The aim of the present study was to develop and examine the initial psychometrics of an instrument, the Charter School Teacher Development Inventory (CSTDI), designed to measure the professional development opportunities available in U.S. charter schools. Exploratory factor analysis suggested that the CSTDI was comprised of five factors: traditional, content, coherence, duration, and collaboration. Confirmatory factor analysis also supported a five-factor structure of the CSTDI. This study provides promising support for a five-factor instrument that assesses professional development practices in charter schools and further research is warranted to determine its relevance for use in traditional public schools.
AmmentorpJ.RasmussenA.NorgaardB.KirketerpE.KofoedP. E. (2007). Electronic questionnaires for measuring quality improvement. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(2), 120–126. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm001
2.
AryD.JacobsL.RaziviehA. (2002). Introduction to research in education. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth- Thompson Learning.
3.
AydinY.UzuntiryakiE. (2009). Development and psychometric evaluation of the high school chemistry self-efficacy scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(5), 868–880. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164409332213
4.
BatesC.MorganD. (2018). Elements of effective professional development. The Reading Teacher, 71(5), 623–628. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1674
5.
BayarA. (2014). The components of effective professional development activities in terms of teachers’ perspective. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(2), 319–327.
6.
BirmanB.LeFlochK.C.KletotkaA.LudwigM.TaylorJ.WaltersK.YoonK. S. (2007). State and local implementation of No child left behind act, volume II–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.
7.
BlankR. K.de las AlasN.SmithC. (2008). Does teacher professional development have effects on teaching and learning? Analysis of evaluation findings from programs for mathematics and science teachers in 14 states. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
8.
BodilS. (2020). Inquiries into teacher professional development- what matters?Education, 140(3), 111–130.
BuczynskiS.HansenC. (2009). Impact of professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering connections. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.006
11.
CheungG.RensvoldR. (2002). Investigating goodness of fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(1), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5
12.
ChoK. W.ParkJ. (2021). Do political institutions matter to education policy?: Lessons from charter school growth in the United States. Journal of Digital Convergence, 19(12), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2021.19.12.133
13.
CostelloA.OsborneJ. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(7), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05553.x
14.
Darling-HammondL.HylerM.GardnerM.EspinozaD. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
15.
Darling-HammondL.WeiR. C.AndreeA.RichardsonN.OrphanosS. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council.
16.
DesimoneE. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x08331140
17.
DesimoneL.GaretM. (2016). Best practices in teacher professional development in the United States. Psychology, Society, & Education, 7(3), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.25115/psye.v7i3.515
18.
DixonF.TurnerH. (2007). Handbook of research on electronic surveys and measurements. Sydney, Australia: IGI.
19.
FletcherT.NusbaumD. (2010). Development of the competitive work environment scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(1), 21–44.
20.
GarridoL.AbadF.PonsodaV. (2011). Performance of Velicer’s minimum average partial factor retention method with categorical variables. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71(3), 551–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164410389489
21.
GawlikM. (2015). Shared sense-making: How charter school leaders ascribe meaning to accountability. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(3), 393–415. https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-08-2013-0092
22.
GilraineM.PetronijevicU.SingletonJ. D. (2021). Horizontal differentiation and the policy effect of charter schools. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 13(3), 239–276. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20200531
HensonR.RobertsK. (2006). The use of exploratory factor analysis in published research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282485
HillH.BeisiegalM.JacobR. (2013). Professional development research: Consensus, crossroads, and challenges. Educational Researcher, 42(9), 476–487. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x13512674
JohnsonB.StevensJ. (2001). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the school level environment questionnaire. Learning Environments Research, 4(3), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014486821714
29.
JohnsonC. (2007). Whole-school collaborative sustained professional development and science teacher change: Signs of progress. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(4), 629–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9043-x
30.
JoliffeI.MorganB. (1992). Principal component analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 1(1), 11–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029200100105
KiefferK.ReeseR. (2009). Measurement of test and study worry and emotionality in college students: A psychometric evaluation of the test and study attitudes inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(2), 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323231
34.
KnightD. S.ToenjesL. A. (2020). Do charter schools receive their fair share of funding? School finance equity for charter and traditional public schools. education Policy Analysis Archives, 28(51)), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.28.4438
35.
MacCallumR.AustinA. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 201–226. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.201
36.
MarshallD. T.NeugebauerN. M. (2022). How charter school leaders navigated COVID-19. In COVID-19 and the classroom: How schools navigated the great disruption, Lanham, MA, p. 107.
37.
MartinL.KraglerS.QuatrocheD.BausermanK. (2019). Transforming schools: The power of teachers’ input in professional development. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 9(1), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.5590/jerap.2019.09.1.13
38.
McChesneyK.AldridgeJ. (2019). What gets in the way? A new conceptual model for the trajectory from teacher professional development to impact. Professional Development in Education, 47(5), 834–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1667412
39.
McDonaldR.HoM. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64–82. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.64
MerchieE.TuytensM.DevosG.VanderlindeR. (2018). Evaluating teachers’ professional development initiatives: Towards an extended evaluative framework. Research Papers in Education, 33(2), 143–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2016.1271003
NeumannR. (1992). Perceptions of the teaching-research nexus: A framework for analysis. Higher Education, 23(2), 159–171.
44.
NiY. (2012). Teacher working conditions in charter schools and traditional public schools: A comparative study. Teachers College Record, 114(3), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811211400308
45.
O’ConnorB. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instrumentation, and Computers, 32, 396––402. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03200807
46.
PattonK.ParkerM.TannehillD. (2016). Helping teachers help themselves: Professional development that makes a difference. NASSP Bulletin, 99(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636515576040
47.
PenuelW.FishmanB.YamaguchiR.GallagherL. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207308221
48.
SancarR.AtalD.DeryakuluD. (2021). A new framework for teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 101(5), 223–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103305
49.
SchleyerT.ForrestJ. (2000). Methods for the design and administration of web-based surveys. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 7(4), 175–214. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2000.0070416
50.
Sisk-HiltonS. (2011). Teaching and learning in schools: Professional development through shared inquiry. New York: Teachers College Press.
51.
StevensJ. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Erlbaum.
52.
StewartC. (2014). Transforming professional development to professional learning. Journal of Adult Education, 43(1), 28–33.
53.
ThompsonB. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. American Psychological Association.
54.
UngarO. (2016). A model of professional development: Teachers’ perceptions of their professional development. Teachers and Teaching, 22(6), 653–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1158955
55.
Webster-WrightA. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 702–739. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308330970
56.
WeiR.C.Darling-HammondLAdamsonF. (2010). Professional development in the United States: Trends and challenges. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council.
57.
YoonK. S.DuncanT.LeeS. W.ScarlossB.ShapleyK. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.
58.
ZeggelaarA.VermeulenM.JochemsW. (2020). Evaluating effective professional development (pp. 1–21). Professional Development in Education.
59.
ZepedaS. (2008). Professional development: What works. Eye on Education.
60.
ZimmerR.BuddinR.SmithS. A.Duffy-ChipmanD. (2019). Nearly three decades into the charter school movement, what has research told us about charter schools?In The routledge handbook of the economics of education (pp. 73–106). Routledge.
