Programme theory, programme documents and state standards in evaluating teacher education (original) (raw)
Related papers
2020
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
Teacher Development: An international journal of teachers' professional
2013
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Editorial : In Asia-Pacific journal of teacher education, v.39 n.1
2011
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution , reselling , loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Studying Teacher Education: A journal of self-study of teacher education
2013
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
Teacher Education Policy and Practice
Teacher Education Policy and Practice, 2017
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
teaching and teacher education 2009
The study reported here examines whether teaching skills included in the dynamic model of educational effectiveness can be grouped into types of teacher behaviour and whether these types are related with different student outcome measures. The data stem from a study which was conducted in order to test the validity of the dynamic model. Results reveal that teaching skills can be grouped into five types of teacher behaviour which are discerned in a distinctive way and move gradually from skills associated with direct teaching to more advanced skills concerned with new teaching approaches and differentiation of teaching. Teachers exercising more advanced types of behaviour have better student outcomes. Suggestions for research on teacher education and professional development are drawn.
Studying the Effectiveness of Teacher Education – Final Report
2015
The Chief Investigators note the significant contribution of the Industry Partners and thank them for their commitment to, and engagement with, the project. The project team also acknowledges the generous involvement of the schools and teachers who made this project possible, and Peter Smith for his role in overseeing the quantitative analyses. The Studying the Effectiveness of Teacher Education research was supported under the Australian Research Council's Linkage Projects funding scheme (project LP110100003). The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Australian Research Council.
Methodological Issues in Describing the Features and Qualities of Teacher Education Programs
2001
A complex research project has been conducted to determine the features and qualities of teacher education programs that are related to gains in student performance that occurred when a student was under the tutelage of a teacher from one of the teacher education programs. This paper describes the methodology and some of the results from work on producing good measurements of the multitude of variables that describe teacher preparation and professional judgment. Because of the large scope of the work, the discussion is confined to scale formation for three variables. The development team created the Beginning Teacher Preparation Survey to obtain information about a specific set of variables. Two efficacy scales, revised to one such scale, a professional development and support scale, and a scale measuring mathematics orientation provide examples of the sorts of scales developed for the survey. The confirmatory and exploratory reliability analysis process was performed on the majority of the hypothesized scales in the survey. A total of 26 scales have been defined and confirmed through the analyses. The lowest reliabilities have been in the 0.50 range and the highest in the upper 0.90 range. The distribution of scores for the scales were usually unimodal and often symmetric, but in some cases, the distributions were almost uniform. The result of the scaling methodology has been to produce a series of scales that are very sensitive to differences in beginning teacher's preparation and perspective. These scales can be used with high confidence to investigate the variables that lead to student learning in the classroom. (SLD) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document.