Curriculum-Based Teacher Professional Development

A curriculum-based professional development approach we utilized in our current work addresses this issue and provides what has been described as "transported ideas" (Langer, 2000). That is teacher professional development activities that are modified to fit the schools contextual and curricular needs, allowing teacher to see first hand the effectiveness (or lack there of) of various teaching strategies. In this way curriculum-based professional development is defined in two parts, first, professional development providers conduct detailed observations and inquiry with teachers about local, contextual school needs (students, teachers, leadership) as a basis for making informed collaborative decisions about professional development. Second, deep alignment of professional development activities with the contextual and curricular demands of the school.

Organizational Change: Relationship between Participation, Attitudinal and Behavior Change and Effectiveness of Change Initiative

While our approach to teacher professional development has attempted to deal with teachers' and schools' contextual and curricular needs the curriculum-based approach in and of itself does not deal with the larger question about organizational change. In this way we are also exploring the level of participation in a change initiative as they related to attitude and behavior change as well as the effectiveness of the initiative. Figure 1 outlines a model of organizational change

Orientations towards Teaching and Learning

Epistemological beliefs are important because they influence how individuals understand the nature of intellectual tasks and decide what kinds of strategies are appropriate for dealing with both formal and informal learning and problem solving situations (Perry 1970; Ryan 1984; Kitchener & King 1981; 1986; Dweck & Leggett 1988; Schommer, 1993; Jehng, Johnson & Anderson 1993; Tsai 1997). These beliefs are influenced by a variety of factors both internal and external to our educational system. At the highest stage of epistemological understanding the individual sees him or herself as a co-participant in the learning process, truths are not seen as absolute but contextual; certainty is not possible across domains. Knowledge is complex and cannot be characterized as isolated facts. The ability to learn is acquired over time; quick learning is not possible, instead, learning requires sustained participation in contextual settings (Perry, 1970; Schoomer, 1993; Hofer & Pintrich, 1998). It is at this level of understanding about how knowledge is obtained, stored, and validated that a high degree of learning and understanding takes place. When learning is thought to be driven by systematic laws and innate intellectual ability, performance tends to be lower (Schommer, 1993). In addition, they shape the attributions (Dweck and Leggett, 1988) students make about their success or failure.

Impact of Assessment for Learning Principals and Strategies on Student Learning

Student learning can only be increased by changes put into effect by teachers and students in the classrooms. The assessment of learning, that is the measurement of student success on specific mandated measures, provides important accountability information and can be use in limited ways to make instructional decisions. However, this type of assessment is primarily designed as a summative accountability tool, and is not well designed to provide useful and timely formative assessment information to teachers and students on a daily basis. As Black and Wiliam (1998) have discussed, solid evidence has shown that formative assessment can raise standards of achievement. In the climate of high-stakes testing and accountability, assessment has become a key driver in school reform efforts. As our ideas about assessment have grown and adapted to the challenges of meeting the increasing demands of NCLB, educators have advanced assessment from primarily summative to summative and formative. But as Stiggins (2006) has pointed out, in the current climate, formative assessment has sometimes taken on a narrow meaning, that is "a system of more frequent summative assessments administered at regular intervals (often quarterly) to determine which students have not yet met state standards - an early warning system, if you will." Similarly, the 2003 TIMSS study (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study ) reported that "A focus on standards and accountability that ignores the processes of teaching and learning in classrooms will not provide the direction that teachers need in their quest to improve."

Theory to Practice Research

In our ongoing work with local school divisions it has been continually expressed by school leaders the concern that our work with them not be perceived by teachers as an added responsibility, or university imposed research agenda, rather that it be perceived as supporting their continued development of what they already need to work on. In an effort to address this teacher concern have explored new approaches to research and evaluation that can reduce the tension between researchers and practitioners and promote mutually beneficial results. Design-based research principals provide such a mechanism and aids practitioners in creating learning conditions that theory suggests are productive, but that are not commonly practiced or well understood. The design-based approach allows researchers and practitioners to: Support the design and refinement of professional development with research, set pragmatic goals based on research, conduct research and collaborate in real-world settings, "repurpose" ongoing data collection for formative program evaluation, PD refinement and improvement, measure effectiveness and produce scholarship for wider dissemination.