Copyright © 2019 Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT)                                                                                              

Chapter 3. Approaches to measuring teaching practice

 

Council of Chief State School Officers.  (2011).  InTASC

model core teaching standards: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Author.  Retrieved from https://www.ccsso.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/InTASC_Model_Core_Teaching_Standards_
2011.pdf

Council of Chief State School Officers.  (2013).  InTASC

model core teaching standards and learning progressions for teachers 1.0: A resource for ongoing teacher development.  Washington, DC: Author.  Retrieved from https://www.ccsso.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/2013_INTASC_Learning_Progressions_for_
Teachers.pdf

The Danielson Group.  (2013).  The 2013 framework for

teaching evaluation instrument.  Princeton, NJ: Author. Retrieved from https://www.danielsongroup.org/framework/

Marshall, K.  (2014).  Teacher evaluation rubrics.  Retrieved

from https://usny.nysed.gov/rttt/teachers-leaders/practicerubrics/Docs/marshall-teacher-rubric-jan-2014.pdf

Marzano, R.J.  (2017).  The new art and science of teaching.

Alexandria, VA: ASCD and Solution Tree.

Chapter 4. Local approaches to measuring impact on
P-12 students

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L.  (1999).  The teacher

research movement: A decade later. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 15-25. doi:10.3102/0013189X028007015

D'Souza, L.A.  (2012).  Assessing student learning through

guided inquiry: A case study of a beginning teacher.  Journal of Education, 192(2/3), 79-87. doi:10.1177/0022057412192002-310

Grudens-Schuck, N., Allen, B.L., & Larson, K. (2004).

Methodology brief: Focus group fundamentals.  Ames, IA: Iowa State University / Extension Community and Economic Development Publications.  Retrieved from https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/extension_communities_pubs/12

Little, J.W., Gearhart, M., Curry, M., & Kafka, J. (2003).

Looking at student work for teacher learning, teacher community, and school reform.  Phi Delta Kappan, 85(3), 185-192. doi:10.1177/003172170308500305

McDonald, J.P. (2002).  Teachers studying student work:

Why and how?  Phi Delta Kappan, 84(2), 120-127. doi:10.1177/003172170208400207

Merriam, S.  (1998).  Qualitative research and case study

applications in education.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Nias, J.  (1991).  How practitioners are silenced, how

practitioners are empowered.  In H.K. Letiche, J.C. Vander Wolf, & F.X. Plooij (Eds.), The practitioner’s power of choice in staff development and in-service training.  Amsterdam, Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.

Schlechty, P.C.  (2002).  Working on the work: An action plan

for teachers, principals, and superintendents.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Yin, R.K.  (2014).  Case study research: Design and method

(5th ed.).  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chapter 5. School context factors that support beginning teacher effectiveness

Berthiaume, A.D.  (2015).  Email communication and its

impact on high school principal and teacher relations (doctoral dissertation).  Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.  Retrieved from ProQuest. (ProQuest No. 3739909)

Cook, C.M., & Faulkner, S.A.  (2010).  The use of common

planning time: A case study of two Kentucky schools to watch.  Research in Middle Level Education, 34(2), 1-12. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ914054.pdf

Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N.  (2009).  Teacher

learning: What matters? Educational Leadership, 66(5), 46-53.

Dufour, R., Dufour, R., Eaker, R., Many, T., & Matttos, M

(2016).  Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work (3rd ed.).  Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.