Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study employed a randomized experiment to examine differences in teacher and student learning from professional development (PD) in two modalities: online and face-to-face. The study explores whether there are differences in teacher knowledge and beliefs, teacher classroom practice, and student learning outcomes related to PD modality. Comparison of classroom practice and student learning outcomes, normally difficult to establish in PD research, is facilitated by the use of a common set of curriculum materials as the content for PD and subsequent teaching. Findings indicate that teachers and students exhibited significant gains in both conditions, and that there was no significant difference between conditions. We discuss implications for the delivery of teacher professional learning.

Keywords

professional development technology teacher knowledge science education

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ball

D. L.

Cohen

D. K.

(1996). Reform by the book: What is—Or might be—The role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6-8.

Barab

S. A.

Luehmann

A. L.

(2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education, 87(4), 454-467.

Becker

H. J.

(1999). Internet use by teachers: Conditions of professional use and teacher-directed student use (Report No. 1). Irvine: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine. Retrieved from http://www.crito.uci.edu/TLC/findings/Internet-Use/startpage.htm

Borko

(2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.

Bowen

W. G.

Chingos

M. M.

Lack

K. A.

Nygren

T. I.

(2012). Interactive learning online at public universities: Evidence from randomized trials. New York, NY: Ithaka S+R.

Chetty

Friedman

J. N.

Rockoff

J. E.

(2012). Great teaching: Measuring its effects on students’ future earnings. EducationNext, 12(3). Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/files/ednext_20123_Friedman.pdf

Clark

R. E.

(1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.

Cohen

D. K.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Ball

D. L.

(2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 119-142.

Crawford

(2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916-937.

10.

Davis

E. A.

Krajcik

J. S.

(2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 2-14.

11.

Dede

Ketelhut

D. J.

Whitehouse

McCloskey

(2009). A research agenda for online teacher professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 8-19.

12.

Desimone

(2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199.

13.

Desimone

Porter

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(2), 81-112.

14.

Edelson

(2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 355-385.

15.

Edelson

Schwille

Bruozas

Lach

Taber

Gordin

Tarnoff

(2005). Investigations in environmental science: A case based approach to the study of environmental systems. Armonk, NY: It’s About Time.

16.

Fisher

J. B.

Schumaker

J. B.

Culbertson

Deshler

D. D.

(2010). Effects of a computerized professional development program on teacher and student outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(4), 301-312.

17.

Fishman

Marx

Best

Tal

(2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643-658.

18.

Frechtling

J. A.

Sharp

Carey

Vaden-Kiernan

(1995). Teacher enhancement programs: A perspective on the last four decades. Retrieved from http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehr/rec/pubs/eval/tep/tep.htm

19.

Garet

M. S.

Cronen

Eaton

Kurki

Ludwig

Jones

Sztejnberg

(2008). The impact of two professional development interventions on early reading instruction and achievement (NCEE No. 2008–4030). Washington, D.C.: Institute of Education Sciences.

20.

Garet

M. S.

Porter

A. C.

Desimone

Birman

B. F.

Yoon

K. S.

(2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

21.

Ginsberg

Gray

Levin

(2004). Online professional development for mathematics teachers: A strategic analysis. Washington, DC: National Center for Technology Innovation, American Institutes for Research.

22.

Kao

Tsai

(2009). Teachers’ attitudes toward web-based professional development, with relation to Internet self-efficacy and beliefs about web-based learning. Computers & Education, 53(1), 66-73.

23.

Kleiman

G. M.

(2004). Meeting the need for high quality teachers: E-Learning solutions. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/plan/2004/site/documents/Kleiman-MeetingtheNeed.pdf

24.

Kozma

R. B.

(1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19.

25.

Krajcik

McNeill

K. L.

Reiser

B. J.

(2008). Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science Education, 92(1), 1-32.

26.

Kubitskey

Fishman

Marx

R. W.

(2002). Professional development, teacher learning, and student learning: Is there a connection? In Bell

Stevens

Satwicz

(Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 229-236). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

27.

Loucks-Horsley

Hewson

P. W.

Love

Stiles

K. E.

(1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

28.

Loucks-Horsley

Matsumoto

(1999). Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: The state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99(5), 258-271.

29.

Mangan

(2012, May 22). Study shows promise and challenges of “hybrid” courses. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/study-shows-promise-and-challenges-of-hybrid-courses/36350

30.

Masters

Magidin deKramer

O’Dwyer

L. M.

Dash

Russell

(2010). The effects of online professional development on fourth grade English language arts teachers’ knowledge and instructional practices. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(3), 355-375.

31.

McGee

Brazdil

L. C.

(2011, April). The influence of teacher grading practices on course performance and high stakes test performance. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

32.

Means

Toyama

Murphy

Bakia

Jones

(2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

33.

Nye

Konstantopoulos

Hedges

L. V.

(2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(3), 237-257.

34.

Odden

Archibald

Fermanich

Gallagher

H. A.

(2002). How to figure the cost of professional development. Journal of Staff Development 23(2), 53-58.

35.

O’Dwyer

L. M.

Carey

Kleiman

G. M.

(2007). A study of the effectiveness of the Louisiana Algebra I online course. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 289-306.

36.

O’Dwyer

L. M.

Masters

Dash

Magidin deKramer

Humez

Russell

(2010). e-Learning for educators: Effects of on-line professional development on teachers and their students: Findings from four randomized trials. Retrieved from http://www.bc.edu/research/intasc/PDF/EFE_Findings2010_Report.pdf

37.

Powell

D. R.

Diamond

K. E.

Burchinal

M. R.

Koehler

M. J.

(2010). Effects of an early literacy professional development intervention on head start teachers and children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 299-312. doi:10.1037/a0017763

38.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Bryk

A. S.

(2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

39.

Riggs

I. M.

Enochs

L. G.

(1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74(6), 625-637.

40.

Ruiz-Primo

M. A.

Shavelson

R. J.

Hamilton

Klein

(2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 369-393.

41.

Santagata

Kersting

Givvin

K. B.

Stigler

J. W.

(2011). Problem implementation as a lever for change: An experimental study of the effects of a professional development program on students’ mathematics learning. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(1), 1-24. doi:10.1080/19345747.2010.498562

42.

Scher

O’Reilly

(2009). Professional development for K-12 math and science teachers: What do we really know? Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(3), 209-249. doi:10.1080/19345740802641527

43.

Schlager

M. S.

Fusco

Schank

(2002). Evolution of an online education community of practice. In Renninger

K. A.

Shumar

(Eds.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 129-158). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

44.

Smith

P. S.

Banilower

E. R.

McMahon

K. C.

Weiss

I. R.

(2002). The national survey of science and mathematics education: Trends from 1977 to 2000. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research. Retrieved from http://2000survey.horizon-research.com/reports/trends.php

45.

Squire

K. D.

MaKinster

J. G.

Barnett

Leuhmann

Barab

S. A.

(2003). Designed curriculum and local culture: Acknowledging the primacy of classroom culture. Science Education, 87(4), 468-489.

46.

Tal

Krajcik

J. S.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

(2006). Urban schools’ teachers enacting project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(7), 722-745.

47.

U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Washington, DC: Author.

Comparing the Impact of Online and Face-to-Face Professional Development in the Context of Curriculum Implementation

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References