Abstract
In this chapter, it is advocated that teacher training and professional development should focus on how to address specific groupings of teacher factors associated with student learning rather than with isolated teaching factors or with the whole range of teacher factors without considering the professional needs of student teachers and teachers. In order to test this element of the dynamic model and identify the groupings of factors, we refer to the results of two studies which made use of the Rasch model to identify stages of effective teaching. The methods and the main results of each study are presented. The first study was conducted in Cyprus, and data on the teacher factors of the dynamic model were collected using external observations and student questionnaires. The results revealed 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 demonstrating more advanced types of behaviour were found to have better student outcomes (both cognitive and affective). The second study was conducted in Canada and provided support for the cross-cultural validity of the dynamic model, especially its attempt to identify the stages of effective teaching. In the last part of this chapter, we argue that the grouping of teacher factors emphasises the need to establish a dynamic integrated approach (DIA) to teacher professional development. The main steps in this approach are then presented.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adams, R. J., & Khoo, S. (1996). Quest: The interactive test analysis system, Version 2.1. Melbourne: ACER.
Andrich, D. (1988). A general form of Rasch’s extended logistic model for partial credit scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 1(4), 363–378.
Antoniou, P. (2009). Using the dynamic model of educational effectiveness to improve teaching practice: Building an evaluation model to test the impact of teacher professional development programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cyprus, Cyprus.
Berliner, D. (1988). The development of expertise in pedagogy. New Orleans, LA: Charles W. Hunt Memorial Lecture for the American Association of Colleges in Teacher Education.
Berliner, D. (1992). Expertise in teaching. In F. Oser, J.-L. Patry, & A. Dick (Eds.), Effective and responsible teaching (pp. 227–249). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Berliner, D. (1994). Expertise: The wonder of exemplary performances. In J. Mangieri & C. Block (Eds.), Creating powerful thinking in teachers and students: Diverse perspectives (pp. 161–186). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College.
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). New York: MacMillan.
Burry, J. A., & Shaw, D. (1988, April). Defining teacher effectiveness on a continuum: A Rasch model approach. Paper presented at the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.
Combs, A. W., Blume, R. A., Newman, A. J., & Wass, H. L. (1974). The professional education of teachers: A humanistic approach to teacher preparation. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2008b). The dynamics of educational effectiveness: A contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. London: Routledge.
Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2010b). Using the dynamic model to develop an evidence-based and theory-driven approach to school improvement. Irish Educational Studies, 29, 5–23.
Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2012). Improving quality in education: Dynamic approaches to school improvement. London: Routledge.
Creemers, B. P. M., & Reezigt, G. J. (1996). School level conditions affecting the effectiveness of instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(3), 197–228.
Den Brok, P., Brekelmans, M., & Wubbels, T. (2004). Interpersonal teacher behaviour and student outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(3/4), 407–442.
Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: Free Press.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Remillard, J. (1996). Perspectives on learning to teach. In F. B. Murray (Ed.), The teacher educator’s handbook (pp. 63–91). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Flanders, N. (1970). Analyzing Teacher Behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Green, K. E., & Frantom, C. G. (2002). Survey development and validation with the Rasch model. Paper presented at the International Conference on Questionnaire Development, Evaluation, and Testing, Charleston, SC, November 14–17.
Janosz, M., Archambault, I., & Kyriakides, L. (2011, January). The cross-cultural validity of the dynamic model of educational effectiveness: A Canadian study. Paper presented at the 24th International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI) 2011, Limassol, Cyprus.
Kyriakides, L. (2008). Testing the validity of the comprehensive model of educational effectiveness: A step towards the development of a dynamic model of effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19(4), 429–446.
Kyriakides, L., Campbell, R. J., & Gagatsis, A. (2000). The significance of the classroom effect in primary schools: An application of creemers’ comprehensive model of educational effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(4), 501–529.
Kyriakides, L., & Christoforou, Ch. (2011, April). A synthesis of studies searching for teacher factors: Implications for educational effectiveness theory. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2011 Conference, New Orleans, LA.
Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B. P. M. (2008). Using a multidimensional approach to measure the impact of classroom-level factors upon student achievement: A study testing the validity of the dynamic model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19(2), 183–205.
Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B. P. M. (2009). The effects of teacher factors on different outcomes: Two studies testing the validity of the dynamic model. Effective Education, 1(1), 61–86.
Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P. M., & Antoniou, P. (2009). Teacher behaviour and student outcomes: Suggestions for research on teacher training and professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 12–23.
Marcoulides, G. A., & Drezner, Z. (1999). A procedure for detecting pattern clustering in measurement designs. In M. Wilson & G. Engelhard Jr. (Eds.), Objective measurement: Theory into practice (Vol. 5). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Mislevy, R. J., & Wilson, M. (1996). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation for a psychometric model of discontinuous development. Psychometrika, 61, 41–71.
Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2000). School effectiveness and teacher effectiveness in mathematics: Some preliminary Findings from the evaluation of the mathematics enhancement programme (primary). School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(3), 273–303.
Opdenakker, M. C., & Van Damme, J. (2000). Effects of schools, teaching staff and classes on achievement and well-being in secondary education: Similarities and differences between school outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(2), 65–196.
Sampson, S. O., & Bradley, K. D. (2004). Measuring factors impacting educator supply and demand: An argument for Rasch analysis. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, San Diego, CA.
Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. J. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
Sternberg, R. J., Forsythe, G. B., Hedlund, J., Horvath, J. A., Wagner, R. K., Williams, W. M., Snook, S. A., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2000). Practical intelligence in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, W. C., & Cheng, Y. Y. (2001). Measurement issues in screening outstanding teachers. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2(2), 171–186.
Wilks, R. (1996). Classroom management in primary schools: A review of the literature. Behaviour Change, 13(1), 20–32.
Wilson, M. (1989). Saltus: A psychometric model of discontinuity in cognitive development. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 276–289.
Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1989). Observations are always ordinal: Measurements, however, must be interval. Archives of Physical Measurement and Rehabilitation, 70(12), 857–860.
Wright, S. P., Horn, S. P., & Sanders, W. L. (1997). Teacher and classroom context effects on student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11(1), 57–67.
Yair, G. (1997). When classrooms matter: Implications of between-classroom variability for educational policy in Israel. Assessment in Education, 4(2), 225–248.
Yen, W. (1993). Scaling and performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 187–213.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Creemers, B., Kyriakides, L., Antoniou, P. (2013). Using the Dynamic Model to Develop an Integrated Approach to Teacher Training and Professional Development. In: Teacher Professional Development for Improving Quality of Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5207-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5207-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5206-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5207-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)