A mixed-methods look at teaching quality: Challenges and possibilities from one study

Teachers College Record

Volumn 114, Issue 4, 2012, Pages

  Croninger, Robert G ^a   Buese, Daria ^b   Larson, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b MCDANIEL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887862647     PISSN: 01614681     EISSN: 14679620     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1998). The research base for APAs learner-centered psy-chological principles. In N. M. Lumber & B.L. McCombs (Eds.), Issues in school reform: A sampler of psychological perspectives on learner-centered schools (pp. 25-60). Washington IXi American Psychological Association.
2. Allitigton, R. Lt & Johnson, P. H. (2002) footling to learn: lessons from exemplary fourth-grade classrooms. New York: Guilford Press.
3. Baker, E. L., Barton, P. E., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H. F., Linn, R. I., et al. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers (Economic Policy Institute Briefing Paper No. 278). Washington DC: Economic Policy Institute.
4. Ball, D. L., & Lampert, M. (1999). Multiples of evidence, time, and perspective: Revising the study of teaching and learning. In E. C. Lagermann & L. S. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research (pp. 371-398). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Ball, D. L., & Rowan, B. (2004). Introduction: Measuring instruction. Elementary School Journal, 705(1), 3-10.
6. Boruch, R., & Mostellar, F. (2001). (Eds.). Education, evaluation and randomized trials. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
7. Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328-375). New York: Macmillan.
8. Bruner, J. (1999). Postscript. Some reflections on education research. In E. C. Lagermann & L. S. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research (pp. 399-409). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
9. Chambliss, M.J., Alexander, P. A., & Price, J. N. (2012). Epistemological threads in the fabric of pedagogical research. Teachers College Record, 114(4), 35 pages.
10. Cohen, D., McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (Eds.). (1993). Teaching for understanding. Challenges for policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
11. Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 1-24.
12. Connor, C., Morrison, F. J, Fishman, B. J., Ponitz, C. C, Glasney, S., Underwood, et al. (2009). The ISI classroom observation system: Examining the literacy instruction provided to individual students. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 85-99.
13. Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. I., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Ed.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral sciences (pp. 209-240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Croninger, R. C., & Valli, L. (2009a). "Where is the action?" Challenges to studying the teaching of reading in elementary classrooms. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 100-108.
15. Croninger, R. G., & Valli, L. (2009b). Mixing it up about methods. Educational Researcher, 38(1), 541-545.
16. Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint far creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. Dillon, D. (1989). Showing them that I want them to learn and that I care about who they are: A microethnography of the social organization of a secondary low-track English- reading classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 227-259.
18. Fenstermacher, G. D., & Richardson, V. (2005). On making determinations of quality in teaching. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 186-213.
19. Floden, R. (2001). Research on effects of teaching: A continuing model for research on teaching. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 5-16). Washington DC: AERA.
20. Goldhaber, D., & Anthony, E. (2003). Teacher quality and student achievement. New York: Teachers College Press.
21. Gracber, A. O., Newton, K. J., & Chambliss, M. J. (2012). Crossing the borders again: Challenges in comparing quality instruction in mathematics and reading. Teachers College Record, 114(4), 30 pages.
22. Greene, J. C. (2001). Mixing social inquiry methodologies. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 251-258). Washington DC: AERA.
23. Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Hiebert, J., Sigler, J. W., Jacobs, J. K., Giwin, K. B., Gamier, H., Smith, M., et al. (2005). Mathematics teaching in the United States today (and tomorrow): Results from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(2), 111-132.
25. Hill, H. C. (2009). Evaluating value-added models: A validity approach. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28, 700-709.
26. International Reading Association & National Council of Teachers of English. (1996). Standards for the English language arts. Newark, DE, &: Urbana, IE: International Reading Association & The National Council of Teachers of English.
27. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzi, A.J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Education Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
28. Knapp, M. S. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high-poverty classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
29. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). Dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
30. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
31. Lissitz, R. W. (Ed). (2005). Value added models in education: Theory and applications. Maple Grove, MN:JAM Press.
32. McCaffrey, D., Lockwood, J., Koretz, D., & Hamilton, I. (2003) Evaluating value-added mod-els for teacher accmintability. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
33. Molnar, A., Smith, P., Zahorik, J., Palmer, A., Halbach, A., & Ehrle, K. (1999). Evaluating the SAGE Program: A pilot program in targeted pupil-teacher reduction in Wisconsin. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 165-177.
34. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school math-ematics. Reston, VA: Author.
35. Newmann, F., & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
36. Newmann, F., Smith, B., Allensworth, E., & Bryk, A.S. (2001). Instructional program coher-ence: What it is and why it should guide school improvement policy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(4), 297-321.
37. Oser, F. K., Dick, A., & Patry, J. (Eds.). (1992). Effective and responsible teaching. The new synthesis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38. Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B.K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of Classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109-119.
39. Porter, A. (2002). Measuring content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
40. Rice, J. K. (2003). Teacher-quality. Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
41. Rivkin, S. G., Hanuschek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (1998). Teachers, schools, and academic achieve-ment (Working Paper No. 6691). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
42. Rowan, B., & Correnti, R. (2009). Studying reading instruction with teacher logs: Lessons from the study of instructional improvement. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 120-131.
43. Rowan, B., Correnti, R., & Miller, R.J. (2002) What large-scale survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the Prospects Study of Elementary Schools. Teachers College Record. 104(8), 1525-1567.
44. Sanders, W., & Horn, S. P. (1998). Research findings from the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS) database: Implications for educational evaluation and research. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
45. Sarason, S. B. (1999). Teaching as a performing art. New York: Teachers College Press.
46. Schwab, J. J. (1973). The practical 3: Translation into curriculum. School Review, 81(4), 501-522.
47. Smith, T. M., Desimone, L. M., & Ueno, K. (2005) Highly qualified to do what? The rela-tionship between NCl.B teacher quality mandates and the use of reform-oriented instruction in middle school mathematics. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27, 75-109.
48. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003) Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Ed.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral sciences (pp. 3-50). Thousand Oaks. VA: Sage.
49. Valli, I., Croninger, R., Chambliss, M., Graeber, A., & Buese, D. (2008). Test driven. High- stakes accountability in elementary schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
50. Valli, I., Croninger, R., & Walters, K. (2007). Who (else) is the teacher? Cautionary notes on teacher accountability systems. American Journal of Education, 113(4), 635-662.
51. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
52. Whitehurst, G. J. (2002 June). Research on teacher preparation and professional development. Paper presented at the White House Conference on Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers, Washington. DC.