Does Policy Influence Mathematics and Science Teachers’ Participation in Professional Development?
Does Policy Influence Mathematics and Science Teachers’ Participation in Professional Development?
复制标题
政策是否影响数学和科学教师参与专业发展？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
影响因子：
1
通讯作者：
Kristie J. R. Phillips
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Laura Desimone;Thomas M. Smith;Kristie J. R. Phillips
背景/背景最近的研究表明，教师学习的专业发展的重要性，并记录了质量，使专业发展有效地改善教学和学生的成绩。但是，很少有研究表明，政策环境如何塑造教师参与“有效”或“无效”专业发展的选择。因为“不让一个孩子掉队”（NCLB）和相关改革对教师提出了新的要求，而专业发展是我们打算改善教育体系的关键机制之一，所以我们必须找到最有效的方法来鼓励教师参与最有可能提高他们的实践水平的专业发展，从而提高学生的成绩。目的在描述政策环境的几个方面，我们试图发现哪些类型的政策或多或少影响教师进入专业发展的类型，研究表明，是最有效的改善教学和学习。此外，我们研究这些关系是否不同的高风险的主题，数学，和低风险的主题，科学。我们根据一个理论来描述政策环境，该理论认为政策环境的某些属性会增加政策执行：（1）权威-政策的说服力;（2）权力（或问责性）--与政策相关的奖励和制裁;（3）一致性--政策与政策系统中其他要素的一致性;（4）稳定性--政策环境中的行动者和思想有多稳定。我们的分析回答了两个主要问题。政策环境的属性权威，权力，一致性和稳定性影响的可能性，教师将参与专业发展的研究为基础的功能的有效性，而不是课堂管理或没有专业发展？政策属性和专业发展参与之间的这种关系对于高风险科目（例如，数学）而不是低风险科目（例如，科学）？研究设计使用全国样本的高中数学和科学教师的学校和人员调查（SASS），我们进行了二次分析，使用三个层次的线性模型（HLM），以预测教师的参与水平在不同类型的专业发展活动。结论我们发现，权威，而不是权力，与教师采取的专业发展，我们知道提高教学和学习活动的主题内容和教学策略，以及积极的互动与其他教师周围的课程和教学。同样，我们发现，稳定性（衡量减少教师流动率），而不是与其他改革的专业发展的一致性，与采取有效的专业发展。我们提供我们的研究结果，有助于了解如何最好地塑造政策，为教师学习提供最有用的机会。
Background/Context Recent research has shown the importance of professional development for teacher learning and has documented the qualities that make professional development effective for improved instruction and student achievement. But there is little research to suggest how the policy environment shapes teachers’ choices to participate in either “effective” or “ineffective” professional development. Because No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and related reforms are making new demands on teachers, and professional development is one of the critical mechanisms by which we intend to improve our educational system, it is important that we find the most effective ways to encourage teachers to participate in the types of professional development most likely to improve their practice—and, in turn, student achievement. Purpose In describing the policy environment on several dimensions, we seek to discover which types of policies are more or less influential in moving teachers into the types of professional development that research has shown to be most effective for improved teaching and learning. In addition, we examine whether these relationships differ for a high-stakes subject, mathematics, and a low-stakes subject, science. We characterize the policy environment based on a theory that suggests that certain attributes of the policy environment increase policy implementation: (1) authority—the extent to which a policy is persuasive; (2) power (or accountability)—rewards and sanctions attached to a policy; (3) consistency—how aligned a policy is with other elements in the policy system; and (4) stability—how stable actors and ideas in the policy environment are. Our analyses answer two main questions. Do attributes of the policy environment—authority, power, consistency, and stability—influence the likelihood that teachers will participate in professional development with research-based features of effectiveness, rather than classroom management or no professional development? Is this relationship between policy attributes and professional development participation different for high-stakes subjects (e.g., mathematics) than for lower stakes subjects (e.g., science)? Research Design Using a national sample of high school mathematics and science teachers from the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), we conduct a secondary analysis using a three-level hierarchical linear model (HLM) to predict teachers’ level of participation in different types of professional development activities. Conclusions We find that authority, not power, is associated with teachers taking the kind of professional development that we know improves teaching and learning—activities focused on subject matter content and instructional strategies, as well as active interactions with other teachers around curriculum and instruction. Similarly, we find that stability (measured by reduced teacher turnover), not the consistency of professional development with other reforms, is associated with taking effective professional development. We offer our findings to contribute to understanding how best to shape policy to provide the most useful opportunities for teacher learning.