We experimentally compare two modes of in-service professional development for South African public primary school teachers. In both programs teachers received the same learning material and daily lesson plans, aligned to the official literacy curriculum. Pupils exposed to two years of the program improved their reading proficiency by 0.12 standard deviations if their teachers received centralized Training, compared to 0.24 if their teachers received in-class Coaching. Classroom observations reveal that teachers were more likely to split pupils into smaller reading groups, which enabled individualized attention and more opportunities to practice reading. Results vary by class size and baseline pupil reading proficiency. * Results reported on in this study forms part of the Early Grade Reading Study (EGRS) which was lead by the Department of Basic Education to find out how to improve early grade reading. We are grateful for useful feedback from Servaas van der Berg, David Evans, Clare Leaver, Rob Garlick, James Habyarimana, and an anonymous pair of reviewers.

Against the backdrop of the influence exerted in recent years in South Africa by new legislation and regulatory authorities on personality assessment research and instrument development, the present article highlights important research methodology issues pertaining to the cultural fairness of the 16PF®. The article is a deliberate comment upon the work of Abrahams (1996) and Abrahams and Mauer (1999a, 1999b). As a result, the relevant aspects are illustrated practically and empirically by referring to recent, current and intended South African research. Personality assessment research and instrument development are assumed to require a symbiotic relationship between test developers and test users. The relevant roles and responsibilities of each of the two groups are discussed. A particularly salient brief is to find common ground about methodological issues, the practical usefulness of the relevant assessment devices, user proficiency in administering and interpreting tests, and understanding how research processes intend ensuring quality tools. Some of the issues illustrated in more detail by referring to HSRC and other research on the SA92 and FifthEditions of the 16PF® are mean scores and their meaning, subgroup differences, language proficiency, research samples and target populations, statistical techniques, and test material as such.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract