We posit that professional development (PD) models fall on a continuum from highly adaptive to highly specified, and that these constructs provide a productive way to characterize and distinguish among models. The study reported here examines the impact of an adaptive mathematics PD model on teachers’ knowledge and instructional practices as well as on students’ achievement over time. Results indicate at least modest impacts in each of these areas. Our findings demonstrate that adaptive models of PD can be subjected to investigations of impact based on quantitative research methodologies; moreover, we argue that utilizing a wider variety of methodologies to study adaptive models is increasingly needed as these models gain in popularity and usage.
AdlerJ. (2000). Social practice theory and mathematics teacher education: A conversation between theory and practice. Nordic Mathematics Education Journal, 8, 31-53.
2.
BallD. L.CohenD. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In Darling-HammondL.SykesG. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
BanilowerE. R.BoydS. E.PasleyJ. D.WeissI. R. (2006). The LSC capstone report: Lessons from a decade of mathematics and science reform. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
5.
BellC.WilsonS.HigginsT.McCoachB. (2010). Measuring the effects of professional development on teacher knowledge: The case of Developing Mathematics Ideas. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 41(5), 479-512. doi:10.1023/A:102606212857
6.
BermanP.McLaughlinM. W. (1978). Federal programs supporting educational change, Vol. VIII: Implementing and sustaining innovations. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
7.
BorkoH.JacobsJ.EiteljorgE.PittmanM. E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discourse in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 417-436. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.012
8.
BorkoH.JacobsJ.KoellnerK. (2010). Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development. In PetersonP.BakerE.McGawB. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (Vol. 7, pp. 548-556). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
9.
BorkoH.KoellnerK.JacobsJ. (2014). Examining novice teacher leaders’ facilitation of mathematics professional development. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 149-167.
10.
BorkoH.KoellnerK.JacobsJ.SeagoN. (2011). Using video representations of teaching in practice based professional development programs. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik/International Reviews on Mathematical Education, 43(1), 175-187. doi:10.1007/s11858-010-0302-5
11.
BorkoH.VirmaniR.KhachatryanE.MangramC. (2014). The role of video-based discussions in professional development and the preparation of professional development leaders. In CalandraB. D.RichP. (Eds.), Digital video for teacher education: Research and practice (pp. 89-108). Philadelphia, PA: Routledge.
12.
CarpenterT. P.FennemaE.PetersonP. L.ChiangC. P.LoefM. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499-531.
13.
ChokshiS.FernandezC. (2004). Challenges to importing Japanese lesson study: Concerns, misconceptions, and nuances. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(7), 520-525.
14.
ClarkK. K.JacobsJ.PittmanM. E.BorkoH. (2005). Strategies for building mathematical communication: Modeled in professional development, implemented in the classroom. Current Issues in Middle Childhood Education, 11(2), 1-12.
15.
CobbP. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13-20. doi:10.2307/1176934
16.
CollinsA.JosephD.BielaczycK. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15-42.
17.
DesimoneL. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199.
18.
GrantT. J.KlineK. (2010). The impact of video-based lesson analysis on teachers’ thinking and practice. Teacher Development, 14(1), 69-83. doi:10.1080/13664531003696600
19.
GreenoJ. G. (2003). Situative research relevant to standards for school mathematics. In KilpatrickJ.MartinW. G.SchifterD. (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 304-332). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
20.
GreenoJ. G.CollinsA. M.ResnickL. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In BerlinerD.CalfeeR. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673-708). New York, NY: MacMillan.
21.
HeckD. J.BanilowerE. R.WeissI. R.RosenbergS. L. (2008). Studying the effects of professional development: The case of the NSF’s local systemic change through teacher enhancement initiative. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(2), 113-152.
22.
HiebertJ.StiglerJ.JacobsJ. K.GivvinK. B.GarnierH.SmithM.. . .GallimoreR. (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.
23.
HillH. C. (2007). Mathematical knowledge of middle school teachers: Implications for the No Child Left Behind policy initiative. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(2), 95-114. doi: 10.3102/0162373707301711
24.
HillH. C.BallD. L. (2004). Learning mathematics for teaching: Results from California’s Mathematics Professional Development Institutes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 330-351. doi:10.2307/30034819
25.
HillH. C.BallD. L.BlunkM.GoffneyI. M.RowanB. (2007). Validating the ecological assumption: The relationship of measure scores to classroom teaching and student learning. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 5, 107-118. doi:10.1080/15366360701487138
26.
HillH. C.BlunkM.CharalambousC.LewisJ.PhelpsG. C.SleepL.BallD. L. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 430-511. doi:10.1080/07370000802177235
27.
HillH. C.SchillingS. G.BallD. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elementary School Journal, 105, 11-30. doi:10.1086/428763
28.
HornI. S.LittleJ. W. (2010). Attending to problems of practice: Routines and resources for professional learning in teachers’ workplace interactions. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 181-217. doi:10.3102/0002831209345158
29.
JacobsJ.BorkoH.KoellnerK.SchneiderC.EiteljorgE.RobertsS. A. (2007). The Problem-Solving Cycle: A model of mathematics professional development. Journal of Mathematics Education Leadership, 10(1), 42-57.
30.
JacobsJ.KoellnerK.FunderburkJ. (2012). Problem solved: Middle school math instruction gets a boost from a flexible model for learning. Journal of Staff Development, 33(2), 32-39.
31.
JacobsJ.KoellnerK.JohnT.KingC. (2014). The process of instructional change: Insights from the Problem-Solving Cycle. In LiY.SilverE. A.LiS. (Eds.), Transforming mathematics instruction: Multiple approaches and practices (pp. 335-354). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
32.
KildayC. R.KinzieM. B. (2009). An analysis of instruments that measure the quality of mathematics teaching in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 365-372. doi:10.1007/s10643-008-0286-8
33.
KoellnerK.JacobsJ.BorkoH.RobertsS.SchneiderC. (2011). Professional development to support students’ algebraic reasoning: An example from the Problem-Solving Cycle Model. In CaiJ.KnuthE. (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 429-452). New York, NY: Springer.
34.
KoellnerK.JacobsJ.BorkoH.SchneiderC.PittmanM.EiteljorgE.. . .FrykholmJ. (2007). The Problem-Solving Cycle: A model to support the development of teachers’ professional knowledge. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 9(3), 271-303.
35.
KoellnerK.SeagoN. (2010). Using video to study teacher learning: The role of the facilitator. In PintoM.KawasakiT. F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol.1 (p. 392).Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Psychology of Mathematics Education.
LewisC.PerryR.HurdJ. (2004). A deeper look at lesson study. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 18-23.
38.
LewisC.PerryR.MurataA. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of Lesson Study. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 3-14. doi:10.3102/0013189X035003003
39.
LiebermanA.MillerL. (Eds.). (2008). Teachers in professional communities: Improving teaching and learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
40.
LittleJ. W. (2002). Locating learning in teachers’ communities of practice: Opening up problems of analysis in records of everyday work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 917-946. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00052-5
41.
MarraR. M.ArbaughF.LanninJ.AbellS.EhlertM.SmithR.. . .RogersM. P. (2011). Orientations to professional development design and implementation: Understanding their relationship to PD outcomes across multiple projects. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 793-816.
42.
MarrongelleK.SztajnP.SmithM. (2013). Scaling up professional development in an era of common state standards. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(3), 202-211.
43.
MurataA.BofferdingL.PothenB. E.TaylorM. W.WischniaS. (2012). Making connections among student learning, content, and teaching: Teacher talk paths in elementary mathematics lesson study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(5), 616-650.
44.
National Academy of Education. (2009). Education policy white paper on teacher quality (WilsonS., Ed.), Washington, DC: Author.
45.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
46.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards Mathematics. Washington, DC: Author.
47.
PenuelW. R.FishmanB. J.ChengB. H.SabelliN. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331-337.
48.
PutnamR.BorkoH. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning?Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15. doi:10.2307/1176586
49.
Sample McMeekingL. B.OrsiR.CobbR. B. (2012). Effects of a teacher professional development program on the mathematics achievement of middle school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(2), 159-181.
50.
SherinM. G.HanS. Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 163-183. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2003.08.001
51.
SleeterC. (2014). Toward teacher education research that informs policy. Educational Researcher, 43(3), 146-153. doi:10.3102/0013189X14528752
52.
SnyderJ.BolinF.ZumwaltK. (1992). Curriculum implementation. In JacksonP. (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 402-435). New York, NY: Macmillan.
53.
StiglerJ. W.ThompsonB. J. (2009). Thoughts on creating, accumulating, and utilizing shareable knowledge to improve teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 109(5), 442-457. doi:10.1086/596995
54.
SupovitzJ. A.MayerD. P.KahleJ. B. (2000). Promoting inquiry-based instructional practice: The longitudinal impact of professional development in the context of systemic reform. Educational Policy, 14, 331-356. doi:10.1177/0895904800014003001
55.
van EsE. A.SherinM. G. (2010). The influence of video clubs on teachers’ thinking and practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13, 155-176. doi:10.1007/s10857-009-9130-3
