top of page

REFERENCES

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.

bottom of page