Professional Development and Teacher Change: The Missing Leadership Link

Journal of Science Teacher Education

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 121-137

  Whitworth, Brooke A ^a   Chiu, Jennifer L ^b  

^a NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

District leaders; Leadership; Professional development; Teacher change

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925539271     PISSN: 1046560X     EISSN: 15731847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10972-014-9411-2     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Aoki, J. M. (2003). The perceptions of inquiry held by greater Houston area science supervisors (Doctoral dissertation). Houston, TX: University of Houston.
2. Bandura, A. (Ed.). (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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 on Science Teaching,44, 375–395.
4. Bell, R. L., Konold, T., Maeng, J. L., & Heinecke, W. F. (2012). VISTA research and evaluation annual report: Year 2. Unpublished report for George Mason University.
5. Bianchini, J. A., & Cavazos, L. M. (2007). Learning from students, inquiry into practice, and participation in professional communities: Beginning teachers’ uneven progress toward equitable science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,44, 586–612.
6. Birman, B. S., Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., & Garet, M. S. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership,57(8), 28–33.
7. Birman, B., Le Floch, K. C., Klekotka, A., Ludwig, M., Taylor, J., Walters, K., … Yoon, K. (2007). State and local implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act: Vol. 2. Teacher quality under NCLB: Interim report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education; Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development; Policy and Program Studies Service.
8. Bollough, R. V., Kauchak, D., Crow, N., Hobbs, S., & Stoke, D. (1997). Professional development schools: Catalysts for teacher and school change. Teaching and Teacher Education,13, 153–169.
9. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher,33(8), 3–15.
10. Boyle, B., Lamprianou, I., & Boyle, T. (2005). A longitudinal study of teacher change: What makes professional development effective? Report of the second year of the study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,16, 1–27.
11. Buczynski, S., & Hansen, C. B. (2010). Impact of professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering connections. Teaching and Teacher Education,26, 599–607.
12. Carey, K. (2004). The real value of teachers: Using new information about teacher effectiveness to close the achievement gap. Thinking K-16,8(1), 3–42.
13. Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record,102, 294–343.
14. Copland, M. A., & Knapp, M. S. (2006). Connecting leadership with learning: A framework for reflection, planning and action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
15. Corcoran, T., Fuhrman, S. H., & Belcher, C. L. (2001). The district role in instructional improvement. The Phi Delta Kappan,83, 78–84.
16. Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
17. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher,38(3), 181–199.
18. 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.
19. Desimone, L. M., Smith, T. M., & Phillips, K. J. R. (2007). Does policy influence mathematics and science teachers’ participation in professional development? Teachers College Record,109, 1086–1122.
20. Dexter, S. (2014). Collaboration and networking learning environment and database. Retrieved from http://canlead.net/
21. Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L. G., Book, C., Putnam, J., & Wesselman, R. (1986). The relationship between explicit verbal explanations during reading skill instruction and student awareness and achievement: A study of reading teacher effects. Reading Research Quarterly,21, 237–252.
22. Firestone, W. A., Mangin, M. M., Martinez, M. C., & Plovsky, T. (2005). Leading coherent professional development: A comparison of three districts. Educational Administration Quarterly,41, 413–448.
23. Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Best, S., & Tal, R. T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education,19, 643–658.
24. Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teacher learning. National Staff Development Council,28(3), 35–36.
25. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal,38, 915–945.
26. Gerard, L. F., Bowyer, J. B., & Linn, M. C. (2008). Principal leadership for technology-enhanced learning in science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(1), 1–18.
27. Gerard, L. F., Varma, K., Corliss, S. B., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Professional development for technology-enhanced inquiry science. Review of Educational Research,81, 408–448.
28. Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal,37, 479–507.
29. Grierson, A. L., & Woloshyn, V. E. (2013). Walking the talk: Supporting teachers’ growth with differentiated professional learning. Professional Development in Education,39, 401–419.
30. Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2000). What makes teacher community different from a gathering of teachers? (Occasional paper). Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy and Center on English Learning and Achievement.
31. Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher,15(5), 5–12.
32. Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education,4, 63–69.
33. Guskey, T. R. (1997). Research needs to link professional development and student learning. Journal of Staff Development,18(2), 36–40.
34. Guskey, T. R. (1999). Moving from means to ends. Journal of Staff Development,20(1), 48.
35. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and practice,8, 381–391.
36. Guskey, T. R., & Sparks, D. (1996). Exploring the relationship between staff development and improvements in student learning. Journal of Staff Development,17(4), 34–38.
37. Halverson, R., Feinstein, N., & Meshoulam, D. (2011). School leadership for science education. In G. E. DeBoer (Ed.), The role of public policy in K-12 science education (pp. 397–430). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
38. Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
39. Haycock, K. (1998). Good teaching matters…a lot. Thinking K-16,3(2), 3–14.
40. Heller, J. I., Daehler, K. R., Wong, N., Shinohara, M., & Miratrix, L. W. (2012). Differential effects of three professional development models on teacher knowledge and student achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,49, 333–362.
41. Honig, M. I. (2006). Street-level bureaucracy revisited: Frontline district central-office administrators as boundary spanners in education policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,28, 357–383.
42. Honig, M. I., & Copland, M. A. (2008). Reinventing district central offices to expand student learning (Issue brief). Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement.
43. Honig, M. I., & Hatch, T. C. (2004). Crafting coherence: How schools strategically manage multiple, external demands. Educational Researcher,33(8), 16–30.
44. Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American educational research journal,38, 499–534.
45. Jeanpierre, B., Oberhauser, K., & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teacher’s classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,42, 668–690.
46. Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo, J. D. (2007). A study of the effect of sustained, whole-school professional development on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,44, 775–786. doi:10.1002/tea.20149
47. Jones, M. (2014). Supporting science teacher learning of technology integration through new models and tools (Doctoral dissertation). Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.
48. Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education (Research monograph no. 1). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
49. Kennedy, M. M. (1999). Form and substance in mathematics and science professional development. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin at Madison, National Institute for Science Education.
50. Knapp, M. (2003). Professional development as a policy pathway. Review of Research in Education,27, 109–157.
51. Knapp, M. S., & Plecki, M. L. (2001). Investing in the renewal of urban science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38, 1089–1100.
52. Lakshmanan, A., Heath, B. P., Perlmutter, A., & Elder, M. (2011). The impact of science content and professional learning communities on science teaching efficacy and standards-based instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,48, 534–551.
53. Lee, O., Deaktor, R., Enders, C., & Lambert, J. (2008). Impact of a multiyear professional development intervention on science achievement of culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,45, 726–747. doi:10.1002/tea.20231
54. Lee, V. R., Leary, H. M., Sellers, L., & Recker, M. (2014). The role of school district science coordinators in the district-wide appropriation of an online resource discovery and sharing tool for teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23, 309–323.
55. Leithwood, K., Seashore-Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement.
56. Lewis, L., Parsad, B., Carey, N., Bartfai, N., Farris, E., & Smerdon, B. (1999). Teacher quality: A report on the preparation and qualifications of public school teachers (NCES 1999-080). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.
57. Little, J. W., & Wong, N. (2007). Conceptualizing the contribution of facilitation to professional learning opportunity. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, Chicago, IL.
58. Livneh, C., & Livneh, H. (1999). Continuing professional education among educators: Predictions of participation in learning activities. Adult Education Quarterly,49, 91–106.
59. Loucks-Horsley, S., & Matsumoto, C. (1999). Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: The state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics,99, 258–271.
60. Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., Love, N., & Hewson, P. W. (2010). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
61. Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education,23, 517–534.
62. Luft, J. A., Firestone, J. B., Wong, S. S., Ortega, I., Adams, K., & Bang, E. (2011). Beginning secondary science teacher induction: A two-year mixed methods study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,48, 1199–1224.
63. Luft, J. A., & Hewson, P. W. (2014). Research on teacher professional development programs in science. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II). New York, NY: Routledge.
64. Madrazo, G. M., & Hounshell, P. B. (1987). Science supervisor: Results of research in science supervision. Science Education,71, 9–14.
65. Madrazo, G., & Motz, L. (1982). Science supervisors—An endangered species? Science Teacher,49(9), 42.
66. Marsh, J. A. (2002). How districts relate to states, schools, and communities. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 25–40). New York: Teachers College Press.
67. Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. Denver, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
68. McGinnis, J., Parker, R., & Graeber, C. A. (2004). A cultural prospective of the induction of five reform-minded beginning mathematics and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41, 720–747.
69. Murphy, J., & Hallinger, P. (1988). Characteristics of instructionally effective school districts. The Journal of Educational Research,81, 175–181.
70. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
71. Ogawa, R., & Bossert, R. (1995). Leadership as an organizational quality. Educational Administration Quarterly,31, 224–244.
72. Ottoson, J. M. (1997). After the applause: Exploring multiple influences on application following an adult education program. Adult Education Quarterly,47, 92–107.
73. Perrine, W. G. (1984). Teacher and supervisory perceptions of elementary science supervisors. Science Edcuation,68, 3–9.
74. Petersen, G. J. (1999). Demonstrated actions of instructional leaders: An examination of five California superintendents. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 7(18).
75. Pianta, R. C. (2011). Teaching children well: New evidence based approaches to teacher professional development and training. Center for American Progress,11, 1–36.
76. Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Desimone, L. D., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2000). Does professional development change teaching practice? Results from a three-year study: Executive summary. Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Office of the Undersecretary.
77. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2010). Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for America’s future. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stem-ed-final.pdf
78. Putnam, R., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher,29(1), 4–15.
79. Roberts, J. K., Henson, R. K., Tharp, B. Z., & Moreno, N. (2000). An examination of change in teacher self-efficacy beliefs in science education based on the duration of in-service activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Dallas, TX.
80. Roden, J. (2003). Bridging the gap: The role of the science coordinator in improving the induction and professional growth of newly qualified teachers. Journal of In-Service Education,29, 201–220.
81. Rosenholtz, S. (1986). Educational reform strategies: Will they increase teacher commitment? American Journal of Education,95, 543–562.
82. Ross, J. A. (1994). The impact of an in-service to promote cooperative learning on the stability of teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education,10, 381–394.
83. Ross, J. A. (1998). Antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (Vol. 7, pp. 49–74). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
84. Roth, K., Garnier, H., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., & Wickler, N. (2011). Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,48, 117–148.
85. Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Knoxville: University of Tennessee.
86. Saxe, G. B., Gearhart, M., & Nasir, N. S. (2001). Enhancing students’ understanding of mathematics: A study of three contrasting approaches to professional support. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,4, 55–79.
87. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher,15(2), 4–14.
88. Smith, C., Hofer, J., Gillespie, M., Solomon, M., & Rowe, K. (2003). How teachers change: A study of professional development in adult education (NCSALL Rep. No. 25). Boston: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy.
89. Smith, T., & Ingersoll, R. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring on beginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal,41, 681–714.
90. Smylie, M. A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational and psychological antecedents to individual teacher change. American Educational Research Journal,25, 1–30.
91. Sparks, D. (1994). A paradigm shift in staff development. Journal of Staff Development,15(4), 26–29.
92. Sparks, D. (1995). Focusing staff development on improving student learning. In G. Cawelti (Ed.), Handbook of research on improving student achievement (pp. 163–169). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
93. Spillane, J. P. (2002). Local theories of teacher change: The pedagogy of district policies and programs. Teachers College Record,104, 377–420.
94. Spillane, J. P., Camburn, E. M., & Stitziel, P. A. (2007). Taking a distributed perspective to the school principal’s workday. Leadership and Policy in Schools,6, 103–125.
95. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership: A distributed practice. Educational Researcher,30(3), 23–28.
96. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., & Silver, E. A. (1999). The development of professional developers: Learning to assist teachers in new settings in new ways. Harvard Educational Review,69, 237–269.
97. Stein, M. K., & Wang, M. C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: The process of teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education,4, 171–187.
98. Stout, R. T. (1996). Staff development policy: Fuzzy choices in an imperfect market. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 4(2). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/625/747
99. Stronge, J. H. (2010). Effective teachers = student achievement: What the research says. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
100. Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research,68, 202–248.
101. Wallace, M. R. (2009). Making sense of the links: Professional development, teacher practices, and student achievement. Teachers College Record,111, 573–596.
102. Waters, J. T., & Marzano, R. J. (2007). School district leadership that works: The effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. ERS Spectrum,25(2), 1–12.
103. Whitehurst, G. (2002). Research on teacher preparation and professional development. Speech given at the White House conference on preparing quality teachers. Retrieved from http://www.stcloudstate.edu/tpi/initiative/documents/assessment/Scientifically%20Based%20Reserach%20on%20Teacher%20Quality.pdf
104. Whitworth, B. A. (2014). Exploring the critical role of a district science coordinator (Doctoral dissertation). Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.
105. Wilson, S. M. (2013). Professional development for science teachers. Science,340, 310–313.
106. Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues and Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 033). Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.