A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession: What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One?

Hiebert, James; Gallimore, Ronald; Stigler, James W.

doi:10.3102/0013189x031005003

Cited by 754 publications

(548 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

488

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hiebert, Gallimore, and Stigler (2002) explored the need for a long-term initiative of professional development in education that is linked to the curriculum, focused on student learning, school-based, and collaborative. Induction coaching is one specific way to support beginning teachers directly in their classrooms and scaffold their development as educators.…”

Section: Induction Coachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers' Experiences of Induction: A Narrative Retrospective Inquiry

Clark¹

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well established that beginning teachers need support to bridge the gap from college teacher preparation to the classroom setting (Fletcher & Strong, 2009; Wong, 2003). In fact, lack of support in this transition has been identified as a leading factor that causes beginning teachers to leave the profession at high rates early in their careers (Andrews, Gilbert & Martin, 2006). Research suggests that coaching is an effective way to support beginning teacher’s learning (Ingersoll & Strong, 2011). The purpose of this qualitative research is to tell the lived experiences of nine teachers who took part of in a statewide induction coaching program. Using narrative inquiry methodology with semi-structured interviews, the study sought to gain the individual stories of past beginning teachers who worked with an induction coach, identify common themes across beginning teachers’ narratives, and to understand what their retrospective stories tell us about working with their induction coach. Four main implications of the findings include the needs of beginning teachers in the field, phases of coaching in reaction to the needs of beginning teachers, qualities of an induction coach, and the need for coaches to mediate the identities of the beginning teacher.

show abstract

Section: Induction Coachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers' Experiences of Induction: A Narrative Retrospective Inquiry

Clark¹

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However the focus on different representational formats in the second revisedBloom dimension does relate to another of White's (1979) features of quality, namely, variety Variety in types of representational formats has been documented by Munby, Russell and Martin (2001), including, inter alia, situated knowledge (Wenger, 1998), knowing-in-action and personal practical knowledge (Schön, 1988), declarative and procedural knowledge (J. R. Anderson, 2010), semantic and episodic knowledge (Tulving, 1972;Tulving & Craik, 2000), conceptual and procedural knowledge (Hiebert, Gallimore, & Stigler, 2002) and metacognitive knowledge (Flavell, 1979;Hacker, Dunlosky, & Graesser, 1998). These classifications of types of knowledge are similar in kind to the variety of memory elements identified in White's (1979) account, but are not identified explicitly in discussions of deep approaches to learning.…”

Section: Features Of Good Quality Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing the Features of Good-Quality Knowledge for Teachers and Students

Lawson¹,

Askell–Williams²

2012

Enhancing the Quality of Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we have two concerns. First we consider the features used to describe good quality learning actions and knowledge representations. Our second concern is the need to develop students' knowledge of how to act, during teachinglearning transactions, in order to generate good quality knowledge representations.There is a convergence of views, at a broad level, about the character of good quality knowledge. Although there are frequent specifications of the features of good quality learning these discussions mostly do not build on one another so that a coherent representation of such learning is built up. There is therefore a need to consider further the characteristics of learning that are regarded as being of good quality. For this purpose we set out a framework based around six dimensions of good quality knowledge, namely, extent, well-foundedness, structure, complexity, generativity, and variety of representational format. In the final section of the chapter we advance arguments that point to the need to attend to the state of students' and teachers' knowledge about how to act, in strategic cognitive and metacognitive ways, in order to generate good quality knowledge representations.

show abstract

“…In parallel, the debate around the nature of the teaching profession, the knowledge and skills teachers need, where and how this is produced and developed, has gained increasingly more attention both in research and policy communities (Guerriero, 2017 [16] ; Hargreaves, 1996 [17] ; Hiebert, Gallimore and Stigler, 2002 [18] ; Whitty and Furlong, 2017 [19] ). Most researchers argue that teachers' need a specialised knowledge base on which they base their professional judgement (Guerriero, 2017 [16] ; Hargreaves, 1996 [17] ), but the type and sources of this knowledge base is debated (Hiebert, Gallimore and Stigler, 2002 [18] ; Goldacre, 2013 [20] ).…”

Section: Introduction and Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

What difference do standards make to educating teachers?

Révai

2018

OECD Education Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. │ EDU/WKP(2018)10 WHAT DIFFERENCE DO STANDARDS MAKE TO EDUCATING TEACHERS? Unclassified OECD EDUCATION WORKING PAPERS SERIESOECD Working Papers should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its member countries. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein are those of the author(s).Working Papers describe preliminary results or research in progress by the author(s) and are published to stimulate discussion on a broad range of issues on which the OECD works. Comments on Working Papers are welcome, and may be sent to the Directorate for Education and Skills, OECD, 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France.This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgement of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to rights@oecd.org.Comment on the series is welcome, and should be sent to edu.contact@oecd.org .This working paper has been authorised by Andreas Schleicher, Director of the Directorate for Education and Skills, OECD. │ EDU/WKP(2018)10 WHAT DIFFERENCE DO STANDARDS MAKE TO EDUCATING TEACHERS? Unclassified ABSTRACTThis paper reviews evidence on the interplay between professional standards for teachers, the content of teacher education and educational sciences, and provides three case studies to illustrate these interactions from Estonia, Australia and Singapore. In particular, it investigates what aligning teacher education programmes to standards really mean; and what conception of educational sciences is reflected in the standards and the curriculum. Analyses suggest that alignment, as an explicit, direct and consistent correspondence, is difficult to achieve, in part due to different conceptualisations of professional knowledge. However, this paper argues that the main value of standards as policy tools lies in their capacity to create mutual dialogue between different artefacts (standards' requirements, curriculum, course descriptions, accreditation standards, etc.), as well as among stakeholders. Regularly renegotiating the standards as a result of such dialogue and reflections should be a crucial part of the policy process. RÉSUMÉCe document de travail fait un état de la littérature sur l'interaction entre les normes professionnelles pour les enseignants, le contenu de leur formation et les s...

show abstract

A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession: What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One?

Cited by 754 publications

References 46 publications

Teachers' Experiences of Induction: A Narrative Retrospective Inquiry

Teachers' Experiences of Induction: A Narrative Retrospective Inquiry

Framing the Features of Good-Quality Knowledge for Teachers and Students

What difference do standards make to educating teachers?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About