Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Teacher Professional Development for Improving Quality of Teaching pp 183–213Cite as

Broadening the Scope of the Dynamic Integrated Approach to Teacher Professional Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 3416 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, two projects investigating possible ways of expanding the DIA are presented. The first project examined the extent to which the proposed approach can be used to improve not only teaching but also assessment practice, whereas the second investigated the added value of using the dynamic approach internally rather than externally. Each study explored ways to expand the scope of the DIA by taking into account areas of concern addressed by teacher professional development research. More specifically, the first project was an attempt to suggest how the DIA can be used to improve the assessment skills of teachers. Developmental stages of teachers’ skills in assessment were identified. This study also showed the importance of using the DIA to design courses on assessment to support the formative function of assessment. The second project attempted to identify the added value of using the DIA to develop school-based in-service training courses. These two projects not only showed how the DIA can be used in policy and practice in teacher education but also provided evidence to support the validity of the theoretical framework upon which this approach is based. Finally, these two projects investigated the relative impact of the DIA compared to that of either the holistic approach or the competency-based approach and provided evidence to support the use of DIA for improvement purposes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, R. J. & Khoo, S. (1996). Quest: The interactive test analysis system, Version 2.1. Melbourne: ACER.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 129–144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrich, D. (1988). A general form of Rasch’s extended logistic model for partial credit scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 1(4), 363–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angelo, T. A. (1995). Reassessing and defining assessment. AAHE Bulletin, 48(2), 7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antoniou, P., Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2009). Integrating research on teacher education and educational effectiveness: Using the dynamic model for teacher professional development. In M. S. Khine & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), Transformative leadership and educational excellence: Learning organizations in the information age. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birenbaum, M. (2007). Assessment and instruction preferences and their relationship with test anxiety and learning strategies. Higher Education, 53(6), 749–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. London: King’s College London School of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. (1995). Assessment and learning: Contradictory or complementary? In P. Knight (Ed.), Assessment for learning in higher education. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bright, G. W., & Joyner, J. M. (1998). Classroom assessment in mathematics: View from a National Science Foundation working conference. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadfoot, P., & Black, P. (2004). Redefining assessment? The first ten years of assessment in education. Assessment in Education, 11(1), 7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (1997). Effects of the classroom assessment environment on mathematics and science achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 90(6), 323–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (2003). Developing measurement theory for classroom assessment purposes and uses. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22(4), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (2004). Classroom assessment: Tensions and intersections in theory and practice. Teachers College Record, 106(3), 429–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models in social and behavioral research: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calderhead, J., & Shorrock, S. B. (1997). Understanding teacher education. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calfee, R. C., & Masuda, W. V. (1997). Classroom assessment as inquiry. In G. D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, adjustment, and achievement. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christoforides, M., & Kyriakides, L. (2011, January). Using the dynamic model to identify stages of teachers’ skills in assessment. Paper presented at the 24th International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI) 2011, Limassol, Cyprus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cools, W., De Fraine, B., Van den Noortgate, W., & Onghena, P. (2009). Multilevel design efficiency in educational effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20, 357–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2006). Critical analysis of the current approaches to modelling educational effectiveness: The importance of establishing a dynamic model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(3), 347–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2008b). The dynamics of educational effectiveness: A contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creemers, B. P. M., Kyriakides, L., & Sammons, P. (2010). Methodological advances in educational effectiveness research. London/New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dall’Alba, G., & Sandberg, J. (2006). Unveiling professional development: A critical review of stage models. Review of Educational Research, 76, 383–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Lange, J. (1993). Assessment in problem-oriented curricula. In N. L. Webb & A. F. Coxford (Eds.), Assessment in the mathematics classroom (NCTM Yearbook) (pp. 197–208). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delandshere, G. (2002). Assessment as inquiry. Teachers College Record, 104(7), 1461–1484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1998). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. D., & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to change the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4(1), 37–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2000). Changing classroom assessment: Teachers’ struggles. In N. Bascia & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), The sharp edge of educational change (pp. 97–111). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gipps, C. (1994). Beyond testing. London: Routledge/Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber, J., & Smith, D. (2002). The development of documentation strategies to support teacher reflection, inquiry, and collaboration. In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.), Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach (pp. 147–60). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, S. K., & Mantz, M. (2002, April). Classroom assessment practices: Examining impact on student learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R., & Bailey, J. M. (2001). Developing grading and reporting systems for student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W., & James, M. (1997). Assessment and learning: Differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education, 4(3), 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck, R. H., & Moriyama, K. (2010). Examining relationships among elementary schools’ contexts, leadership, instructional practices, and added-year outcomes: A regression discontinuity approach. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(4), 377–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herman, J. L., Osmundson, E., Ayala, C., Schneider, S., & Timms, M. (2006). The nature and impact of teachers’ formative assessment practices. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), Center for the Study of Evaluation Technical Report 703, University of California. Available online from http://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports/R703.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolen, M. J., & Brennan, R. L. (1995). Test equating: Methods and practices. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasne, S., Wimmers, P. F., Relan, A., & Drake, T. A. (2006). Differential effects of two types of formative assessment in predicting performance of first-year medical students. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11(2), 155–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroeger, J., & Cardy, T. (2006). Documentation: A hard-to-reach place. Early Childhood Education Journal, 33(6), 389–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyriakides, L. (2005a). Evaluating school policy on parents working with their children in class. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(5), 281–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyriakides, L. (2005b). Extending the comprehensive model of educational effectiveness by an empirical investigation. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(2), 103–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyriakides, L., & Christoforides, M. (2011, October). Searching for stages of teacher skills in assessment: Implications for research on teacher professional development. Paper presented at the 37th International Association for Educational Assessment annual conference (IAEA) 2011, Manila, Philippines.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P. M., & Panayiotou, A. (2012, January). A dynamic approach to teacher professional development: The added value of offering INSET courses on a school basis. Paper presented at the 25th International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI) 2012, Malmo, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, R. L. (1993). Educational assessment: Expanded expectations and challenges. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lock, C. L., & Munby, H. (2000). Changing assessment practices in the classroom: A study of one teacher’s change. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 46, 267–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practical guide. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mok, M. M. C. (2010). Self-directed learning oriented assessment: Assessment that informs learning and empowers the learner. Hong Kong, China: Pace Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponte, J. P., Matos, J. F., Guimaraes, H. M., Leal, L. C., & Canavarro, A. P. (1994). Teachers’ and students’ views and attitudes towards a new mathematics curriculum: A case study. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 347–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popham, W. J. (2006). Phony formative assessments: Buyer beware! Educational Leadership, 64(3), 86–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, W. D. (1991). Essential assessment skills in professional education of teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10(1), 3–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmoker, M. (2006). Results NOW: How we can achieve unprecedented improvements in teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational researcher, 29(7), 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. A. (2007). Formative assessment: Caveat emptor. In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 279–303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. J. (1992). High quality classroom assessment: What does it really mean? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11(2), 35–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. J. (1999). Evaluating classroom assessment training in teacher education programs. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(1), 23–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. J. (2004). New assessment beliefs for a new school mission. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 22–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. J., & Chappuis, J. (2008). Enhancing student learning. Available online from http://www.districtadministration.com/viewarticlepf.aspx?articleid=1362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. J., & DuFour, R. (2009). Maximizing the power of formative assessments. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9), 640–644.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2000). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (1998). Investigating formative assessment: Teaching, learning and assessment in the classroom. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, T. (2007). International handbook of school effectiveness and improvement. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, W. C., & Cheng, Y. Y. (2001). Measurement issues in screening outstanding teachers. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2(2), 171–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. J. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for learning: Impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 11(1), 49–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. D. (1985). Additivity in psychological measurement. In E. E. Roskam (Ed.), Measurement and personality assessment (pp. 101–112). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers BV.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. (1981). The measurement of knowledge and attitude (Research memorandum 30). Chicago: Department of Education, Statistical Laboratory, University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen, W. (1993). Scaling and performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 187–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Behavioural & Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Bert Creemers

  2. Department of Education, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Leonidas Kyriakides

  3. Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Panayiotis Antoniou

Authors
  1. Bert Creemers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leonidas Kyriakides
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Panayiotis Antoniou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bert Creemers .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Creemers, B., Kyriakides, L., Antoniou, P. (2013). Broadening the Scope of the Dynamic Integrated Approach to Teacher Professional Development. In: Teacher Professional Development for Improving Quality of Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5207-8_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation