Explaining stability and changes in school effectiveness by looking at changes in the functioning of school factors

School Effectiveness and School Improvement

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 409-427

  Creemers, Bert P M ^a   Kyriakides, Leonidas ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

Author keywords

Changes in school effectiveness over time; Dynamic perspectives of educational effectiveness; School learning environment; School policy; Testing educational theories

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649683044     PISSN: 09243453     EISSN: 17445124     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09243453.2010.512795     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Adams, R.J., & Khoo, S.T. (1996). Quest: The interactive test analysis system. Camberwell, Victoria, Australia: ACER.
2. Andrich, D. (1988). A general form of Rasch's Extended Logistic Model for partial credit scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 1, 363-378.
3. Bentler, P.M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
4. Bentler, P.M. (1995). EQS: Structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software Inc.
5. Brophy, J., & Good, T.L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328-375). New York, NY: Macmillan.
6. Brown, M.W., & Mels, G. (1990). RAMONA PC: User manual. Pretoria, South Africa: University of South Africa.
7. Burry, J.A., & Shaw, D. (1988). Defining teacher effectiveness on a continuum: A Rasch model approach. Paper presented at the National Council on Measurement in Education conference, New Orleans, LA.
8. Creemers, B.P.M. (1994). The effective classroom. London, UK: Cassell.
9. Creemers, B.P.M., & Kyriakides, L. (2006). Critical analysis of the current approaches to modelling educational effectiveness: The importance of establishing a dynamic model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17, 347-366.
10. Creemers, B.P.M., & Kyriakides, L. (2008). The dynamics of educational effectiveness: A contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. London, UK: Routledge.
11. Creemers, B.P.M., & Kyriakides, L. (2010). School factors explaining achievement on cognitive and affective outcomes: Establishing a dynamic model of educational effectiveness. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 54, 263-294.
12. Cronbach, L.J., Gleser, G.C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability scores and profiles. New York, NY: Wiley.
13. Den Brok, P., Brekelmans, M., Levy, J., & Wubbels, T. (2002). Diagnosing and improving the quality of teachers' interpersonal behavior. The International Journal of Educational Management, 16, 176-184.
14. Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations: Foundations for organizational science. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Goldstein, H. (2003). Multilevel statistical models (3rd ed.). London, UK: Edward Arnold.
16. Gray, J., Goldstein, H., & Jesson, D. (1996). Changes and improvements in schools' effectiveness: Trends over five years. Research Papers in Education, 11, 35-51.
17. Gray, J., Goldstein, H., & Thomas, S. (2001). Predicting the future: The role of past performance in determining trends in institutional effectiveness at A level. British Educational Research Journal, 27, 391-405.
18. Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42, 3-41.
19. Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2000). Models of teaching. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
20. Keeves, J.P., & Alagumalai, S. (1999). New approaches to measurement. In G.N. Masters & J.P. Keeves (Eds.), Advances in measurement in educational research and assessment (pp. 23-42). Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
21. Klecka, W.R. (1980). Discriminant analysis: Quantitative applications in the social sciences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
22. Kyriakides, L. (1999). The management of curriculum improvement in Cyprus: A critique of a "centre-periphery" model in a centralised system. In T. Townsend, P. Clarke, & M. Ainscow (Eds.), Third millennium schools: A world of difference in effectiveness and improvement (pp. 107-124). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
23. Kyriakides, L. (2008). Testing the validity of the comprehensive model of educational effectiveness: A step towards the development of a dynamic model of effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19, 429-446.
24. Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B.P.M. (2008). Using a multidimensional approach to measure the impact of classroom-level factors upon student achievement: A study testing the validity of the dynamic model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19, 183-205.
25. Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B.P.M. (2009, August). Explaining stability and changes in schools: A follow-up study testing the validity of the dynamic model. Paper presented at the EARLI 2009 conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
26. Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B.P.M., & Antoniou, P. (2009). Teacher behaviour and student outcomes: Suggestions for research on teacher training and professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 12-23.
27. Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B.P.M., Antoniou, P., & Demetriou, D. (2010). A synthesis of studies searching for school factors: Implications for theory and research. British Educational Research Journal, 36, 807-830.
28. Kyriakides, L., Demetriou, D., & Charalambous, C. (2006). Generating criteria for evaluating teachers through teacher effectiveness research. Educational Research, 48, 1-20.
29. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
30. Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. London, UK: Sage.
31. Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 376-391). New York, NY: Macmillan.
32. Scheerens, J. (1992). Effective schooling: Research, theory and practice. London, UK: Cassell.
33. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in Education, 4(1), 1-94.
34. Shavelson, R.J., Webb, N.M., & Rowley, G.L. (1989). Generalizability theory. Am erican Psychologist, 44, 922-932.
35. Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London, UK: Sage.
36. Stringfield, S.C., & Slavin, R.E. (1992). A hierarchical longitudinal model for elementary school effects. In B.P.M. Creemers & G.J. Reezigt (Eds.), Evaluation of educational effectiveness (pp. 35-69). Groningen, The Netherlands: ICO.
37. Teddlie, C., & Stringfield, S. (1993) Schools make a difference: Lessons learned from a ten-year study of school effects. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
38. Thomas, S. (2001). Dimensions of secondary school effectiveness: Comparative analyses across regions. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12, 285-322.
39. Thomas, S., Peng, W.J., & Gray, J. (2007). Modelling patterns of improvement over time: Value added trends in English secondary school performance across ten cohorts. Oxford Review of Education, 33, 261-295.
40. Wang, W.C., & Cheng, Y.Y. (2001). Measurement issues in screening outstanding teachers. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2, 171-186.
41. Wright, B.D. (1985). Additivity in psychological measurement. In E.E. Roskam (Ed.), Measurement and personality assessment (pp. 101-112). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers.