-16.
50. Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers' professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 133-152.
51. Little, J. W. (1999). Organizing schools for teacher learning. In L. Darling- Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 233-262). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
52. Loucks-Horsley, S. (1999). Research on professional development for teach- ers of mathematics and science: The state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 258-271.
53. Louis, K. S., Febey, K., & Schroeder, R. (2005). State-mandated accountability in highschools: Teachers' interpretationsof a new era. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27, 177-204.
54. Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. M. (1998). Does professional community affect the classroom? Teachers' work and student experiences in restructuring schools. American Journal of Education, 106, 532-575.
55. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. McDonald, S. K., Keesler, V. A., Kauffman, N. J., & Schneider, B. (2006). Scaling-up exemplary interventions. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 15-24.
57. McDonnell, L. M. (2005). Assessment and accountability from the poli-cymaker's perspective. In J. L. Herman & E. H. Haertel (Eds.), Uses and misuses of data for educational accountability and improvement (pp. 35-54). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.
58. McLaughlin, D., Bandeira de Mello, V., Blankenship, C., Chaney, K., Esra, P., & Hikawa, H. (2008). Comparison between NAEP and State Mathematics Assessment Results: 2003, Volume 2 (Research and Development Report, NCES 2008-475). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
59. McLaughlin, M. (1987) Learning from experience: Lessons from policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 171-178.
60. McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York, NY: Routledge.
61. Mintrop, H., & Sunderman, L. G. (2009). Predictable failure of federal sanctions-driven accountability for school improvement-and why we may retain it anyway. Educational Researcher, 38, 353-361.
62. Mirel, J. (1993). School reform, Chicago style: Educational innovation in a changing urban context, 1976-1991. Urban Education, 28, 116-149.
63. Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., Goldring, E., & Porter, A. C. (2002). Leadership for learning: A research-based model and taxonomy of behaviors. School Leadership and Management, 27, 179-201.
64. Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that addresses school capacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of Education, 108, 259-299.
65. No Child Left Behind Act (2001). Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425.
66. O'Day, J. A. (2002). Complexity, accountability, and school improvement. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 293-329.
67. Parker, T., & Ziegler, C. (2005). Leading from the classroom. Educational Leadership, 62. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational leadership/summer05/vol62/num09/Leading From the Cla- ssroom.aspx
68. Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 921-958.
69. Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
70. Porter, A. C., Polikoff, M. S., & Smithson, J. L. (2009). Is there a de facto national curriculum? Evidence from state content standards. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31, 238-268.
71. Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. L. (2001). Are content standards being implemented in the classroom? A methodology and some tentative answers. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the Capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 60-80). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
72. Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., Blank, R., & Zeidner, T. (2007). Alignment as a teacher variable. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 27-51.
73. Quiroz, P. A., & Secada, W. G. (2003). District policy and teaching for understanding. In A. Gamoran (Ed.), Transforming teaching in math and science: How schools and districts can support change (pp. 151-172). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
74. Reed, B. (2009). The long turnaround. Northwest Education, 14(3), 25-27.
75. Richardson, V. & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Hand book of research on teaching (pp.905-947).Washington,DC:American Educational Research Association.
76. Rosenholtz,S.J.(1989).Work place conditions that affect teacher quality and commitment: Implications for teacher induction programs. Elementary School Journal, 89, 421-439.
77. Rothman, R. (2004). Benchmarking and alignment of standards and assessments. In S. H. Fuhrman & R. F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems for education (pp. 96-137). New York: Routledge.
78. Rowan, B., Camburn, E., & Barnes, C. (2004). Benefiting from Comprehensive School Reform: A review of research on CSR implementation. In Putting the pieces together: Lessons from comprehensive school reform research (pp. 1-52). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Comprehensive School Reform.
79. Sanders, W., & Rivers, J. (1996). Research progress report: Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement: Tennessee value-added assessment system. Knoxville, TN: Value-Added Research and Assessment Center. Retrieved from http://www.cgp.upenn.edu/ope techreports.html
80. Schraw, G., & Olafson, L. (2002). Teachers' epistemological world views and educational practices. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 3, 178-235.
81. Schultz, K., Jones-Walker, C. E., & Chikkatur, A. P. (2008). Listening to students, negotiating beliefs: Preparing teachers for urban classrooms. Curriculum Inquiry, 38, 155-187.
82. Schwille, J., Porter, A., Belli, G., Floden, R., Freeman, D., Knappen, L., & Schmidt, W. (1983). Teachers as policy brokers in the content of elementary school mathematics. In L. S. Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 484-504). New York, NY: Longman.
83. Sikes, P. J. (1992). Imposed change and the experienced teacher. In M. Fullan & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teacher development and educational change (pp. 36-54). London, England: Routledge.
84. Smith, M. S., Hughes, E. K., Engle, R. A., & Stein, M. K. (2009). Orchestrating discussions. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 14, 548-556.
85. Smith, M. S., & O'Day, J. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233-267). Bristol, PA: Falmer.
86. Smith, T.M., & Desimone, L.M.(2003).Do changes in patterns of participation in teachers' professional development reflect the goals of standards-based reform? Educational Horizons, 81, 119-129.
87. Smith, T. M., Desimone, L. M., Zeidner, T., Dunn, A. C., Bhatt, M., & Rumyantseva, N. (2007). Inquiry-oriented instruction in science: Who teaches that way? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 169-199.
88. Smylie, M. A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational and psychological antecedents to individual teacher change. American Educational Research Journal, 25(1), 1-30.
89. Snow, C. E., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children (National Research Council). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
90. Spillane, J. P. (2001). Challenging instruction for "all students": Policy, practitioners, and practice. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the Capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 217-241). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
91. Stecher, B. M. (2002). Chapter 4: Consequences of large-scale, high stakes testing on school and classroom practice. In L. S. Hamilton, B. M. Stecher, & S. P. Klein (Eds.), Making sense of test-based accountability in education (pp. 79-100). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
92. Stecher, B. M., Epstein, S., Hamilton, L. S., Marsh, J. A., Robyn, A., McCombs, J. S., & Naftel, S. (2008). Pain and gain: Implementing No Child Left Behind in three states, 2004-2006. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
93. Stein, M. K., Baxter, J. A., & Leinhardt, G. (1990). Subject-matter knowledge and elementary instruction: A case from functions and graphing. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 639-663.
94. Stein, M. K., & D'Amico, L. (2002). Inquiry at the crossroads of policy and learning: A study of a district-wide literacy initiative. Teachers College Record, 104, 1313-1344.
95. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., & Silver, A. (1999). The development of professional developers: Learning to assist teachers in new settings in new ways. Harvard Educational Review, 69, 237-269.
96. Stein, M. K., & Wang, M. C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: The process of teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 171-187.
97. Supovitz, J. A. (2001). Translating teaching practice into improved student achievement. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the Capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 81-98). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
98. Thompson, C. L., & Zeuli, J. S. (1999). The frame and the tapestry: Standards-based reform and professional development. In L. Darling- Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Hand-book of policy and practice (pp. 341-375). San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
99. U.S. Department of Education. (2008). Improving Teacher Quality State Grants. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/ programs/teacherqual/funding.html
100. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). Toward better teaching: Professional development in 1993-94 (NCES 98-320). Washington, DC: Author.
101. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). Teacher preparation and professional development: 2000. (NCES 2001-088). Washington, DC: Author.
102. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2003-2004). Schools and Staffing Survey: 2003-2004 Public school file [Data file]. Washington, DC: Author.
103. Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 519-558.
104. Wayne, A. J., Yoon, K. S., Zhu, P., Cronen, S., & Garet, M. S. (2008). Experimenting with teacher professional development: Motives and methods. Educational Researcher, 37, 469-479.
105. Whittaker,A.,&Young,V.M.(2002).Tensionsinassessmentdesign:Professional development under high-stakes accountability. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(3), 43-60.
106. Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education, 24, 173-209.
107. Youngs, P. (2007). How elementary principals' beliefs and actions influence new teachers' experiences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(1), 101-137.
108. Youngs,P.,&King,M.B.(2002).Principalleadershipforprofessionaldevel- opment to build school capacity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38,643-670.