QualitiesOfEffectiveTeachers3rdEd Stronge 0318

QUALITIES OF EFFECTIVE TEACHERS
QUALITIES OF
EFFECTIVE TEACHERS 3RD EDITION
Every teacher seeks to be an effective teacher. Every teacher wants to have a
positive, remarkable, and lasting influence on students’ lives.
But what makes for an effective teacher? What role does teacher preparation
play in teacher effectiveness? What do effective teachers do during planning,
JAMES H. instruction, and assessment? How do they create a learning environment that
STRONGE engages and supports students? And how do effective teachers interact with their
students to promote the best opportunities and results for all?
is president and CEO of
Stronge and Associates
Educational Consulting,
In Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd edition, James H. Stronge explores these
3RD EDITION
LLC, an educational questions and more as he synthesizes the literature on teacher effectiveness. The
consulting company that result? A research-based framework for effective teaching that addresses:
focuses on teacher and
Professional knowledge Assessment
leader effectiveness with
projects internationally Instructional planning Learning environment
and in many U.S. Instructional delivery Professionalism
states. He is also the
Heritage Professor of Stronge also examines characteristics of effective teachers of
Education, a distinguished at-risk students and high-ability students. To bridge the gap between
professorship, in the research and practice, he includes checklists of skills and positive
Educational Policy, qualities associated with effective teacher performance as well as red
Planning, and Leadership flags that indicate that teachers may not be reaching their full potential
Area at the College of
in the classroom.
William and Mary, in
STRONGE
Williamsburg, Virginia.
This resource is for anyone interested in improving teaching. It offers
He teaches doctoral
courses within the School
research-based advice for teachers who wish to improve their own
of Education’s Educational performance, as well as guidance for teacher leaders and supervisors,
Policy, Planning, and school administrators and department heads, staff development
Leadership (EPPL) specialists, teacher and administrator educators, human resource
Program, with a particular specialists, and education policymakers and their staffs. Anyone who has
focus on human resource a vested interest in students and their success can gain valuable insight
leadership, legal issues
and practical tools to ensure positive outcomes for all students.
in education, and
research design.
$37.95 U.S.
STUDY
GUIDE
ONLINE
Alexandria, Virginia USA
Browse excerpts from ASCD books: www.ascd.org/books

1703 N. Beauregard St. • Alexandria, VA 22311-1714 USA
Phone: 800-933-2723 or 703-578-9600 • Fax: 703-575-5400
Website: www.ascd.org • E-mail: member@ascd.org
Author guidelines: www.ascd.org/write
Deborah S. Delisle, Executive Director; Stefani Roth, Publisher; Genny Ostertag, Director, Content
Acquisitions; Julie Houtz, Director, Book Editing & Production; Joy Scott Ressler, Editor; Lindsey Smith,
Graphic Designer; Mike Kalyan, Director, Production Services; Andrea Hoffman, Senior Production
Specialist; Cynthia Stock, Production Designer.
Copyright © 2018 ASCD. All rights reserved. It is illegal to reproduce copies of this work in print
or electronic format (including reproductions displayed on a secure intranet or stored in a retrieval
system or other electronic storage device from which copies can be made or displayed) without the
prior written permission of the publisher. By purchasing only authorized electronic or print editions
and not participating in or encouraging piracy of copyrighted materials, you support the rights of
authors and publishers. Readers who wish to reproduce or republish excerpts of this work in print
or electronic format may do so for a small fee by contacting the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC),
222 Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA 01923, USA (phone: 978-750-8400; fax: 978-646-8600; web:
www.copyright.com). To inquire about site licensing options or any other reuse, contact ASCD
Permissions at www.ascd.org/permissions, or permissions@ascd.org, or 703-575-5749. For a list of
vendors authorized to license ASCD e-books to institutions, see www.ascd.org/epubs. Send transla-
tion inquiries to translations@ascd.org.
ASCD® and ASCD LEARN. TEACH. LEAD.® are registered trademarks of ASCD. All other trade-
marks contained in this book are the property of, and reserved by, their respective owners, and
are used for editorial and informational purposes only. No such use should be construed to imply
sponsorship or endorsement of the book by the respective owners.
All web links in this book are correct as of the publication date below but may have become inactive
or otherwise modified since that time. If you notice a deactivated or changed link, please e-mail
books@ascd.org with the words “Link Update” in the subject line. In your message, please specify
the web link, the book title, and the page number on which the link appears.
PAPERBACK ISBN: 978-1-4166-2586-5 ASCD product #118042 n3/18

PDF E-BOOK ISBN: 978-1-4166-2588-9; see Books in Print for other formats.
Quantity discounts are available: e-mail programteam@ascd.org or call 800-933-2723, ext. 5773, or
703-575-5773. For desk copies, go to www.ascd.org/deskcopy.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Stronge, James H., author.
Title: Qualities of effective teachers / James H. Stronge.
Description: 3rd edition. | Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD, [2018] | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017057163 (print) | LCCN 2017059530 (ebook) | ISBN
9781416625889 (PDF) | ISBN 9781416625865 (pbk.)
Subjects: LCSH: Effective teaching. | Teacher effectiveness.
Classification: LCC LB1025.3 (ebook) | LCC LB1025.3 .S789 2018 (print) | DDC
371.102--dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017057163
______________________________________________________________
26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 4 2/5/18 7:04 AM

QUALITIES OF
EFFECTIVE
TEACHERS
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Part 1: What It Means to Be an Effective Teacher. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

TableTeachers:
Chapter 1: Qualities of Effective of Contents
An Introduction. . . . . . . . . . 3
Chapter 2: Professional Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Chapter 3: Instructional Planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Chapter 4: Instructional Delivery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Chapter 5: Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Chapter 6: Learning Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
Chapter 7: Professionalism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Chapter 8: Effective Teaching: What Does It All Mean? . . . . . . . . . . . 252

vi Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd Edition
Part 2: Teacher Effectiveness: Resources You Can Use. . . . . . . . . 261
Section I: Teacher Skills Assessment Checklists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
Section II: Positive Qualities and Red Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344
About the Author. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348

Preface
How We Came to Know What We

Know About Effective Teachers
Since the breakthrough of behavioral learning theory in psychology in
the 1950s and 1960s, research on teaching practice has made momen-
tous advances and evolved drastically. We know more about teaching and
learning than we ever have before. However, confounded by factors of
variety in research design and rigor, and because human subjects are dif-
ficult to study to begin with, education research has led to inconsistent
and sometimes confusing findings. How can we make the best out of the
extant research, and what information can be gleaned?
Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd edition, sheds light on the elusive
concept of teacher effectiveness by summarizing research results accumu-
lated across several decades to define specific teacher behaviors that con-
tribute to student achievement and other measures of effectiveness. The
book was developed by focusing specifically on the teacher and his or her
preparation, personality, and practice, as opposed to student demograph-
ics, school and district administration, or organizational decision making
outside the teacher’s control. The sources considered in creating this syn-
thesis of teacher background and behaviors include broad-based studies
of teacher practice as linked to student achievement, case studies of teach-
ers identified as effective within specific contexts, surveys and interviews
among stakeholders, meta-analyses of teacher effectiveness studies, and
other reviews of research.
ix

x Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd Edition
Organization of the Book

Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd edition, is designed to serve as a
resource and reference tool for educators. It identifies elements of effec-
tive teaching within broad categories and aims to cover all areas of teacher
effectiveness as represented in the empirical research literature. The book
is grounded in a broad review of extant research that explores teacher
impact and teacher attributes that have been found to be associated with
effectiveness. The book is divided into two parts. Part 1 focuses on the
research useful in developing a profile of what an effective teacher is, and
Part 2 contains myriad resources related to effective teachers.
Part 1, which begins with Chapter 1, lays out some preliminary issues
and the broader contexts regarding teacher effectiveness. Specifically, it
defines what an effective teacher is and it looks at teacher effectiveness
from the perspectives of the at-risk learner, the high-ability learner, and
21st century teaching. Chapters 2–7 address major categories of teacher
effectiveness, with each chapter exploring the characteristics of effective
teachers of at-risk students and high-ability students, as well as additional
thoughts from the perspective of 21st century teaching.
Chapter 2 and Chapter 7 explore the teacher as a professional and
as an individual. Chapter 2 investigates prerequisites of effective teach-
ing, focusing on the influence of a teacher’s professional knowledge. The
implications of verbal ability, educational preparation, teacher certifica-
tion, and experience are also explored. Chapter 7 explores the significance
of the teacher’s professionalism. This discussion emphasizes dedicated
and reflective practice among effective teachers. The chapter also focuses
on a teacher’s nonacademic interactions with students and on the aspects
of a teacher’s behavior that make him or her loved, respected, and remem-
bered by students as personally effective.
Chapters 3 through 6 focus more specifically on aspects of a teach-
er’s job responsibilities and practices. Chapter 3 investigates planning and
organization for instruction with a focus on maximizing the amount of
time allocated for instruction, identifying learning intentions and objec-
tives, and incorporating assessment data into instructional planning.
Chapter 4 focuses on implementation of instruction with an emphasis on

Preface xi
communication and complexity of instructional content by using appro-

priate questioning techniques and supporting active learning. Chapter
5 considers the management and organizational skills that an effective
teacher displays, with emphasis on the establishment of an effective learn-
ing environment in which routines and discipline are established and
maintained to serve as a backdrop for instruction and student engage-
ment. Chapter 6 examines assessing student progress and potential
through discussing the importance of assessment literacy and applying
data of student learning outcomes, as well as responding to and meeting
the individual needs of special populations within the classroom.
Within each chapter, information is organized into categories of char-
acteristics or behaviors that are supported by the existing research as
important aspects of teacher effectiveness. Summaries of research are pro-
vided in each chapter, with a list of key references to guide the interested
reader to further information on the topics. Chapter 8 presents a brief
conclusion on what an effective teacher is in every school every day.
Part 2 includes teacher skills assessment checklists and positive qual-
ities and red flags associated with effective teacher performance. This
portion of the book focuses on helping teachers improve—whether the
impetus for improvement is self-diagnosed or the result of supervisor
assistance. In particular, the checklists and list of qualities are designed
to aid in converting research findings into more effective practice. The
checklists have been updated to include selected salient qualities of
teachers based on the latest educational effectiveness research and under-
standings of learning and teaching. The qualities are an addendum to the
already existing qualities of teachers in general.
Intended Audiences for the Book

This book is designed to bridge the gap between research and prac-
tice. It has teased out the minutiae and fuzziness of education research
and focuses on the big ideas of effectiveness so as to aid readers in iden-
tifying the links between classroom processes and desirable student out-
comes. Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd edition, aimed at improving the
quality of teacher performance and learning opportunities for students,
can be a valuable resource for:

xii Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd Edition
• Teachers who wish to improve their own performance through

analysis and reflective practice
• Teacher leaders and supervisors who are engaged in mentoring,
peer coaching, and collaborative schoolwide improvement
• School administrators and department heads who supervise and
evaluate teachers
• Staff development specialists who plan and deliver training focused
on improving instruction for the range of abilities that exist in
classrooms
• Teacher and administrator educators who can employ the book’s
research synthesis in their teacher training and instructional lead-
ership programs
• Human resource specialists who are responsible for recruiting and
selecting high-quality teacher applicants
• Policymakers and their staffs who are responsible for developing
tools and strategies for state or district teacher development and
evaluation processes
Each group contributes to the education of students and has a vested

interest in their success.

1
Qualities of Effective Teachers:
An Introduction
T
he focus of Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd edition, is the teacher.
Not teacher skills alone. Not teacher dispositions alone. Instead,
the focus is on the whole person who brings to the classroom
unique beliefs, values, attitudes, aspirations, motivation, knowledge, and
skills, all rolled into one—the teacher.
The content is presented within the context of a person—the
teacher—as opposed to viewing teaching skills as isolated processes. The
style and format are designed to be as teacher- and leader-friendly as pos-
sible, providing easy-to-use summaries and tools for teacher effectiveness.
In building on the framework provided in the 1st and 2nd editions of
Qualities of Effective Teachers, this edition is solidly research based with
updates from the latest empirical findings. Additionally, new features in
this edition include a focus in each chapter on the unique qualities needed
to prepare students for the knowledge economy of the 21st century.
If finding or becoming an effective teacher were simple, this book
would not be necessary. If a single method for developing an effective
teacher existed, such a teacher would be in every classroom. Nonethe-
less, there are common attributes that characterize our best, most effec-
tive teachers.
Teachers have a powerful, long-lasting influence on their students.
They directly affect how students learn, what they learn, how much they
learn, and the ways in which they interact with one another and the
world around them. Considering the degree of the teacher’s influence, it

4 Qualities of Effective Teachers, 3rd Edition
is important to understand what teachers should do to promote positive

results in the lives of students—with regard to school achievement, positive
attitudes toward school, interest in learning, and other desirable outcomes.
This understanding should be based both on what experts and stakehold-
ers think teachers should do and on what educational research has shown
to be significant in the preparation and practice of effective teachers.
This edition chronicles the common background and identifies
the common behaviors that characterize effectiveness in the classroom.
Although the majority of what we know about effective teachers in gen-
eral applies to teachers of at-risk students and students who are identi-
fied as gifted in some way, additional teacher qualities, dispositions, and
behaviors emerged in a careful review of the extant literature. Based on a
comprehensive review and synthesis of research related to effective teach-
ing, this book serves as a resource for teachers, administrators, and others
interested in improving the quality of teaching and learning in our schools.
What Is Effectiveness?
Effectiveness is an elusive concept when we consider the complex task of
teaching. Some researchers define teacher effectiveness in terms of stu-
dent achievement. Others focus on high performance ratings from super-
visors. Still others rely on comments from students, administrators, and
other interested stakeholders. In fact, in addition to being uncertain how
to define effectiveness, we vacillate on just how to refer to successful teach-
ers. Cruickshank and Haefele (2001) noted that good teachers, at various
times, have been called ideal, analytical, dutiful, competent, expert, reflective,
satisfying, diversity-responsive, and respected.
As a teacher’s influence is far reaching, it is challenging to define
what outcomes might demonstrate effectiveness and how those outcomes
should be measured. In addition, many variables outside the teacher’s
control affect each of the potential measures of effectiveness.
Despite the complexities surrounding the issue of measuring teacher
effectiveness, we can agree that effective teachers make an extraordinary
and lasting impact on their students’ lives. For instance, research finds that
students taught by highly effective teachers are more likely to attend col-
lege, live in better neighborhoods, and save more for retirement. If we

Qualities of Effective Teachers: An Introduction 5
replace a teacher who is in the bottom 5th percentile of effectiveness with

an average teacher, the lifetime income of the class’s students can increase
by approximately $250,000 (Chetty, Friedman, & Rockoff, 2014).
In recent years, the field of education has moved toward a stronger
focus on accountability and on careful analysis of variables affecting edu-
cational outcomes. Particularly during the past decade, value-added mod-
els have been employed in an attempt to determine teachers’ contribution
to student learning outcomes, as measured by standardized tests. Time
and again, the teacher has proven to be the most influential school-related
force in student achievement. Consequently, researchers have begun to
focus on the specific characteristics and teaching processes employed by
the most effective teachers in an attempt to understand what teachers do
to impact student learning.
The growing body of research concerned with teacher effectiveness
has reinforced the notion that specific characteristics and behaviors mat-
ter in teaching, in terms of student achievement as well as other desirable
outcomes (e.g., Muijs et al., 2014). Looking across studies that examine
the defining elements of effectiveness, a careful exploration of the research
helps confirm which practices are vital. In a 2014 study, Loeb, Soland,
and Fox asked, “Is a good teacher a good teacher for all?” and found that
teachers who are effective with English learners also tend to be effective
with their non–English learner counterparts, and vice versa. It seems that
effective teachers are effective with many populations and in various sit-
uations. The following chapters will highlight qualities and characteris-
tics of effective teachers from many perspectives, including professional
knowledge, instructional planning, instructional delivery, assessment,
learning environment, and professionalism. Put all these pieces together,
and a portrait of an effective teacher takes shape.
At-Risk and High-Ability Students

In addition to considering effective teaching in general, are there specific
attributes and dimensions for effectively teaching at-risk students and
high-ability students? Although these two categories are discussed sepa-
rately, many students fall into both—that is, they are both at risk and high
ability (Cline & Schwartz, 1999; Kaul, Johnsen, Witte, & Saxon, 2015;

Siegle et al., 2016). Students with high abilities can also be at risk of
school failure. Likewise, students at risk of school failure can also possess
exceptional abilities. Teachers of these particular students, like teachers of
all students, must take into account the unique needs and characteristics
of their students (VanTassel-Baska & Hubbard, 2016).
Effective Teachers of At-Risk Students

The term at risk may have been used in education circles for many
decades, but it emerged more broadly in the public arena in 1983 as a
result of A Nation at Risk, the report published by the National Com-
mission on Excellence in Education (1983). In general, we think of stu-
dents as being “at risk” when they require remediation, are more likely
to be retained, are at higher risk of dropping out of school, have low
self-efficacy, or have substandard academic skills. These students pres-
ent pressing instructional and behavioral problems for teachers but are in
most need of quality instruction to be successful learners and rise above
their situation (Sagor & Cox, 2013).
Often, students labeled “at risk” are disproportionately ethnic minori-
ties or those with low socioeconomic status. These students, who most
need quality instruction, face educational disparities because of their skin
color, ethnicity, or linguistic and social status. The past 50 years have wit-
nessed significant successes in equalizing access to opportunity; however,
an achievement gap persists, one that begins as early as kindergarten and
first grade, when achievement in science can be seen to vary by race and
ethnicity (Curran & Kellogg, 2016). The effects of the gap are reflected in
the fact that the United States has the lowest level of intergenerational social
mobility among OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Devel-
opment) or other developed countries (Chetty, 2014; Corak, 2013). As a
result, a student’s socioeconomic background strongly influences his or her
academic achievement and earnings later in life (Welner & Carter, 2013).
Economic inequality now exceeds racial inequality in its impact on
educational outcomes, although the effects of both remain significant.
This shift became evident in the early part of the 21st century, and it
affects teachers today (Reardon, 2011, 2013). Research shows that a read-
ing achievement gap between those from high-income families and those
from low-income families has grown significantly since the mid-1970s

(Reardon, 2013). As a result of this shift, studies indicate that Americans

are more concerned about, and more supportive of, policy initiatives to
close wealth-based achievement gaps than black-white or Hispanic-white
gaps (Reardon, 2013; Valant & Newark, 2016). The good news is that by
closing one gap, we also often close the other gap.
The great equalizers. Traditionally, schools have been considered
to be the great equalizers. And since teachers have the greatest in-school
impact on student success, investing in improving the teaching force and
equitably distributing this resource can help to successfully address oppor-
tunity gaps. For instance, if all black students were assigned to highly
effective teachers four years in a row, this would be sufficient to close the
average black-white achievement gap (Haycock & Crawford, 2008).
Many factors lead to a student’s being considered at risk. Factors
include personal, familial, societal, and in-school factors. Societal and
familial factors include poverty, discrimination, parenting education, stu-
dent mobility, television watching, and amount of reading in the home
(Sanders & Jordan, 2012; Welner & Carter, 2013). Five million public
school students in the United States (1 out of every 10) are learning to
speak English (Sanchez, 2017). English language learners face the chal-
lenge of learning subject content while working on their language profi-
ciency. Compared to native English speakers, they are more likely to come
from a high-poverty background, they tend have lower academic achieve-
ment and lower high school graduation rates, and they are less likely to
take college entrance exams, such as the ACT or SAT, and go to college.
Students who have learning disabilities or mental health issues such as
anxiety or depression are also at higher risk of academic failure, especially
when quality, intensive, individualized instruction is not available. We
know that selected school characteristics also can affect a child’s education
and the risk of a student’s dropping out of school, repeating a grade, or
needing some type of remediation. These school-related factors include
elements such as the following:
• A less rigorous curriculum in which instruction is watered down
and access to the more rigorous curriculum is limited
• A school climate in which students feel that teachers and staff do not
expect them to succeed or a climate in which students do not feel safe

• Segregation of students in which high concentrations of minority

and poor students go to school in buildings in disrepair (Darling-
Hammond, 2013; Logan, Minca, & Adar, 2012; Sorhagen, 2013)
And, perhaps most germane to the discussion presented in this book,

a key factor is a teacher who is less experienced, less prepared, and less
qualified to teach. In fact, “a salient characteristic of at-risk schools is that
they generally have relatively few well-qualified teachers” (National Part-
nership for Teaching in At-Risk Schools, 2005, p. 6).
Beacons of bright light. Although the picture drawn here is quite
bleak, by no means does it suggest that at-risk students never have effec-
tive, dedicated, and well-qualified teachers. In many schools facing the
societal and school characteristics described earlier, beacons of bright
light do shine in the form of teachers who help students achieve academ-
ically and who tap into children’s curiosity and motivation to learn. These
beacons of light persist under difficult circumstances, providing stability
for students for whom school may be the most stable part of their lives.
Further discussion and exploration. Given the importance of
addressing the unique learning needs of at-risk students, sections in Chap-
ters 2–7 focus on teachers of students who, through societal or school fac-
tors, are at risk of school failure. As mentioned earlier, although the majority
of the literature regarding effective teaching applies in general to teachers of
at-risk students, some aspects warrant further discussion and exploration.
In fact, current research reveals various characteristics of effective teachers
of at-risk students that distinguish them from ineffective teachers.
Effective Teachers of High-Ability Students

Simply defining a high-ability learner is a challenging task, one on
which the field of education is not in full agreement. High-ability students
are referred to, variously, as gifted, talented, creative, independent thinkers,
complex thinkers, leaders, emotionally intense, and curious. This certainly is
not an exhaustive list, but it demonstrates that there may not be one defi-
nition of “giftedness” upon which most educators, researchers, parents,
and students can agree (Baska, 1989; Reis & Small, 2001; Vaughn, Bos,
& Schumm, 2000). Hence, we use the term high-ability to connote both
identified gifted students as well as those high-achieving students who

have not been formally identified as gifted. High-ability students generally

have been characterized as having—and exhibiting—a high degree of one
or more of the following qualities:
• General intellectual ability
• Specific academic aptitude
• Creative or productive thinking
• Leadership ability
• Visual or performing arts ability
• Psychomotor ability
In addition to these qualities, other types of giftedness or intelligence

have been explored, including theories such as Howard Gardner’s theory
of multiple intelligences, which is built on the premise that students may
not be just mathematically or verbally talented but also may be talented
athletically, musically, and interpersonally, to name a few of the multi-
ple intelligences that Gardner (1983) identified. Regardless, students with
high abilities in some area need access to a teacher who recognizes the
students’ unique abilities and works with these students in enhancing
their talents in a multitude of ways. In 1968, Joseph Renzulli, a leader in
the field of gifted education, observed astutely that the teacher is the most
important element in the success of programs for gifted students. And,
most certainly, we know this claim holds true today.
Students’ growth and self-efficacy. A study of university honors
freshmen revealed that effective teachers encourage students’ growth and
self-efficacy, as they make the content meaningful and challenging for
their students, and as they shape students’ perception of support in their
environment by building positive relationships and being knowledgeable
about the content. These effective teachers of gifted students have exten-
sive depth and breadth of content knowledge. They are comfortable dif-
ferentiating content, straying from the familiar territory of the textbook,
and delving into a variety of instructional strategies, such as in-depth dis-
cussions, with their students (Siegle, Rubenstein, & Mitchell, 2014).
The influence of teachers. Unfortunately, access to highly effec-
tive teachers in programs that serve high-ability students is inconsistent
at best. Students, parents, teachers, and various researchers report that
school experiences for gifted learners frequently do not provide sufficient

challenge to promote learning (Little, 2012). Research also highlights the

curvilinear relationship between boredom and ability, with students at the
highest and lowest levels of ability most at risk for experiencing bore-
dom (Little, 2012). A study of 100 eminent persons reveals that, as stu-
dents, these individuals could not identify a teacher who influenced them
or whom they perceived played a role in their educational development.
Secondary school, in particular, brought negative memories (Csikszent-
mihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993). A study of women majoring in
mathematics or engineering at the college level revealed that the major-
ity who dropped out of such programs did so because of poor teachers
(Brainard & Carlin, 2001). This inconsistency leads to some students
excelling and reaching their potential while some drop out of school
or fail to develop their talents. In other words, teachers—for better or
worse—are extraordinarily influential at all schooling levels.
The role of the teacher is critical. As with all students, the role of
the teacher of gifted or high-ability students is a critical one. Research
regarding what works and what doesn’t with the general student popu-
lation does not fully address some of the important elements of effective
teaching in the gifted classroom, or in the mixed-ability classroom, where
differentiation of instruction is used to meet the range of needs. As for
teachers of at-risk students, Chapters 2–7 contain a section devoted to
defining qualities of effective teachers of high-ability students.
Effective Teachers in the 21st Century

To remain current with the changes happening in other sectors, educa-
tion and teaching need to continue to evolve. The shift to a knowledge
economy, worldwide in many respects, has brought unparalleled atten-
tion to the quality of education systems and, in particular, to teacher
quality. Within this continuing shift to a 21st century knowledge econ-
omy, a primary factor shaping the workers of the new economy is edu-
cation quality. Indeed, we must understand that the nations with the
best schools, and the schools with the best teachers and leaders, will
own the future.
A highly interrelated and competitive world demands that young
people be truly college and career ready. Consequently, particularly within

the past decade or two, numerous and substantial changes have taken
place in the educational realm. Consider just a few of these meta-changes:
• Unprecedented attention has been paid to teacher performance
and accountability due to a significant body of research identifying
the teacher as the most important in-school factor impacting stu-
dent success.
• Conceptions are changing regarding how people learn and what
they need to know in order to compete in the knowledge economy.
• Changing contexts of an increasingly diverse student population
are calling for growing equality.
The consequences of these and similar changes shine a bright spotlight on
effective teachers. Teachers must prepare all students to meet world-class
standards, diminish achievement gaps and social inequality, and serve as
the linchpin for educational reforms (Cochran-Smith & Villegas, 2015).
All of these factors, along with many others, place a renewed premium on
our populating every classroom with the best teachers possible. Given the
importance of a future-oriented perspective, Chapters 2–7 also contain
sections on effective teacher qualities needed in the 21st century.
Framework for Effective Teaching

The chapters that follow capture the major job responsibilities or duties
performed by teachers. They aim to provide a comprehensive and authen-
tic “performance portrait” of effective teachers. Each chapter presents
teachers’ skills and behaviors that have a direct impact on student learn-
ing outcomes as indicated by a synthesis of extant research. In fact, the
Framework for Effective Teaching used throughout this book (see Figure
1.1) is a valid operational definition of teacher effectiveness, according to
a study of teachers and administrators (Williams, 2010). The study also
finds that school administrators and teachers perceive that all important
facets of teacher effectiveness are included in the framework. Further
results show that demographic factors play a minimal role in influencing
teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions. In other words, the framework
presented in this book produces highly consistent agreement among both
teachers and administrators regarding the significance and worth of all the
identified dimensions of teacher effectiveness.

1.1 Framework for Effective Teaching
Summary
Teaching is complicated because it is both an art and a science (Marzano,
2007, 2017). As an artist often creates works of art that are spontaneous
and improvised, effective teachers, too, must continually be spontaneous
and improvise in the classroom. Although teaching can be exhilarating, it
carries a degree of risk as the teacher and student work together to create
the art of learning. In terms of the science of teaching, the research find-
ings and recommended practices identified throughout this book are not
meant to prescribe what to do, but instead to serve as tools that teachers
and school leaders can use as they create the most positive learning expe-
riences possible for their students.
The practices highlighted throughout this book will seem like old
friends to many teachers. For these effective teachers, the chapters should
serve as a review and a reminder for continued improvement. For others,
the same findings serve to build awareness as they take steps to enhance
their effectiveness. By focusing on teacher effectiveness, our ultimate goal
is to improve the educational experiences and achievement of the stu-
dents we serve in our schools.

References
Acee, T. W., Kim, H., Kim, H. J., Kim, J., Chu, H. R., Kim, M., et al. (2010). Academic boredom in under-
and overchallenging situations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 17–27.
ACT. (2011). The condition of college and career readiness, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.ewa.org/sites/
main/files/conditionofcollegeandcareerreadiness2011.pdf
Adams, G., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Seattle, WA:
Educational Achievement Systems.
Adamson, F., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Funding disparities and the inequitable distribution of teach-
ers: Evaluating sources and solutions. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 30(37). Retrieved from http://
epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1053
Adkins-Coleman, T. A. (2010). “I’m not afraid to come into your world”: Case studies of teachers facilitating
engagement in urban high school English classrooms. Journal of Negro Education, 79, 41–53.
Ado, K. (2013). Designing their own: Increasing urban high school teacher capacity for creating interim
assessment. High School Journal, 97(1), 41–55.
Adodo, S. O. (2013). Effects of two-tier multiple choice diagnostic assessment items on students’ learning
outcome in basic science technology. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(2), 201–210.
Afari, E., Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B., & Khine, M. S. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the learning envi-
ronment and attitudes in game-based mathematics classrooms. Learning Environments Research, 16,
131–150.
Afshar, H. S., Rahimi, A., & Rahimi, M. (2014). Instrumental motivation, critical thinking, autonomy and
academic achievement of Iranian EFL learners. Issues in Educational Research, 24(3), 281–298.
Agathangelou, S. A., Charalambous, C. Y., & Koutselini, M. (2016). Reconsidering the contribution of
teacher knowledge to student learning: Linear or curvilinear effects? Teaching and Teacher Education, 57,
125–138.
Agne, K. J. (2001). Gifted: The lost minority. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 37(4), 168–172.
Ainsworth, L. (2010). Rigorous curriculum design: How to create curricula units of study that align standards,
instruction, and assessment. Englewood, CO: The Leadership and Learning Center.
Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & Hanson, D. L. (2010). Experienced teachers’ strategies for assessing nature
of science conceptions in the elementary classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(6), 723–745.
Akhlaq, M., Chudhary, M. A., Malik, S., ul-Hassan, S., & Mehmood, K. (2010). An experimental study to
assess the motivational techniques used by teachers in the teaching of chemistry. Journal of Education and
Sociology, 3, 36–52.
Al Otaiba, S., Connor, C. M., Folsom, J. S., Greulich, L., Meadows, J., & Zhi, L. (2011). Assessment data-
informed guidance to individualize kindergarten reading instruction. Elementary School Journal, 111(4),
535–560.
Al-Shammari, Z., Aqeel, E., Faulkner, P., & Ansari, A. (2012). Enhancing student learning and achievement
via a direct instruction-based ICT integrated in a Kuwaiti 12th-grade secondary school math curriculum.
International Journal of Learning, 18, 323–337.
301

Alade, O. M., & Omoruyi, I. V. (2014). Table of specification and its relevance in educational development
assessment. European Journal of Educational and Development Psychology, 2(1), 1–17.
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction
enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18.
Allen, D., & Blythe, T. (2004). The facilitator’s book of questions: Tools for looking together at student and teacher
work. New York: Teachers College Press.
Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A., Lun, J., Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of effective teach-
er-student interactions in secondary school classrooms: Predicting student achievement with the Class-
room Assessment Scoring System—Secondary. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 76–98.
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2014). On the path to equity: Improving the effectiveness of beginning teachers.
Retrieved from http://all4ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/PathToEquity.pdf
Allington, R. L. (2002). What I’ve learned about effective reading instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 740–747.
Aloe, A. M., & Becker, B. J. (2009). Teacher verbal ability and school outcomes: Where is the evidence?
Educational Researcher, 38(8), 612–624.
Aloe, A. M., & Becker, B. J. (2012). An effect size for regression predictors in meta-analysis. Journal of Educa-
tional and Behavioral Statistics, 37(2), 278–297.
Alrøe, H. F., & Noe, E. (2014). Second-order science of interdisciplinary research: A polyocular framework
for wicked problems. Constructivist Foundations, 10(1), 65–76.
Anderson, K. J., & Minke, K. M. (2007). Parent involvement in education: Toward an understanding of
parents’ decision making. Journal of Educational Research, 100(5), 311–323.
Anderson, L. M., & Stillman, J. A. (2013). Student teaching’s contribution to preservice teacher develop-
ment: A review of research focused on the preparation of teachers for urban and high-needs contexts.
Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 3–69.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision
of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Andrade, H. G. (1999, April). The role of instructional rubrics and self-assessment in learning to write: A smor-
gasbord of findings. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Associ-
ation, Montreal, Canada.
Andrade, H. G. (2000). Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educational Leadership, 57(5),
13–18.
Andrade, H., & Du, Y., (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment and Eval-
uation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181.
Andrade, H., Du, Y. & Mycek, K. (2010). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and middle school students’
writing. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(2), 199–214.
Andrade, H., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria genera-
tion, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational Measure-
ment: Issues and Practices, 27(2), 3–13.
Applebee, A. N., Adler, M., & Flihan, S. (2007). Interdisciplinary curricula in middle and high school class-
rooms: Case studies of approaches to curriculum and instruction. American Educational Research Journal,
44(4), 1002–1039.
Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Fallu, J.-S., & Pagani, L. S. (2009). Student engagement and its relationship
with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651–670.
Ark, T. V., & Schneider, C. (2014). Deeper learning for every student every day. Menlo Park, CA: Hewlett Foun-
dation. Retrieved from http://www.hewlett.org/library/deeper-learning-for-every-student-every-day/.
Armor, D., Contry-Oseguera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, M., Pascal, A., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G.
(1976). Analysis of school preferred reading program in selected Los Angeles minority schools. Santa Monica,
CA: RAND.
Artelt, C., & Schneider, W. (2015). Cross-country generalizability of the role of metacognitive knowledge in
students’ strategy use and reading competency. Teachers College Record, 117(1), 1–32.
ASCD. (2015). Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Comparison of the No Child Left Behind Act to the Every
Student Succeeds Act. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/policy/ESEA_NCLB_
ComparisonChart_2015.pdf
Astor, R. A., Meyer, H. A., & Behre, W. J. (1999). Unowned places and times: Maps and interviews about
violence in high schools. American Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 3–42.
Atteberry, A., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2017). Teacher churning: Reassignment rates and implications for
student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 3–30.

References 303
Au, K. H. (2009). Culturally responsive instruction: What is it, and how can we incorporate it in the class-
room? Reading Today, 27(3), 30–31.
Azzam, A. M., & Pink, D. (2014). Motivated to learn. Educational Leadership, 72(1), 12–17.
Baartman, L. K. J., & de Bruijn, E. (2011). Integrating knowledge, skills, and attitudes: Conceptualising
learning processes towards vocational competence. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 125–134.
Bain, H. P., & Jacobs, R. (1990). The case for smaller classes and better teachers. Streamlined Seminar—
National Association of Elementary School Principals, 9(1). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
ED322632.pdf
Baker, J. A. (1999). Teacher-student interaction in urban at-risk classrooms: Differential behavior, relation-
ship quality, and student satisfaction. The Elementary School Journal, 100(1), 57–70.
Balan, A. (2012). Assessment for learning: A case study in mathematics education. Doctoral dissertation. Malmö
University, Malmö, Sweden.
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special?
Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.
Bang, M., & Medin, D. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: Supporting the navigation of multi-
ple epistemologies. Science Education, 94(6), 1008–1026.
Bangel, N. J., Moon, S. M., & Capobianco, B. M. (2010). Preservice teachers’ perceptions and experiences in
a gifted education training model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 209–221.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effects of feedback
in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213–254.
Banks, S. R. (2012). Classroom assessment: Issues and practices (2nd ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Banks, T. (2015). Teacher education reform in urban educator preparation programs. Journal of Education
and Learning, 4(1), 60–71.
Banks, T., Obiakor, F., & Algozzine, B. (2013). Preparing teachers for urban students who have been labeled
as having special needs. Multicultural Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 155–170.
Barahal, S. (2008). Thinking about thinking: Pre-service teachers strengthen their thinking artfully. Phi Delta
Kappan, 90(4), 298–302.
Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2009). Parsing the achievement gap II. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/PICPARSINGII.pdf
Basham, J. D., Hall, T. E., Carter, R. A., Jr., & Stahl, W. M. (2016). An operationalized understanding of
personalized learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31(3), 126–136.
Baska, L. K. (1989). Characteristics and needs of the gifted. In J. Feldhusen, J. VanTassel-Baska, & K. Seeley
(Eds.), Excellence in educating the gifted (pp. 15–28). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
Basterra, M., Trumbull, E., & Solano-Flores, G. (2013). Cultural validity in assessment: Addressing linguistic
and cultural diversity. New York: Routledge.
Bates, C. C. (2013). Flexible grouping during literacy centers: A model for differentiating instruction. YC
Young Children, 68(2), 30–33.
Battey, D. (2013). “Good” mathematics teaching for students of color and those in poverty: The importance
of relational interactions with instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(1), 125–144.
Battle-Bailey, L. (2003). Training teachers to design interactive homework. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC:
ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED482700)
Bauman, J. F., & Graves, M. F. (2010). What is academic vocabulary? Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy,
54(1), 4–12.
Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2013). The COACTIV model of teachers’ professional competence. In M. Kunter,
J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss, and M. Neubrand (Eds.), Cognitive activation in the mathe-
matics classroom and professional competence of teachers (pp. 25–48). Boston, MA: Springer.
Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., et al. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical
knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research
Journal, 47(1), 133–180.
Becker, E. S., Goetz, T., Morger, V., & Ranellucci, J. (2014). The importance of teachers’ emotions and
instructional behavior for their students’ emotions—An experience sampling analysis. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 43, 15–26.
Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2013). Fundamentals of creativity. Educational Leadership, 70(5), 10–15.
Bell, L. M., & Aldridge, J. M. (2014). Investigating the use of student perception data for teacher reflection
and classroom improvement. Learning Environment Research, 17(3), 371–388.

Ben-Peretz, M. (2011). Teacher knowledge: What is it? How do we uncover it? What are its implications for
schooling? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 3–9.
Berendt, P. R., & Koski, B. (1999). No shortcuts to success. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 45–47.
Berkowitz, R., Moore, H., Astor, R. A., & Benbenishty, R. (2016). A research synthesis of the association
between socioeconomic background, inequality, school climate, and academic achievement. Review of
Educational Research, 87(2), 425–469.
Berliner, D. C., & Rosenshine, B. V. (1977). The acquisition of knowledge in the classroom. In R. C. Ander-
son, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 375–396).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Berman, K. M., Schultz, R. A., & Weber, C. L. (2012). A lack of awareness and emphasis in preservice
teacher training: Preconceived beliefs about the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Today, 35(1), 18–26.
Bernal, E. M. (1994). Finding and cultivating minority gifted/talented students. A paper presented at the National
Conference on Alternative Teacher Certification, Washington, DC.
Bernard, B. (2003). Turnaround teachers and schools. In B. Williams (Ed.), Closing the achievement gap: A
vision for changing beliefs and practices (pp. 115–137). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Berry, B., Byrd, A., & Wieder, A. (2013). Teacherpreneurs: Innovative teachers who lead but don’t leave. San
Francisco: Wiley & Sons.
Bertrand, M., & Marsh, J. A. (2015). Teachers’ sensemaking of data and implications for equity. American
Educational Research Journal, 52(5), 861–893.
Betts, J. R., Rueben, K. S., & Danenberg, A. (2000). Equal resources, equal outcomes? The distribution of school
resources and student achievement in California. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California.
Beyers, S. J., Lemoke, E. S., & Curs, B. C. (2013). Social studies progress monitoring and intervention for
middle school students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(4), 224–235.
Bitter, C., Taylor, J., Zeiser, K. L., & Rickles, J. (2014). Providing opportunities for deeper learning: Findings from
the study of deeper learning opportunities and outcomes (Report 2). Washington, DC: American Institutes
for Research.
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2012). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions.
Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi
Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.
Blank, R. K. (2013). Science instructional time is declining in elementary schools: What are the implications
for student achievement and closing the gap? Science Education, 97(6), 830–847.
Blazar, D. (2015). Grade assignments and the teacher pipeline: A low-cost lever to improve student achieve-
ment. Educational Researcher, 44(4), 213–226.
Bloom, B. S. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballentine Books.
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, N. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational
objectives—The classification of educational goals, handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay
Company.
Bondy, E., Ross, D. D., Hambacher, E., & Acosta, M. (2012). Becoming warm demanders: Perspectives and
practices of first-year teachers. Urban Education, 48(3), 420–450.
Bongiorno, D. (Ed.). (2011). Student assessment: Using student achievement data to support instructional decision
making [White paper]. Alexandria, VA: National Association of Elementary School Principals. Retrieved
from www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/Student%20Achievement_blue.pdf
Bonner, S. M. (2013). Validity in classroom assessment: Purposes, properties, and principles. In J. H. McMil-
lan (Ed.), Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Borich, G. D. (1988). Effective teaching methods. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by
expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 473–498.
Boser, U. (2014). Teacher diversity report: A new state-by-state analysis. Retrieved from https://cdn.american-
progress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/TeacherDiversity.pdf
Boser, U., Wilhelm, M., & Hanna, R. (2014). The power of the Pygmalion effect: Teacher expectations strongly
predict college completion. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.
org/issues/education/report/2014/10/06/96806/the-power-of-the-pygmalioneffect/
Böttcher, F., & Meisert, A. (2013). Effects of direct and indirect instruction on fostering decision-making
competence in socioscientific issues. Research of Science Education, 43, 479–506.

References 305
Bowman-Perrott, L., Burke, M. D., Zaini, S., Zhang, N., & Vannest, K. (2016). Promoting positive behavior
using the Good Behavior Game: A meta-analysis of single-case research. Journal of Positive Behavior Inter-
ventions, 18(3), 180–190.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., Ronfeldt, M., & Wyckoff, J. (2012).
Recruiting effective math teachers: Evidence from New York City. American Educational Research Journal,
49(6), 1008–1047.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2006). How changes in entry requirements
alter the teacher workforce and affect student achievement. Education Finance & Policy, 1(2), 176–216.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). Teacher preparation and student
achievement. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(4), 426–440.
Boyle-Baise, M. (2005). Preparing community-oriented teachers: Reflections from a multicultural service-
learning project. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(5), 446–458.
Boz, Y., Yerdelen-Damar, S., Aydemir, N., & Aydemir, M. (2016). Investigating the relationships among stu-
dents’ self-efficacy beliefs, their perceptions of classroom learning environment, gender, and chemistry
achievement through structural equation modeling. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(3),
307–324.
Brainard, S. G., & Carlin, L. (2001). A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering
and science. In M. Lederman & I. Bartsch (Eds.), The gender and science reader (pp. 24–37). New York:
Routledge.
Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (n.d.). Personalization v differentiation v individualization. Retrieved from https://
education.ky.gov/school/innov/Documents/BB-KM-Personalizedlearningchart-2012.pdf
Breault, R. A. (2013). “She was great, but…”: Examining preservice recollections of favorite and most effec-
tive teachers. The Professional Educator, 37(1), 11–24.
Brock, L. L., & Curdy, T. W. (2016). The role of children’s adaptability in classrooms characterized by low or
high teacher emotional support consistency. School Psychology Review, 45(2), 209–225.
Brody, D. L., & Hadar, L. L. (2015). Personal professional trajectories of novice and experienced teacher
educators in a professional developmental community. Teacher Development, 19(2), 246–266.
Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (2010, July 10). The creativity crisis. Newsweek. Retrieved from www.
newsweek.com/2010/07/10/the-creativity-crisis.html
Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Brookhart, S. M., & Loadman, W. E. (1992). Teacher assessment and validity: What do we want to know?
Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 5, 347–357.
Brookhart, S. M., & Nitko, A. J. (2015). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education.
Brophy, J. (2010). Motivating students to learn (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Hand-
book of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–371). New York: Macmillan.
Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1997). Looking in classrooms. New York: Longman.
Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2013). Student self-assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), The Sage handbook
of research on classroom assessment (pp. 367–393). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Brown-Jeffy, S., & Cooper. J. (2011). Toward a conceptual framework of culturally relevant pedagogy: An
overview of the conceptual and theoretical literature. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(1), 65–84.
Browne, K. (2013). Challenging behavior in secondary school students: Classroom strategies for increasing
positive behavior. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 10(1), 125–147.
Brummet, Q., Gershenson, S., & Hayes, M. S. (2013). The frequency and correlates of teachers’ grade-level
reassignment: Evidence from Michigan. Retrieved from https://www.american.edu/spa/faculty/upload/
Gershenson_Grade_Switching_Feb2013.pdf
Brunsting, N., Sreckovic, M., & Lane, K. (2014). Special education teacher burnout: A synthesis of research
from 1979 to 2013. Education and Treatment of Children, 37(4), 681–712.
Brupbacher, L., & Wilson, D. (2008). When TEASing is a good thing. TechEdge, 28(2), 38–39.
Buczynski, S., & Hansen, C. B. (2010). Impact of professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering
connections. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 599–607.

Buettner, C. K., Jeon, L., Hur, E., & Garcia, R. E. (2016). Teachers’ social-emotional capacity: Factors associ-
ated with teachers’ responsiveness and professional commitment. Early Education & Development, 27(7),
1018–1039.
Bullough, R. V., & Hall-Kenyon, K. M. (2011). The call to teach and teacher hopefulness. Teacher Develop-
ment, 15(2), 127–140.
Bullough, R. V., & Hall-Kenyon, K. M. (2012). On teacher hope, sense of calling, and commitment to teach-
ing. Teacher Education Quarterly, 39(2), 7–27.
Bundick, M. J., Quanglia, R. J., Corso, M. J., & Haywood, D. E. (2014). Promoting student engagement in
the classroom. Teachers College Record, 116(4), 2–21.
Burgher, J. K., Finkel, D., Adesope, O. O., & Van Wie, B. J. (2015). Implementation of a modular hands-on
learning pedagogy: Student attitudes in a fluid mechanics and heat transfer course. Journal of STEM Edu-
cation: Innovation & Research, 16(4), 44–54.
Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional development. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1206–1220.
Buttram, J. L., & Waters, J. T. (1997). Improving America’s schools through standards-based education.
NASSP Bulletin, 81(590), 1–5.
Buyse, E., Verschueren, K., Verachtert, P., & Van Damme, J. (2009). Predicting school adjustment in early
elementary school: Impact of teacher-child relationship quality and relational classroom climate. The
Elementary School Journal, 110(2), 119–141.
Çağlar, C. (2013). The relationship between the perceptions of the fairness of the learning environment and
the level of alienation. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 50, 185–206.
Callahan, C. M. (2001). Beyond the gifted stereotype. Educational Leadership, 59(3), 42–46.
Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., & Oh, S. (2014). National surveys of gifted programs: Executive summary. Char-
lottesville, VA: University of Virginia, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Retrieved
from http://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/key%20reports/2014%20Survey%20of%20GT%20pro-
grams%20Exec%20Summ.pdf
Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Oh, S., Azano, A. P., & Hailey, E. P. (2015). What works in gifted education:
Documenting the effects of an integrated curricular/instructional model for gifted students. American
Camburn, E. M., & Han, S. W. (2015). Infrastructure for teacher reflection and instructional change: An
exploratory study. Journal of Educational Change, 16(4), 511–533.
Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., & Jewkes, A. M. (2008). Effects of classroom organization on
letter-word reading in first grade. Journal of School Psychology, 46(2), 173–192.
Cangelosi, J. S. (2014). Classroom management strategies: Gaining and maintaining students’ cooperation (7th
ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Capraro, M. M., Bicer, A., Grant, M. R., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2017). Using precision in STEM language: A quali-
tative look. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 5(1), 29–39.
Carbonneau, K. J., & Marley, S. C. (2015). Instructional guidance and realism of manipulatives influence
preschool children’s mathematics learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 83(4), 495–513.
Carper, A. (2002). Bright students in a wasteland: The at-risk gifted: A qualitative study of fourteen gifted dropouts.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University.
Carr, D. (2009). Professionalism and ethics in teaching. New York: Routledge.
Carroll, J. M. (1994). The Copernican plan evaluated: The evolution of a revolution. Topsfield, MA: Coper-
nican Associates.
Carter, N., Prater, M. A., Jackson, A., & Marchant, M. (2009). Educators’ perceptions of collaborative plan-
ning processes for students with disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 54(1), 60–70.
Carter, P. J. (2003). A review of highly effective teachers in Hamilton County: Analysis of current trends and impli-
cations for improvement. Chattanooga, TN: Public Education Foundation. Retrieved from http://pef.ddn-
group.com/
Case, R. (1991). The anatomy of curricular integration. Canadian Journal of Education, 16(2), 215–224.
Caspersen, J., & Raaen, F. D. (2014). Novice teachers and how they cope. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
Practice, 20(2), 189–211.
Cassidy, W., & Bates, A. (2005). “Drop-outs” and “push-outs”: Finding hope at a school that actualized the
ethic of care. American Journal of Education, 112, 66–102.

References 307
Castro, M., Expósito-Casas, E., López-Martín, E., Lizasoain, L., Navarro-Asencio, E., & Gaviria, J. L. (2015).
Parental involvement on student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review,
14, 33–46.
Catt, S., Miller, D., & Schallenkamp, K. (2007). You are the key: Communicate for learning effectiveness.
Education, 127(3), 369–377.
Cauley, K. M., & McMillan, J. H. (2010). Formative assessment techniques to support student motivation
and achievement. The Clearing House, 83(1), 1–6.
Cavanaugh, R. A., Heward, W. L., & Donelson, F. (1996). Effects of response cards during lesson closure on
the academic performance of secondary students in an earth science course. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 29(3), 403–406.
Cawelti, G. (Ed.). (2004). Handbook of research on improving student achievement (2nd ed.). Arlington, VA:
Educational Research Service.
Center on International Education Benchmarking. (2014). Japan: Teacher and principal quality. Retrieved
from http://www.ncee.org/programs-affiliates/center-on-international-education-benchmarking/top-
performing-countries/japan-overview/
Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online learning design. AACE
Journal, 16(2), 137–159.
Chalmers, D., & Gardiner, D. (2015). An evaluation framework for identifying the effectiveness and impact
of academic teacher development programmes. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 46, 81–91.
Chambers, B., Abrami, P. C., Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (2011). A three-tier model of reading instruc-
tion supported by technology. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 9(3), 286–297.
Chan, C. S., Rhodes, J. E., Howard, W. J., Lowe, S. R., Schwartz, S. E. O., & Herrera, C. (2013). Pathways of
influence in school-based mentoring: The mediating role of parent and teacher relationships. Journal of
School Psychology, 51(1), 129–142.
Chan, D. W. (2011). Characteristics and competencies of teachers of gifted learners: The Hong Kong student
perspective. Roeper Review, 33, 160–169.
Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2014). Creativity beliefs, creative personality and creativity-fostering practices of
gifted education teachers and regular class teachers in Hong Kong. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 14,
109–118.
Changeiywo, J. M., Wambugu, P. W., & Wachanga, S. W. (2011). Investigations of students’ motivation
towards learning secondary school physics through mastery learning approach. International Journal of
Science and Mathematics Education, 9(6), 1333–1350.
Chappuis, J. (2014). Thoughtful assessment with the learners in mind. Educational Leadership, 71(6), 20–26.
Chappuis, J., Chappuis, S., & Arter, J. (2007). Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right—Using
it well. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Chappuis, S., & Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Classroom assessment for learning. Educational Leadership, 60(1),
40–43.
Chappuis, J., Stiggins, R. J., Chappuis, S., & Arter, J. A. (2012). Classroom assessment for student learning:
Doing it right—using it well (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Chen, Y.-T. (2012). The effect of thematic video-based instruction on learning and motivation in e-learning.
International Journal of Physical Sciences, 7(6), 957–965.
Cheng, A., Hitt, C., Kisida, B., & Mills, J. N. (2017). “No Excuses” charter schools: A meta-analysis of the
experimental evidence on student achievement. Journal of School Choice, 11(2). Retrieved from http://
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15582159.2017.1286210
Cherng, H.-Y. S., & Halpin, P. F. (2016). The importance of minority teachers: Student perceptions of
minority versus white teachers. Educational Researcher, 45(7), 407–420.
Chetty, R. (2014). Improving opportunities for social mobility in the United States. Penn
Institute for Urban Research. Retrieved from http://penniur.upenn.edu/publications/
improving-opportunities-for-social-mobility-in-the-united-states
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher val-
ue-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2633–2679.
Childs, A., & McNicholl, J. (2007). Investigating the relationship between subject content knowledge and
pedagogical practice through the analysis of classroom discourse. International Journal of Science Educa-
tion, 29(13), 1629–1653.

Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science.
International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521–549.
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science.
Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1–39.
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. New York:
Springer.
Chute, E. (2010). Instructional time: Not enough hours in the day. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Retrieved from
https://www.pinerichland.org/site/default.aspx?PageType=3&ModuleInstanceID=973&ViewID=7b-
97f7ed-8e5e-4120-848f-a8b4987d588f&RenderLoc=0&FlexDataID=2410&PageID=418
Ciani, K. D., Middleton, M. J., Summers, J. J., & Sheldon, K. M. (2010). Buffering against performance class-
room goal structures: The importance of autonomy support and classroom community. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 35(1), 88–99.
Clapp, E. P. (2014). Clapp: The creativity-collaboration link. P21 Blog, 1(3). Retrieved from http://www.p21.
org/news-events/p21blog/1386-clapp-the-creativity-collaboration-link
Clare, L. (2000). Using teachers’ assignments as an indicator of classroom practice. CSE Technical Report. Los
Angeles: Center for Research and Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
Cline, S., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Diverse populations of gifted children: Meeting their needs in the regular class-
room and beyond. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. (2005). Who teaches whom? Race and the distribution of novice
teachers. Economics of Education Review, 24(4), 377–392.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). How and why do teacher credentials matter for student
achievement? National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Educational Research (Working
paper).
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2010). Teacher credentials and student achievement in high
school. Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 655–681.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J. L., & Diaz, R. A. (2004). Do school accountability systems make it
more difficult for low-performing schools to attract and retain high-quality teachers? Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management, 23(2), 251–271.
Clubine, B., Knight, D. L., Schneider, C. L., & Smith, P. A. (2001). Opening doors: Promising lessons from five
Texas high schools. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana Center, The University of Texas.
Clunies-Ross, P., Little, E., & Kienhuis, M. (2008). Self-reported and actual use of proactive and reactive
classroom management strategies and their relationship with teacher stress and student behaviour. Edu-
cational Psychology, 28, 693–710.
Coady, M., Harper, C., & de Jong, E. (2011). From preservice to practice: Mainstream elementary teacher
beliefs of preparation and efficacy with English language learners in the state of Florida. Bilingual
Research Journal, 34(2), 223–239.
Cochran-Smith, M., Piazza, P., & Power, C. (2013). The politics of accountability: Assessing teacher educa-
tion in the United States. The Education Forum, 77(1), 6–27.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Power, C. (2010). New directions for teacher preparation. Educational Leadership,
67(8), 6–13.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Villegas, A. M. (2015). Framing teacher preparation research: An overview of the
field, Part I. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 7–20.
Coetzee, M., & Jansen, C. (2007). Emotional intelligence in classroom: The secret of happy teachers. Cape Town,
South Africa: Juta & Co.
Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. E. (2004). Whole-grade acceleration. In N. Col-
angelo, S. G. Assouline, & M. U. M. Gross (Eds.), A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s
brightest students: The Templeton national report on acceleration (Vol. 2, pp. 77–86). Iowa City, IA: The
Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
College Board. (2013). Stagnant 2013 SAT results are call to action for the College Board. Retrieved from https://
www.collegeboard.org/releases/2013/stagnant-2013-sat-results-require-action
Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2012). School climate and socio-emotional learning: Predict-
ing teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4),
1189–1204.
Collinson, V., Killeavy, M., & Stephenson, H. J. (1999). Exemplary teachers: Practicing an ethic of care in
England, Ireland, and the United States. Journal for a Just and Caring Education, 5(4), 349–366.

References 309
Colvin, G., Flannery, K., Sugai, G., & Monegan, J. (2009). Using observational data to provide performance
feedback to teacher: A high school case study. Preventing School Failure, 53(2), 95–104.
Conklin, C. G., Kamps, D., & Wills, H. (2017). The effects of class-wide function-related intervention teams
(CW-FIT) on students’ prosocial classroom behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Education, 26, 75–100.
Conley, D. T., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Creating systems of assessment for deeper learning. Stanford,
CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Fishman, B., Crowe, E. C., Otaiba, S. A., & Schatschneider, C. (2013). A
longitudinal cluster-randomized controlled study on the accumulating effects of individualized literacy
instruction on students’ reading from first through third grade. Psychological Science, 24(8), 1408–1419.
Connor, C. M., Ponitz, C. C., Phillips, B. M., Travis, Q. M., Galsney, S., & Morrison, F. J. (2010). First grad-
ers’ literacy and self-regulation gains: The effect of individualizing student instruction. Journal of School
Psychology, 48(5), 433–455.
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 Online, 34(2), 1–12.
Cooper, H., Jackson, K., Nye, B., & Lindsay, J. J. (2001). A model of homework’s influence on the perfor-
mance evaluations of elementary students. Journal of Experimental Education, 69(2), 181–191.
Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J., Nye, B., & Greathouse, S. (1998). Relationships among attitudes about home-
work, amount of homework assigned and completed, and student achievement. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 90(1), 70–73.
Copenhaver, R. W., & McIntyre, D. J. (1992). Teachers’ perception of gifted students. Roeper Review, 14,
151–153.
Corak, M. (2013). Income inequality, equality of opportunity, and intergenerational mobility. Journal of Eco-
nomic Perspectives, 27(3), 79–102.
Corbett, D., & Wilson, B. (2002). What urban students say about good teaching. Educational Leadership,
60(1), 18–22.
Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis.
Cornell, D. G., & Mayer, M. J. (2010). Why do school order and safety matter? Educational Research, 39(1),
7–15.
Cortes, K. I., & Kochenderfer-Ladd, B. (2014). To tell or not to tell: What influences children’s decisions to
report bullying to their teachers? School Psychology Quarterly, 29(3), 336–348.
Cotton, K. (2000). The schooling practices that matter most. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational
Laboratory & Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Coulter, F. (1985). Homework. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of
education research and studies (pp. 2289–2294). New York: Pergamon Press.
Covino, E. A., & Iwanicki, E. (1996). Experienced teachers: Their constructs on effective teaching. Journal of
Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 325–363.
Cowan, J., & Goldhaber, D. (2015). National Board certification and teacher effectiveness: Evidence from
Washington state. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 9(3), 233–258.
Crawford, B., Hicks, D., & Doherty, N. (2009). Worth the WAIT: Engaging social studies students with art in
a digital age. Social Education, 73(3), 136–139.
Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2012). Using educational effectiveness research to improve the quality
of teaching practice. In C. Day (Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of teacher and school develop-
ment (pp. 389–399). New York: Routledge.
Cruickshank, D. R., & Haefele, D. (2001). Good teachers, plural. Educational Leadership, 58(5), 26–30.
Crumpton, H. E. (2011). “I’m not learning”: The role of academic relevancy for low-achieving students.
Journal of Educational Research, 104(1), 42–53.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. New York: Harper Perennial.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Applications of flow in human development and education: The collected works of
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. New York: Springer.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Curby, T. W., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Abry, T. (2013). Do emotional support and classroom organiza-
tion earlier in the year set the stage for higher quality instruction? Journal of School Psychology, 51(5),
557–569.

Curran, F. C., & Kellogg, A. T. (2016). Understanding science achievement gaps by race/ethnicity and gen-
der in kindergarten and first grade. Educational Leadership, 45(5), 273–282.
Cushman, K. (2013). Minds on fire. Educational Leadership, 71(4), 38–43.
Czerniak, C. M., Weber, W. B., Jr., Sandmann, A., & Ahern, J. (1999). A literature review of science and
mathematics integration. School Science and Mathematics, 99(8), 421–430.
Dana, D. F., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2014). The reflective educator’s guide to classroom research: Learning to teach
and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence.
Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1/
Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Inequality and school resources: What it will take to close the opportunity
gap. In P. L. Carter & K. G. Welner (Eds.), Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every
child an even chance (pp. 98–110). New York: Oxford University Press.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2016). Research on teaching and teacher education and its influences on policy and
practice. Educational Researcher, 45(2), 83–91.
Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B., & Thoreson, A. (2001). Does teacher certification matter? Evaluating the
evidence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(1), 57–77.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Falk, B. (2013). Teacher learning through assessment: How student-performance
assessments can support teacher learning. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, D. J., Gatlin, S. J., & Heilig, J. V. (2005). Does teacher preparation matter?
Evidence about teacher certification, Teach for America, and teacher effectiveness. Education Policy Anal-
ysis Archives, 13(42). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n42/
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2015). Meaningful learning in a new paradigm for educational
accountability: An introduction. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(7), 1–9.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national teacher supply policy for education: The
right way to meet the “highly qualified teacher” challenge? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(33).
Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/
David, J. L. (2008). Pacing guides. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 87–88.
Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P., & Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environ-
ments in education—A systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 80–91.
Davies, J., & Head, C. (2010). Pedagogical exchange for professional development: Reflections on how col-
laboration has inspired and empowered a group of early years educators to find new ways of working to
improve learning and teaching. International Journal of Learning, 17(9), 339–352.
Day, S. L. (2002). Real kids, real risks: Effective instruction of students at risk of failure. NASSP Bulletin, 86.
Retrieved from http://www.principals.org/news/bultn_realkids0902.html.
de Jong, E. J., Harper, C. A., & Coady, M. R. (2013). Enhanced knowledge and skills for elementary main-
stream teachers of English language learners. Theory into Practice, 52, 89–97.
De Neve, D., Devos, G., & Tuytens, M. (2015). The importance of job resources and self-efficacy for begin-
ning teachers’ professional learning in differentiated instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47,
30–41.
de Schonewise, E. A., & Klingner, J. L. (2012). Linguistic and cultural issues in developing disciplinary liter-
acy for adolescent English language learners. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 51–68.
de Vries, S., van de Grift, W., & Jansen, E. (2014). How teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching relate to
their continuing professional development. Teachers & Teaching, 20(3), 338–357.
DeAngelis, K. J., Wall, A. F., & Che, J. (2013). The impact of preservice preparation and early career support
on novice teachers’ career intentions and decisions. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(4), 338–355.
DeLuca, C., & Bellara, A. (2013). The current state of assessment education: Aligning policy, standards, and
teacher education curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(4), 356–372.
DeLuca, C., Klinger, D., Pyper, J., & Woods, J. (2015). Instructional rounds as a professional learning model
for systemic implementation of assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Prac-
tice, 22(1), 122–139.
DeLuca, C., & Lam, C. Y. (2014). Preparing teachers for assessment within diverse classrooms: An analysis
of teacher candidates’ conceptualizations. Teacher Education Quarterly, 41(3), 3–24.
DeLuca, C., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy: A review of interna-
tional standards and measures. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Accountability, 28, 251–272.
Demmon-Berger, D. (1986). Effective teaching: Observations from research. Arlington, VA: American Associa-
tion of School Administrators.

References 311
Deruy, E. (2013, March 21). Student diversity is up but teachers are mostly white. Retrieved from https://aacte.
org/news-room/aacte-in-the-news/347-student-diversity-is-up-but-teachers-are-mostly-white
Dettmers, S., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Kunter, M., & Baumert, J. (2010). Homework works if homework
quality is high: Using multilevel modeling to predict the development of achievement in mathematics.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 467–482.
Devlin-Scherer, R., & Sardone, N. B. (2010). Digital simulation games for social studies classrooms. The
Clearing House, 83(4), 138–144.
DiDonato-Barnes, N., Fives, H., & Krause, E. S. (2014). Using a table of specifications to improve teach-
er-constructed traditional tests: An experimental design. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, &
Practice, 21(1), 90–108.
Dietrich, J., Dicke, A., Kracke, B., & Noack, P. (2015). Teacher support and its influence on students’ intrin-
sic value and effort: Dimensional comparison effects across subjects. Learning and Instruction, 39, 45–54.
Dikici, A. (2014). Relationships between thinking styles and behaviors fostering creativity: An exploratory
study for the mediating role of certain demographic traits. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice,
14(1), 179–201.
Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional devel-
opment, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2), 111–127.
Djigic, G., & Stojiljkovic, S. (2011). Classroom management styles, classroom climate and school achieve-
ment. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 819–828.
D’Mello, S. (2012). Monitoring affective trajectories during complex learning. In Encyclopedia of the Sciences
of Learning (pp. 2325–2328). New York: Springer.
Doabler, C. T., Cary, M. S., Jungjohann, K., Clarke, B., Fien, H., Baker, S., et al. (2012). Enhancing core
mathematics instruction for students at risk for mathematics disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children,
44(4), 48–57.
Dobbie, W., & Fryer, R. G. (2013). Getting beneath the veil of effective schools: Evidence from New York
City. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(4), 28–60.
Dolezal, S. E., Welsh, L. M., Pressley, M., & Vincent, M. M. (2003). How third-grade teachers motivate stu-
dent academic achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 239–267.
Donaldson, M. L., & Johnson, S. M. (2010). The price of misassignment: The role of teaching assignments
in Teach for America teachers’ exit from low-income schools and the teaching profession. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32, 299–323.
Donaldson, M. L., & Johnson, S. M. (2011). Teach for America teachers: How long do they teach? Why do
they leave? Phi Delta Kappan, 93(2), 47–51.
Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Downer, J. T., Stuhlman, M., & Schweig, J. (2014). Measuring effective teacher-student interactions from a
student perspective. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 35(5/6), 722–758.
Drummond, K. V., & Stipek, D. (2004). Low-income parents’ beliefs about their role in academic learning.
The Elementary School Journal, 104(3), 197–215.
Du, J., Xu, J., & Fan, X. (2016). Investigating factors that influence students’ help seeking in math home-
work: A multilevel analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 29–35.
Du Plessis, A. E., Gillies, R. M., & Carroll, A. (2013). Out-of-field teaching and professional development: A
transnational investigation across Australia and South Africa. International Journal of Educational Research,
66, 90–102.
Dubner, F. S. (1979). Thirteen ways of looking at a gifted teacher. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 3(3),
143–146.
Duchastel, P. C., & Merrill, P. F. (1973). The effects of behavioral objectives on learning: A review of empiri-
cal studies. Review of Educational Research, 43(1), 53–69.
Duckor, B. (2014). Formative assessment in seven good moves. Educational Leadership, 71(6), 28–32.
DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., Many, T., & Mattos, M. (2016). Learning by doing: A handbook for profes-
sional learning communities at work (3rd ed.). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
DuFour, R., & Mattos, M. (2013). How do principals really improve schools? Educational Leadership, 70(7),
34–40.
DuFour, R., & Reeves, D. (2016). The futility of PLC lite. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(6), 69–71.
Dukerich, L. (2015). Applying modeling instruction to high school chemistry to improve students’ concep-
tual understanding. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(8), 1315–1319.

Dunkin, M. J. (1978). Student characteristics, classroom processes, and student achievement. Journal of Edu-
Dunkin, M. J., & Doenau, S. J. (1980). A replication study of unique and joint contributions to variance in
student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(3), 394–403.
Dusty, C. E., & Dinnesen, M. S. (2012). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms using structured collaborative
planning. Kentucky Journal of Excellence in College Teaching & Learning, 10, 36–52.
Duta, N., Tomoaica, E., & Panisoara, G. (2015). Desirable characteristics defining to describe an effective
teacher. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1223–1229.
Dweck, C. A. (2010). Even geniuses work hard. Educational Leadership, 68(1), 16–20.
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st cen-
tury. Thinking Skills & Creativity, 12, 43–52.
Early, D. M., Rogge, R. D., & Deci, E. L. (2014). Engagement, alignment, and rigor as vital signs of high-qual-
ity instruction: A classroom visit protocol for instructional improvement and research. The High School
Journal, 97(4), 219–239.
Ebbeler, J., Poortman, C. L., Schildkamp, K., & Pieters, J. M. (2017). The effects of a data use interven-
tion on educator’s satisfaction and data literacy. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29,
83–105.
Education USA Special Report. (n.d.). Good teachers: What to look for. A publication of The National School
Public Relations Association.
Educational Review Office. (1998). The capable teacher. Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/Publications/
eers1998/98no2hl.htm
Egalite, A. J., Kisida, B., & Winters, M. A. (2015). Representation in the classroom: The effect of own-race
teachers on student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 45, 44–52.
Eldor, L., & Shoshani, A. (2016). Caring relationships in school staff: Exploring the link between compas-
sion and teacher work engagement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 126–136.
Eliasson, E. N., Karlsson, K. G., & Sørensen, H. (2017). The role of questions in the science classroom—How
girls and boys respond to teachers’ questions. International Journal of Science Education, 39(4), 433–452.
Emerick, L. J. (1992). Academic underachievement among the gifted: Students’ perceptions of factors that
reverse the pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(3), 140–146.
Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C. M., & Anderson, L. M. (1980). Effective classroom management at the beginning
of the school year. The Elementary School Journal, 80(5), 219–231.
Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C. M., & Worsham, M. E. (2003). Classroom management for secondary teachers.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational psychology,
with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 103–112.
Endacott, J. L. (2011). Power and liberty: A long-term course planning strategy to encourage the contextual-
ization of events in American history. Social Studies, 102(2), 73–79.
Epstein, J. L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta
Kappan, 76, 701–712.
Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools.
Boulder, CO: Westview.
Epstein, J. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student attendance though
family and community involvement. Journal of Educational Research, 95(5), 308–318.
Eren, A. (2014). Uncovering the links between prospective teachers’ personal responsibility, academic
optimism, hope, and emotions about teaching: A mediation analysis. Social Psychology of Education, 17,
73–104.
Eren, A. (2015). “Not only satisfied and responsible, but also hopeful”: Prospective teachers’ career choice
satisfaction, hope, and personal responsibility. Cambridge Journal of Education, 45(2), 149–166.
Ernst, J. V., Glennie, E., & Li, S. (2017). Performance-based task assessment of higher-order proficiencies in
redesigned STEM high schools. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 10(1), 13–32.
Erturan-Ilker, G. (2014). Effects of feedback on achievement goals and perceived motivational climate in
physical education. Issues in Educational Research, 24(2), 152–161.
Erwin, R. W., Jr. (2015). Data literacy: Real-world learning through problem-solving with data sets. American
Secondary Education, 43(2), 18–26.

References 313
Esparza, J., Shumow, L., & Schmidt, J. A. (2014). Growth mindsets of gifted seventh grade students in sci-
ence. NCSSSMST Journal, 19(1), 6–13.
Estes, T. H., Mintz, S. L., & Gunter, M. A. (2010). Instruction: A models approach (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Evans, I. M., Harvey, S. T., Buckley, L., & Yan, E. (2009). Differentiating classroom climate concepts: Aca-
demic, management, and emotional environments. New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online, 4,
131–146.
Evans, L. (2011). Job queues, certification status, and the education labor market. Educational Policy, 25(2),
267–298.
Eyre, D., Coates, D., Fitzpatrick, M., Higgins, C., McClure, L., Wilson, H., et al. (2002). Effective teaching of
able pupils in primary school: The findings of the Oxfordshire Effective Teachers of Able Pupils project.
Gifted Education International, 16(2), 158–162.
Fan, W., & Wolters, C. A. (2014). School motivation and high school dropout: The mediating role of educa-
tional expectation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 22–39.
Farbman, D. A. (2015). The case for improving and expanding time in school: A review of key research and prac-
tice. National Center on Time & Learning. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED561994.pdf
Feldhusen, J. F. (1991). Full-time classes for gifted youth. Gifted Child Today 14(5), 10–13.
Feldhusen, J. F. (1997). Educating teachers for work with talented youth. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis
(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 547–552). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Feng, L., & Sass, T. R. (2013). What makes special-education teachers special? Teacher training and achieve-
ment of students with disabilities. Economics of Education Review, 36, 122–134.
Ferguson, R. F. (2002). What doesn’t meet the eye: Understanding and addressing racial disparities in high-
achieving suburban schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Fernández, M., Mercer, N., Wegerig, R., & Rojas-Drummond, S. (2015). Re-conceptualizing “scaffolding”
and the Zone of Proximal Development in the context of symmetrical collaborative learning. Journal of
Classroom Interaction, 50(1), 54–72.
Fetler, M. (1999). High school staff characteristics and mathematics test results. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 7(9). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n9.html
Fidler, P. (2002). The relationship between teacher instructional techniques and characteristics and student achieve-
ment in reduced size classes. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Unified School District.
Fitzgerald, A., Dawson, V., & Hackling, M. (2013). Examining the beliefs and practices of four effective Aus-
tralian primary science teachers. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 981–1003.
Fives, H., & DiDonato-Barnes, N. (2013). Classroom test construction: The power of a table of specifica-
tions. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(1–4), 1–7.
Flower, A., McKenna, J. W., & Haring, C. D. (2017). Behavior and classroom management: Are teacher
preparation programs really preparing our teachers? Preventing School Failure, 61(2), 163–169.
Ford, A. C., & Sassi, K. (2012). Authority in cross-racial teaching and learning: (Re)considering the transfer-
ability of warm demander approaches. Urban Education, 49(1), 39–74.
Ford, D. Y. (2011). Reversing underachievement among gifted black students: Promising practices and programs.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Ford, D. Y., & Moore, J. L. (2013). Understanding and reversing underachievement, low achievement, and
achievement gap among high-ability African American males in urban school contexts. Urban Review,
45, 399–415.
Ford, D. Y., & Trotman, M. F. (2001). Teachers of gifted students: Suggested multicultural characteristics and
competencies. Roeper Review, 23(4), 235–239.
Forzani, F. M. (2014). Understanding “core practices” and “practice-based” teacher education learning from
the past. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 357–368.
Fraser, B. J. (2012). Classroom learning environments: Retrospect, context and prospect. In B. J. Fraser,
K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), The second international handbook of science education (pp. 1191–
1239). New York: Springer.
Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2009). Using common formative assessments as a source of professional development
in an urban American elementary school. Teaching & Teacher Education, 25(5), 674–680.
Friedlaender, D., Burns, D., Lewis-Charp, H., Cook-Harvey, C. M., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). Stu-
dent-centered schools: Closing the opportunity gap. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy
in Education.

Friedrich, A., Flunger, B., Nagengast, B., Jonkmann, K., & Trautwein, U. (2015). Pygmalion effects on the
classroom: Teacher expectancy effects on students’ math achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychol-
ogy, 41, 1–12.
Friend, M., Cook, L., Hurley-Chamberlain, D., & Shamberger, C. (2010). Co-teaching: An illustration of
the complexity of collaboration in special education. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation,
20, 9–27.
Froiland, J. M., & Oros, E. (2014). Intrinsic motivation, perceived competence and classroom engagement
as longitudinal predictors of adolescent reading achievement. Educational Psychology, 34(2), 119–132.
Fuchs, L. S., Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1984). The effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and
evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2003). What is scientifically-based research on progress monitoring? Washington, DC:
National Center on Student Progress Monitoring.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Phillips, N. (1994). The relation between teachers’ beliefs about the importance of
good work habits, teacher planning, and student achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 94(3), 331–345.
Fullan, M. G. (1993). Why teachers must become change agents. Educational Leadership, 50(6), 12–17.
Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2013). Toward a new end: New pedagogies for deep learning. Global Partnership.
Retrieved from http://redglobal.edu.uy/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/New_Pedagogies_for_Deep-Learn-
ing_Whitepaper1.pdf
Fullerton, S. (2002). Student engagement with schools: Individual and school-level influences. (Research Report
No. 27). Victoria, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Fulmer, G. W. (2011). Estimating critical values for strengths of alignment among curriculum, assessment,
and instruction. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics, 36(3), 381–402.
Fulmer, G., & Polikoff, M. (2014). Tests of alignment among assessment, standards, and instruction using
generalizing linear model regression. Educational Assessment, Evaluation & Accountability, 26(3), 225–240.
Fulmer, S. M., & Turner, J. C. (2014). The perception and implementation of challenging instruction by
middle school teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 114, 303–326.
Furtak, E. M., Kiemer, K., Circi, R. K., Swanson, R., de Leon, V., Morrison, D., & Heredia, S. C. (2016).
Teachers’ formative assessment abilities and their relationship to student learning: Findings from a four-
year intervention study. Instructional Science, 44, 267–291.
Gable, R. A., Hester, P. P., Rock, M. L., & Hughes, K. (2009). Back to basics: Rules, praise, ignoring, and
reprimands revisited. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44, 195–205.
Gagné, F. (2011). Academic talent development and the equity issues in gifted education. Talent Development
& Excellence, 3, 3–22.
Gallup. (2013). State of America’s schools: The path to winning again in education. Retrieved from http://www.
gallup.com/services/178709/state-america-schools-report.aspx
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.
Gareis, C. R., & Grant, L. W. (2008). Teacher-made assessments: How to connect curriculum, instruction, & stu-
dent learning. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
Gareis, C. R., & Grant, L. W. (2015). Teacher-made assessments: How to connect curriculum, instruction, & stu-
dent learning (2nd ed.). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
Garrett, R., & Steinberg, M. P. (2015). Examining teacher effectiveness using classroom observation scores.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(2), 224–242.
Garza, R., Alejandro, E. A., Blythe, T., & Fite, K. (2014) Caring for students: What teachers have to say. ISRN
Education, 2014, 1–7.
Garza, R., Ovando, M. N., & Seymour, C. E. (2010). Latino and white students’ perceptions of teacher
behaviors that convey caring: Do gender and ethnicity matter? Current Issues in Education, 13(1).
Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/
Gentry, M., Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Choi, B. (2011). Student-identified exemplary teachers: Insights from
talented teachers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(2), 111–125.
Gershenson, S., Holt, S. B., & Papageorge, N. W. (2016). Who believes in me? The effect of student-teacher
demographic match on teacher expectations. Economics of Education Review, 52, 209–224.
Gettinger, M., & Walter, M. J. (2012). Classroom strategies to enhance academic engaged time. In S. L.
Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 653–673).
New York: Springer.

References 315
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer
feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 304–315.
Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F. A., Whitehead, B. M., & Boschee, B. F. (2011). Curriculum leadership: Strategies
for development and implementation (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Göçmençelebi, Ş. İ., Özkan, M., & Bayram, N. (2012). Evaluating primary school students’ deep learning
approach to science lessons. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(3), 554–562.
Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigations
of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools.
Teachers College Record, 109, 877–896.
Goe, L. (2002). Legislating equity: The distribution of emergency permit teachers in California. Education
Policy Analysis Archives, 10(42). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n42.
Gökçe, E. (2014). Effects of feedback on achievement goals and perceived motivational climate in physical
education. Issues in Educational Research, 24(2), 152–161.
Goldenberg, B. M. (2014). White teachers in urban classrooms: Embracing non-white students’ cultural
capital for better teaching and learning. Urban Education, 49(1), 111–144.
Goldhaber, D., Lavery, L., & Theobald, R. (2015). Uneven playing field? Assessing the teacher quality gap
between advantaged and disadvantaged students. Educational Researcher, 44(5), 293–307.
Goldhaber, D., & Liddle, S. (2013). The gateway to the profession: Assessing teacher preparation programs based
on student achievement (CALDER working paper 65). Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of
Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
Goldhaber, D., Liddle, S., & Theobald, R. (2013). The gateway to the profession: Assessing teacher prepara-
tion programs based on student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 34, 29–44.
Goldhaber, D., & Walch, J. (2014). Gains in teacher quality: Academic capabilities of the U.S. teaching force
are on the rise. EducationNext, 14(1). Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/gains-in-teacher-quality/
Goldring, R., Gray, L., & Bitterman, A. (2013). Characteristics of public and private elementary and secondary
school teachers in the United States: Results from the 2011–12 schools and staffing survey. Washington, DC.:
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013314.pdf
Goleman, D. (2013). Focus: The hidden driver of excellence. New York: Harper.
Gonida, E. N., & Cortina, K. S. (2014). Parental involvement in homework: Relations with parent and stu-
dent achievement-related motivational beliefs and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
84(3), 376–396.
Gonzalez, A. R. (2002). Parental involvement: Its contribution to high school students’ motivation. The
Clearing House, 75(3), 132–135.
Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1997). Looking in classrooms (7th ed.). New York: Addison-Wesley.
Good, T. L., & McCaslin, M. M. (1992). Teacher licensure and certification. In M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Encyclope-
dia of educational research (6th ed., pp. 1352–1388). New York: Macmillan.
Goodwin, B. (2017). Personalization and failing forward. Educational Leadership, 74(6), 80–81.
Goodwin, B., & Hein, H. (2017). Learning styles: It’s complicated. Educational Leadership, 74(7), 79–80.
Gottfried, M. A., & Straubhaar, R. (2015). The perceived role of the Teach for America program on teachers’
long-term career aspirations. Educational Studies, 41(5), 481–498.
Gouthro, P. A., & Holloway, S. M. (2013). Preparing teachers to become lifelong learners: Exploring the use
of fiction to develop multiliteracies and critical thinking. Language & Literacy: A Canadian Educational
E-Journal, 15(3), 50–68.
Graeff, T. R. (2010). Strategic teaching for active learning. Marketing Education Review, 20(3), 265–278.
Grant, L. W., Stronge, J. H., Sun, Y., Xu, X., & Zheng, F. (2017, April). Meeting the needs of at-risk ethnic
minority students in China: Beliefs and practices of effective teachers. American Educational Research Associ-
ation 2017 Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX.
Grant, L. W., Stronge, J. H., & Xu, X. (2013). A cross-cultural comparative study of teacher effectiveness:
Analyses of award-winning teachers in the United States and China. Educational Assessment, Evaluation
and Accountability, 25(3), 251–276.
Green, G. P., Bean, J. C., & Peterson, D. J. (2013). Deep learning in intermediate microeconomics: Using
scaffolding assignments to teach theory and promote transfer. Journal of Economic Education, 44(2),
142–157.
Greenberg, K. P. (2015). Rubric use in formative assessment: A detailed behavioral rubric helps students
improve their scientific writing skills. Teaching of Psychology, 42(3), 211–217.

Gregory, A., Clawson, K., Davis, A., & Gerewitz, J. (2016). The promise of restorative practices to transform
teacher-student relationships and achieve equity in school discipline. Journal of Educational and Psycho-
logical Consultative, 26(4), 325–353.
Gregory, A., & Huang, F. (2013). It takes a village: The effects of 10th grade college-going expectations of
students, parents, and teachers four years later. American Journal of Community Psychology, 52(1), 41–55.
Gregory, A., Skiba, R. J., & Noguera, P. A. (2010). The achievement gap and the discipline gap: Two sides of
the same coin? Educational Researcher, 39, 59–68.
Gregory, E., Hardiman, M., Yarmolinskaya, J., Rinne, L., & Limb, C. (2013). Building creative thinking in
the classroom: From research to practice. International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 43–50.
Grissom, J. A., Kern, E. C., & Rodriguez, L. A. (2015). The “representative bureaucracy” in education educa-
tor workforce diversity, policy outputs, and outcomes for disadvantaged students. Educational Researcher,
44(3), 185–192.
Gronlund, N. E. (2006). Assessment of student achievement (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Grossman, P., Loeb, S., Cohen, J., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). Measure for measure: The relationship between
measures of instructional practice in middle school English language arts and teachers’ value-added
scores. American Journal of Education, 119(3), 445–470.
Guardino, C. A., & Fullerton, E. (2010). Changing behaviors by changing the classroom environment.
Teaching Exceptional Children, 42(6), 8–13.
Gulikers, J. T. M., Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., & Bastiaens, T. J. (2008). The effect of practical experience on
perceptions of assessment authenticity, study approach, and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction,
18(2), 172–186.
Gummer, E. S., & Mandinach, E. B. (2015). Building a conceptual framework for data literacy. Teachers
College Record, 117(4), 1–22.
Guo, S.-J., Tsai, C.-H., Chang, F. M.-T., & Huang, H.-I. (2007). The study of questioning skills on teaching
improvement. International Journal of Learning, 14(8), 141–145.
Gupta, A., & Fisher, D. (2012). Technology-supported learning environments in science classrooms in
India. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 195–216.
Guskey, T. R., & McTighe, J. (2016). Pre-assessment promises and cautions. Educational Leadership, 73(7),
38–43.
Guzey, S., & Roehrig, G. (2012). Educational technology in a novice science teacher’s classroom. In I. L.
Chen & D. McPheeters (Eds.), Cases on educational technology integration in urban schools (pp. 145–153).
Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Hale, M. S., & City, E. A. (2006). The teacher’s guide to leading student-centered discussions: Talking about texts in
the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Hallam, P. R., Smith, H. R., Hite, J. M., Hite, S. J., & Wilcox, B. R. (2015). Trust and collaboration in PLC
teams. NASSP Bulletin, 99(3), 193–216.
Hambacher, E., Acosta, M. M., Bondy, E., & Ross, D. D. (2016). Elementary preservice teachers as warm
demanders in an African American school. Urban Review, 48, 175–197.
Hamilton, L., Halverson, R., Jackson, S., Mandinach, E., Supovitz, J., & Wayman, J. (2009). Using student
achievement data to support instructional decision making. Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first-grade classroom
make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development, 76(5), 949–967.
Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Downer, J. T., Decoster, J., Mashburn, A. J., Jones, S. M., et al. (2013). Teaching
through interactions: Testing a developmental framework of effectiveness in over 4,000 classrooms. The
Elementary School Journal, 113(4), 461–487.
Hands, C., Guzar, K., & Rodrigue, A. (2015). The art and science of leadership in learning environments:
Facilitating a professional learning community across districts. Alberta Journal of Educational Research,
61(2), 226–242.
Hansen, J., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 115–123.
Hansen, M., Backes, B., & Brady, V. (2016). Teacher attrition and mobility during the Teach for America
clustering strategy in Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
38(3), 495–516.

References 317
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2013). The power of professional capital. Journal of Staff Development, 34(3),
36–39.
Hargreaves, D. H. (2001). A capital theory of school effectiveness and improvement. British Educational
Harks, B., Rakoczy, K., Hattie, J., Besser, M., & Klieme, E. (2014). The effect of feedback on achievement,
interest and self-evaluation: The role of feedback’s perceived usefulness. Educational Psychology, 34(3),
269–290.
Harris, D. N., & Sass, T. R. (2009). The effects of NVPTS-certified teachers on student achievement. Journal
of Policy Analysis and Management, 28(1), 55–80.
Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A
descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211–229.
Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. L. (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and
self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers’ implementation. Teaching and
Harrison, K., O’Hara, J., & McNamara, G. (2015). Re-thinking assessment: Self- and peer-assessment as
driver of self-direction in learning. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 60, 75–88.
Hart, R. (2010). Classroom behaviour management: Educational psychologists’ views on effective practice.
Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 15(4), 353–371.
Haskins, C. (2012). Order, organization, and beauty in the classroom: A prerequisite, not an option. Montes-
sori Life: A Publication of the American Montessori Society, 24(2), 34–39.
Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Retrieved from http://www.lead-
space.govt.nz/leadership/pdf/john_hattie.pdf
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York:
Routledge.
Hattie, J. (2011). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York: Routledge.
Haught, J., & Crusan, D. (2016). Filling the gaps: L2 grammar and assessment preparation for ELA teach-
ers. In L. de Oliveira & M. Shoffner (Eds), Teaching English language arts to English language learners (pp.
171–192). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Haycock, K., & Crawford, C. (2008). Closing the teacher quality gap. Educational Leadership, 65(7), 14–19.
Heacox, D. (2012). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: How to reach and teach all learners
(updated anniversary ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit.
Heath, W. J. (1997). What are the most effective characteristics of teachers of the gifted? (ERIC Document Repro-
duction Service No. ED 411 665)
Heddy, B. C., & Pugh, K. J. (2015). Bigger is not always better: Should educators aim for big transformative
learning events or small transformative experiences? Journal of Transformative Learning, 3(1), 52–58.
Heineke, A. J., Mazza, B. S., & Tichnor-Wagner, A. (2014). After the two-year commitment: A quantitative
and qualitative inquiry of Teach for America teacher retention and attrition. Urban Education, 49(7),
750–782.
Helding, K. A., & Fraser, B. J. (2013). Effectiveness of National Board certified (NBC) teachers in terms of
classroom environment, attitudes and achievement among secondary science students. Learning Environ-
ments Research, 16(1), 1–21.
Henderson, J. (1996). Effective teaching in Advanced Placement classrooms. Journal of Classroom Instruction,
31(1), 29–35.
Henry, G. T., Bastian, K. C., Fortner, C. K., Kershaw, D. C., Purtell, K. M., Thompson, C. L., & Zulli, R. A.
(2014). Teacher preparation policies and their effects on student achievement. Education Finance and
Policy, 9(3), 264–303.
Henry, G. T., Purtell, K. M., Bastian, K. C., Fortner, C. K., Thompson, C. L., Campbell, S. L., & Patterson,
K. M. (2014). The effects of teacher entry portals on student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education,
65(1), 7–23.
Heritage, M., & Chen, E. (2005). Why data skills matter in school improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(9),
707.

Herman, P., Wardrip, P., Hall, A., & Chimino, A. (2012). Teachers harness the power of assessment: Col-
laborative use of student data gauges performance and guides instruction. Journal of Staff Development,
33(4), 26–29.
Herrig, R. W. (2011). Homework research gives insight to improving teaching practice. STEM white paper.
Retrieved from http://ecommerce-prod.mheducation.com.s3.amazonaws.com/unitas/school/explore/
sites/glencoe-math/research/glencoe-math-homework-research-gives-insight-to-improving-teaching-
practice.pdf
Hertberg-Davis, H. (2009). Myth 7: Differentiation in the regular classroom is equivalent to gifted programs
and is sufficient: Classroom teachers have the time, the skill, and the will to differentiate adequately.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 251–253.
Hiebert, J., Stigler, J. W., Jacobs, J. K., Givvin, K. B., Garnier, H., Smith, M., et al. (2005). Mathematics teach-
ing in the United States today (and tomorrow): Results from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(2), 111–132.
Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on
student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.
Hill, J. G., & Gruber, K. J. (2011). Education and certification qualifications of departmentalized public high
school-level teachers of core subject. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Educa-
tion Sciences, and National Center for Education Statistics.
Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: A meta-analysis assessment of the
strategies that promote achievement. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 740–763.
Ho, E. S.-C., & Willms, J. D. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade achievement. Sociology
of Education, 69(2), 126–141.
Hobbs, L. (2012). Teaching “out-of-field” as a boundary crossing event: Factors shaping teacher identity.
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11, 271–297.
Hockett, J. A. (2009). Curriculum for highly able learners that conforms to general education and gifted
education quality indicators. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32(3), 394–440.
Hoff, D. J. (2003). Large-scale study finds poor math, science instruction. Education Week, 23(1), 8.
Hoff, K. E., & Ervin, R. A. (2013). Extending self-management strategies: The use of a classwide approach.
Psychology in the Schools, 50(2), 151–164.
Hohmann, J. W., & Grillo, M. C. (2014). Using critical thinking rubrics to increase academic performance.
Journal of College Reading & Learning, 45(2), 35–51.
Hokanson, B., & Hooper, S. (2011). Integrating technology in classrooms: We have met the enemy, and he
is us. In G. J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present, and future (3rd ed., pp. 137–144). Santa
Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Holloway, J. H. (2003). Research link: Grouping gifted students. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 89–91.
Holt, S. B., & Gershenson, S. (2015). The impact of teacher demographic representation on stu-
dent attendance and suspensions. Retrieved from http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.
cgi?article=1248&context=up_workingpapers
Hondrich, A. L., Hertel, S., Adl-Amini, K., & Klieme, E. (2016). Implementing curriculum-embedded for-
mative assessment in primary school science classrooms. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &
Practice, 23(3), 353–376.
Hong, E., Greene, M., & Hartzell, S. (2011). Cognitive and motivational characteristics of elementary teach-
ers in general education classrooms and in gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(4), 250–264.
Hoover, N. R., & Abrams, L. M. (2013). Teachers’ instructional use of summative student assessment data.
Applied Measurement in Education, 26(3), 219–231.
Hosgorur, T., & Gecer, A. (2012). Gifted students’ views about teachers’ desired characteristics. Educational
Process: International Journal, 1(1–2), 39–49.
Hospel, V., & Galand, B. (2016). Are both classroom autonomy support and structure equally important for
students’ engagement? A multilevel analysis. Learning and Instruction, 41, 1–10.
Huang, F. L., & Moon, T. R. (2009). Is experience the best teacher? A multilevel analysis of teacher char-
acteristics and student achievement in low performing schools. Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and
Accountability, 21, 209–234.
Huberman, M., Bitter, C., Anthony, J., & O’Day, J. (2014). The shape of deeper learning: Strategies, structures,
and cultures in deeper learning network high schools—Findings from the study of deeper learning opportunities
and outcomes (Report 1). Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

References 319
Huggins, C. M., & Stamatel, J. P. (2015). An exploratory study comparing the effectiveness of lecturing ver-
sus team-based learning. Teaching Sociology, 43(3), 227–235.
Hughes, C. A., & Dexter, D. D. (2011). Response to intervention: A research-based summary. Theory into
Practice, 21(3), 4–11.
Hughes, G. B. (2010). Formative assessment practices that maximize learning for students at risk. In H.
Andrade & G. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 170–198). New York: Routledge.
Hughes, G. K., Cowley, K. S., Copley, L. D., Finch, N. L., Meehan, M. L., Burns, R. C., et al. (2004). Effects
of a culturally responsive teaching project on teachers and students in selected Kanawha County, WV, schools.
Charleston, WV: AEL.
Huguet, A., Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2014). Building teachers’ data-use capacity: Insights from strong
and developing coaches. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22 (52). doi:10.14507/epaa.v22n52.2014
Hunt, B., & Seney, R. W. (2001). Planning the learning environment. In F. A. Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.),
Methods and materials for teaching the gifted and talented (pp. 43–89). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Hunter, W., Hasper, A. D., & Williamson, R. L. (2014). Utilizing middle school common planning time to
support inclusive environments. Intervention in School & Clinic, 50(2), 114–120.
Hutchinson, L. (2004). Recommended practices for effective teaching in the International Baccalaureate program:
An examination of instructional skills, assessment practices, and teacher-efficacy beliefs of IB teachers. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA.
Hwang, G., Sung, H., Hung, C., & Huang, I. (2012). A learning style perspective to investigate the necessity
of developing adaptive learning systems. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 188–197.
Ilmer, S., Snyder, J., Erbaugh, S., & Kurtz, K. (1997). Urban educators’ perceptions of successful teaching.
Journal of Teacher Education, 48(2), 379–384.
Imafuku, R., Kataoka, R., Mayahara, M., Suzuki, H., & Saiki, T. (2014). Students’ experiences in interdis-
ciplinary problem-based learning: A discourse analysis of group interaction. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem-Based Learning, 8(2). doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1388
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). The realities of out-of-field teaching. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 42–45.
Ingersoll, R. M. (Ed.). (2007). A comparative study of teacher preparation and qualifications in six nations.
Retrieved from http://www.cpre.org/images/stories/cpre_pdfs/sixnations_final.pdf
Ingersoll, R. (2008). Core problems: Out-of-field teaching persists in key academic courses and high-poverty
schools. Washington, DC: Education Trust.
Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of mathematics and science teachers sufficient? American
Instructional Assessment Resources. (2011, September 21). Writing learning objectives. Retrieved from www.
utexas.edu/academic/ctl/assessment/iar/students/plan/objectives
Irby, D., & Clough, C. (2015). Consistency rules: A critical exploration of a universal principle of school
discipline. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23(2), 153–173.
İskifoğlu, G. (2014). Cross-cultural equivalency of the California critical thinking disposition inventory. Edu-
cational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14, 159–178. doi:10.12738/estp.2014.1.1840
Jackson, A. W., & Davis, G. A. (2000). Turning points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Jackson, I., Sealey-Ruiz, Y., & Watson, W. (2014). Reciprocal love: Mentoring black and Latino males
through an ethos of care. Urban Education, 49(4), 394–417.
Jackson, K. M., Willis, K., Giles, L., Lastrapes, R. E., & Mooney, P. (2017). How to meaningfully incorporate
co-teaching into programs for middle school students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Beyond
Behavior, 26(1), 11–18.
Jacob, B. A., & Rockoff, J. E. (2011). Organizing schools to improve student achievement: Start times, grade con-
figurations, and teacher assignments (Discussion Paper 2011–08). Washington, DC: The Hamilton Project,
Brookings Institution.
Jacobs, H. H. (Ed.). (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support
or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588–600.
Janisch, C., & Johnson, M. (2003). Effective literacy practices and challenging curriculum for at-risk learn-
ers: Great expectations. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8(1), 295.
Jay, J. K. (2002). Points on a continuum: An expert/novice study of pedagogical reasoning. The Professional
Educator, 24(2), 63–74.

Jideani, V. A., & Jideani, I. A. (2012). Alignment of assessment objectives with instructional objectives using
revised Bloom’s taxonomy: The case for food science and technology education. Journal of Food Science
Education, 11(3), 34–42.
Johnsen, S. K. (2012). Standards in gifted education and their effects on professional competence. Gifted
Child Today, 35(1), 49–57.
Johnsen, S. K., Haensley, P., Ryser, G., & Ford, R. (2002). Changing general education classroom practices to
adapt for gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(1), 45–63.
Johnsen, S. K., & Ryser, G. R. (1996). An overview of effective practices with gifted students in general edu-
cation settings. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19(4), 379–405.
Johnson, B. L. (1997). An organizational analysis of multiple perspectives of effective teaching: Implications
for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 69–87.
Johnson, D. (2000). Teaching mathematics to gifted students in a mixed-ability classroom. ERIC EC Digest
#E594. Retrieved from http://ericec.org/digests/c594.html
Johnson, S. M., Birkeland, S. E., & Peske, H. G. (2005). Life in the fast track: How states seek to balance
incentives and quality in alternative teacher certification programs. Educational Policy, 19(1), 63–89.
Jones, K. A., Jones, J., & Vermette, P. J. (2011). Six common lesson planning pitfalls: Recommendations for
novice educators. Education, 131(4), 845–864.
Jonsson, A. (2014). Rubrics as a way of providing transparency in assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 39(7), 840–852.
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2004). Models of teaching (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Jussim, L., & Harber, K. (2005). Teacher expectations and self-fulfilling prophecies: Knowns and unknowns,
resolved and unresolved controversies. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(2), 131–155.
Kahl, S. (2016). New possibilities for state assessment under the ESSA. Retrieved from http://blog.measured-
progress.org/blog/new-possibilities-for-state-assessment-under-the-essa
Kaiser, G., Busse, A., Hoth, J., König, J., & Blömeke, S. (2015). About the complexities of video-based
assessments: Theoretical and methodological approaches to overcoming shortcomings of research on
teachers’ competence. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 13(2), 369–387.
Kalogrides, D., Loeb, S., & Beteille, T. (2013). Systematic sorting: Teacher characteristics and class assign-
ments. Sociology of Education, 86, 103–123.
Kamps, D., Wills, H. P., Heitzman-Powell, L., Laylin, J., Szoke, C., Petrillo, T., & Culey, A. (2011). Class-
wide function-related intervention teams: Effects of group contingency programs in urban classrooms.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13(3), 154–167.
Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011a). Evaluating teacher effectiveness: Can class-
room observations identify practices that raise achievement?. Education Next, 11(3), 54–61.
Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011b). Identifying effective classroom practices using
student achievement data. Journal of Human Resources, 46(3), 587–613.
Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying
with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772–775.
Katz, I., Eilot, K., & Nevo, N. (2014). “I’ll do it later”: Types of motivation, self-efficacy and homework pro-
crastination. Motivation and Emotion, 38(1), 111–119.
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity. Review of
General Psychology, 13(1), 1–12.
Kaul, C. R., Johnsen, S. K., Witte, M. M., & Saxon, T. F. (2015). Critical components of a summer enrich-
ment program for urban low-income gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 38(1), 32–40.
Kawalkar, A., & Vijapurkar, J. (2013). Scaffolding science talk: The role of teachers’ questions in the inquiry
classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2004–2027.
Kaya, C., Blake, J., & Chan, F. (2015). Peer-mediated interventions with elementary and secondary school
students with emotional and behavioural disorders: A literature review. Journal of Research in Special
Educational Needs, 15(2), 120–129.
Kaya, S., & Kablan, Z. (2013). Assessing the relationship between learning strategies and science achieve-
ment at the primary school level. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(4), 525–534.
Keddie, A., & Niesche, R. (2012). Productive engagements with student difference: Supporting equity
through cultural recognition. British Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 333–348.
Kee, A. N. (2012). Feelings of preparedness among alternatively certified teachers: What is the role of pro-
gram features? Journal of Teacher Education, 63(1), 23–38.

References 321
Keith, T. Z., Reimers, T. M., Fehrmann, P. G., Pottebaum, S. M., & Aubey, L. W. (1986). Parental involve-
ment, homework, and TV time: Direct and indirect effects on high school achievement. Journal of Educa-
tional Psychology, 78(5), 373–380.
Keller, M. M., Goetz, T., Becker, E. S., Morger, V., & Hensley, L. (2014). Feeling and showing: A new con-
ceptualization of dispositional teacher enthusiasm and its relation to students’ interest. Learning and
Instruction, 33, 29–38.
Keller, M., Hoy, A., Goetz, T., & Frenzel, A. (2016). Teacher enthusiasm: Reviewing and redefining a com-
plex construct. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 743–769.
Kelley, J. G., Lesaux, N. K., Kieffer, M. J., & Faller, S. E. (2010). Effective academic vocabulary instruction in
the urban middle school. The Reading Teacher, 64(1), 5–14.
Kelly, S., & Carbonaro, W. (2012). Curriculum tracking and teacher expectations: Evidence from discrepant
course taking models. School Psychology of Education, 15(3), 271–294.
Kerssen-Griep, J., & Witt, P. L. (2012). Instructional feedback II: How do instructor immediacy cues and
facework tactics interact to predict student motivation and fairness perceptions. Communication Studies,
63(4), 498–517.
Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. L. (2012). Effects of academic language instruction on relational and syntactic
aspects of morphological awareness for sixth graders from linguistically diverse backgrounds. The Ele-
mentary School Journal, 112(3), 519–545.
Kim, K. H. (2011). The creativity crisis: The decrease in creative thinking scores on the Torrance Tests of
Creative Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 285–295.
Kim, K. H. (2016). The creativity challenge: How we can recapture American innovation. Amherst, NY: Pro-
metheus Books.
Kim, K. H., & VanTassel-Baska, J. (2010). The relationship between creativity and behavior problems among
underachieving elementary and high school students. Creativity Research Journal, 22(2), 185–192.
King-Sears, M. E., Brawand, A. E., Jenkins, M. C., & Preston-Smith, S. (2014). Co-teaching perspectives
from secondary science co-teachers and their students with disabilities. Journal of Science Teacher Educa-
tion, 25, 651–680.
Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. Educational
Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37.
Kini, T., & Podolsky, A. (2016). Does teaching experience increase teacher effectiveness? A review of the research.
Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
Kinshuk, L., Liu, T. C., & Graf, S. (2009). Coping with mismatched courses: Students’ behavior and perfor-
mance in courses mismatched to their learning styles. Educational Technology Research and Development,
57(6), 739–752.
Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender,
years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741–756.
Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. C. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: A
meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59–76.
Knapp, M. S., Shields, P. M., & Turnbull, B. J. (1992). Academic challenge for the children of poverty: Summary
report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Policy and Planning.
Knievel, I., Lindmeier, A. M., & Heinze, A. (2015). Beyond knowledge: Measuring primary teachers’ sub-
ject-specific competencies in and for teaching mathematics with items based on video vignettes. Interna-
tional Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 309–329.
Knight, D. S., & Strunk, K. O. (2016). Who bears the costs of district funding cuts? Reducing inequality in
the distribution of teacher layoffs. Educational Researcher, 45(7), 396–406.
Knoff, H. M. (2012). School discipline, classroom management, & student self-management. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin.
Ko, E. K. (2012). What is your objective? Preservice teachers’ views and practice of instructional planning.
International Journal of Learning, 18(7), 89–100.
Koedel, C., Parsons, E., Podgursky, M., & Ehlert, M. (2015). Teacher preparation programs and teacher
quality: Are there real differences across programs? Education, Finance and Policy, 10(4), 508–534.
Kohn, A. (1996). What to look for in a classroom. Educational Leadership, 54(1), 54–55.
Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge
learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Edu-
cation, 78, 160–173.

König, J., Blömeke, S., Klein, P., Suhl, U., Busse, A., & Kaiser, G. (2014). Is teachers’ general pedagogi-
cal knowledge a premise for noticing and interpreting classroom situations? A video-based assessment
approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 76–88.
Koscianski, A. (2012). Short animation movies as advance organizers in physics teaching: A preliminary
study. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30(3), 255–269.
Kostons, D., & van der Werf, G. (2015). The effects of activating prior topic and metacognitive knowledge
on text comprehension scores. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 264–275.
Kraft, M. A., & Dougherty, S. M. (2013). The effect of teacher-family communication on student engage-
ment: Evidence from a randomized field experiment. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 6(3),
199–222.
Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2014). Can professional environment in schools promote teacher development?
Explaining heterogeneity in returns to teaching experience. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
36(4), 476–500.
Kraft, M. A., Papay, J. P., Johnson, S. M., Charner-Laird, M., Ng, M., & Reinhorn, S. (2015). Educating amid
uncertainty: The organizational supports teachers need to serve students in high-poverty, urban schools.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(5), 753–790.
Kraft, M. A., & Rogers, T. (2015). The underutilized potential of teacher-to-parent communication: Evi-
dence from a field experiment. Economics of Education Review, 47, 49–63.
Krieg, J. M., Theobald, R., & Goldhaber, D. (2016). A foot in the door: Exploring the role of student teach-
ing assignments in teachers’ initial job placements. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 38(2),
364–388.
Ku, K., Ho, I., Hau, K., & Lai, E. (2014). Integrating direct and inquiry-based instruction in the teaching of
critical thinking: An intervention study. Instructional Science, 42, 251–269.
Kunter, M., Baumert, J., & Koller, O. (2007). Effective classroom management and the development of sub-
ject-related interest. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 494–509.
Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional compe-
tence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 105(3), 805–820.
Kunter, M., Tsai, Y., Klusmann, U., Brunner, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2008). Students’ and mathemat-
ics teachers’ perceptions of teacher enthusiasm and instruction. Learning and Instruction, 18, 468–482.
Laczko-Kerr, I., & Berliner, D. (2002). The effectiveness of Teach for America and other under-certified
teachers on student academic achievement: A case of harmful public policy. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 10(37). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu/edu/epaa/v10n37
Ladd, H. F., & Sorensen, L. C. (2015). Returns to teacher experience: Student achievement and motivation in mid-
dle school. Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson. Retrieved from http://images.pearson
assessments.com/images/tmrs/CriticalThinkingReviewFINAL.pdf
Laine, S., & Tirri, K. (2016). How Finnish elementary school teachers meet the needs of their gifted stu-
dents. High Ability Studies, 27(2), 149–164.
Lampert, M., Franke, M. L., Kazemi, E., Ghousseini, H., Turrou, A. C., Beasley, H., et al. (2013). Keeping it
complex: Using rehearsals to support novice teacher learning of ambitious teaching. Journal of Teacher
Education, 64(3), 226–243.
Landis, R. N., & Reschly, A. L. (2013). Reexamining gifted underachievement and dropout through the lens
of student engagement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36(2), 220–249.
Langer, J. (2001). Beating the odds: Teaching middle and high school students to read and write well. Amer-
ican Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 837–880.
LaRocque, M., Kleiman, I., & Darling, S. M. (2011). Parental involvement: The missing link in school
achievement. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55, 115–122.
Lasky, D., & Yoon, S. A. (2011). Making space for the act of making: Creativity in the engineering design
classroom. Science Educator, 20(1), 34–43.
Lauermann, F., & Karabenick, S. A. (2013). The meaning and measure of teachers’ sense of responsibility for
educational outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 30, 13–26.
Lawanto, O., Santoso, H. B., & Liu, Y. (2012). Understanding the relationship between interest and expec-
tancy for success in engineering design activity in grades 9–12. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1),
152–161.

References 323
Lawson, M. A., & Lawson, H. A. (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research,
policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 432–479.
Leana, C. (2011). The missing link in school reform. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Social Innovation Review.
Lee, J.-E., & Kim, K.-T. (2016). Pre-service teachers’ conceptions of effective teacher talk: Their critical
reflection on a sample teacher-student dialogue. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 93(3), 363–381.
Lee, S. H. (2011). Working memory, attention, and mathematical problem solving: A longitudinal study of
elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 821–837.
Lee-Corbin, H., & Denicolo, P. (1998). Portraits of the able child: Highlights of case study research. High
Ability Studies, 9(2), 207–219.
Leflot, G., van Lier, P. A., Onghena, P., & Colpin, H. (2010). The role of teacher behavior management in the
development of disruptive behaviors: An intervention study with the Good Behavior Game. Journal of
Abnormal Child Psychology, 38(6), 869–882.
Leithwood, K., & Azah, V. N. (2017). Characteristics of high-performing school districts. Leadership and
Policy in Schools, 16(1), 27–53.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Wahlstrom, K., Anderson, S., Mascall, B., & Gordon, M. (2010). How success-
ful leadership influences student learning: The second installment of a longer story. In A. Hargreaves,
A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational change (pp.
611–629). New York: Springer.
Leonie, K., & Margaret, P. (2013). Responding to professional learning: How effective teachers differentiate
teaching and learning strategies to engage highly able adolescents. Australasian Journal of Gifted Educa-
tion, 22(2), 52–63.
Leopold, C., Doerner, M., Leutner, D., & Dutke, S. (2015). Effects of strategy instructions on learning from
text and pictures. Learning and Instruction, 43, 345–364.
Leopold, C., Sumfleth, E., & Leutner, D. (2013). Learning with summaries: Effects of representation mode
and type of learning activity on comprehension and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 27, 40–49.
LePage, P., Darling-Hammond, L., Akar, H., Gutierrez, C., Jenkins-Gunn, E., & Rosebrock, K. (2005). Class-
room management. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing
world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 327–357). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lesaux, N. K. (2012). Reading and reading instruction for children from low-income and non-English-
speaking households. The Future of Children, 22(2), 73–88.
Leung, K.-C., Leung, F. K. S., & Zuo, H. (2014). A study of the alignment of learning target and assessment
to generic skills in the new senior secondary mathematic curriculum in Hong Kong. Studies in Educa-
tional Evaluation, 43, 115–132.
Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2008). Teachers’ views on factors affecting effective integration of information
technology in the classroom: Developmental scenery. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(2),
233–263.
Levine, A. C. (2013). The sustaining power of hope: Perspectives of public school teachers. Research in the
Schools, 20(1), 57–75.
Levine, T. H., & Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focus of teachers’ collaborative activities facili-
tate and constrain teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 389–398.
Levinson, M., & Theisen-Homer, V. (2015). No justice, no teachers: Theorizing less-unjust teacher firings in
Los Angeles Unified. Theory and Research in Education, 13(2), 1–16.
Li, H. (2016). How is formative assessment related to students’ reading achievement? Findings from PISA
2009. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(4), 473–494.
Liao, Y.-K. C., & Hao, Y. (2008). Large-scale studies and quantitative methods. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek
(Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 1019–
1035). New York: Springer.
Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (2016). Harness the energy of collaboration. Journal of Staff Development, 37(1),
14–25.
Limbrick, L., Wheldall, K., & Madelaine, A. (2012). Do boys need different remedial reading instruction
from girls? Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties, 17(1), 1–15.
Liou, D. D., & Rojas, L. (2016). Teaching for empowerment and excellence: The transformative potential of
teacher expectations in an urban Latina/o classroom. The Urban Review, 48(3), 380–402.
Lipnevich, A. A., McCallen, L. N., Miles, K. P., & Smith, J. K. (2014). Mind the gap! Students’ use of exem-
plars and detailed rubrics as formative assessment. Instructional Science, 42, 539–559.

Little, C. A. (2012). Curriculum as motivation for gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 49(7), 695–705.
Little, C. A., McCoach, D. B., & Reis, S. M. (2014). Effects of differentiated reading instruction on student
achievement in middle school. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(4), 384–402.
Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Eval-
uation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129–151.
Liu, L., Jones, P. E., & Sadera, W. A. (2010). An investigation on experienced teachers’ knowledge and per-
ceptions of instructional theories and practices. Computers in the Schools, 27(1), 20–34.
Livingston, C., & Borko, H. (1989). Expert-novice differences in teaching: A cognitive analysis and implica-
tions for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(4), 36–42.
Llewellyn, D. (2014). Inquire within: Implementing inquiry- and argument-based science standards in grades 3–8
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Loeb, S., Soland, J., & Fox, L. (2014). Is a good teacher a good teacher for all? Comparing value-added of
teachers with their English learners and non-English learners. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
46, 457–475.
Logan, L. R., Minca, E., & Adar, S. (2012). The geography of inequality: Why separate means unequal in
American public schools. Sociology of Education, 85(3), 287–301.
Lomos, C., Hofman, R. H., & Bosker, R. J. (2011). Professional communities and student achievement—a
meta-analysis. School Effectiveness and School Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy and
Practice, 22(2), 121–148.
Long, J. F., & Hoy, A. W. (2006). Interested instructors: A composite portrait of individual differences and
effectiveness. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(3), 303–314.
Lowe, G., & Belcher, S. (2012). Direct instruction and music literacy: One approach to augmenting the
diminishing? Australian Journal of Music Education, 1, 3–13.
Lucero, R. (n.d.). Closure activities: Making that last impression. Retrieved from http://teaching.colostate.edu/
tips/tip.cfm?tipid=148
Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., & Kunter, M. (2009). Assessing the impact of learning environ-
ments: How to use student ratings of classroom or school characteristics in multilevel modeling. Con-
temporary Educational Psychology, 34(2), 120–131.
Lüftenegger, M., Kollmayer, M., Bergsmann, E., Jöstl, G., Spiel, C., & Schober, B. (2015). Mathematically
gifted students and high achievement: The role of motivation and classroom structure. High Ability Stud-
ies, 26(2), 227–243.
Luiselli, J. K., Putnam, R. F., & Sunderland, M. (2002). Longitudinal evaluation of behavior support inter-
vention in a public middle school. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4, 182–188.
Lumpkin, A. (2007). Caring teachers: The key to student learning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 43(4), 158–160.
Lumpkin, A., Claxton, H., & Wilson, A. (2014). Key characteristics of teacher leaders in schools. Administra-
tive Issues Journal: Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 59–67.
Maclellan, E. (2004). Initial knowledge states about assessment: Novice teachers’ conceptualizations. Teach-
ing and Teacher Education, 20, 525–535.
Maddux, C. D., Samples-Lachman, I., & Cummings, R. E. (1985). Preferences of gifted students for selected
teacher characteristics. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29(4), 160–163.
Madjar, N., Shklar, N., & Moshe, L. (2016). The role of parental attitudes in children’s motivation toward
homework assignments. Psychology in the Schools, 53(2), 173–188.
Mager, R. F. (1997). Preparing instructional objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective instruction
(3rd ed.). Atlanta, GA: Center for Effective Performance.
Magliaro, S. G., Lockee, B. B., & Burton, J. K. (2005). Direct instruction revisited: A key model for instruc-
tional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 41–55.
Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Maker, C. J., & Nielson, A. B. (1996). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners (2nd
ed.). Austin, TX: ProEd.
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H., & Fan, X. (2012). When is homework worth the time?: Evaluating the asso-
ciation between homework and achievement in high school science and math. The High School Journal,
96(1), 52–72.
Mandinach, E. B. (2012). A perfect time for data use: Using data-driven decision making to inform practice.
Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 71–85.

References 325
Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2012). Navigating the landscape of data literacy: It is complex. Portland,
OR, and Washington, DC: Education Northwest and WestEd. Retrieved from http://www.wested.org/
online_pubs/resource1304.pdf
Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2013). A systemic view of implementing data literacy in educator
preparation. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 30–37.
Mandinach, E. B., & Jackson, S. S. (2012). Transforming teaching and learning through data-driven decision
making. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Manning, M. L., & Baruth, L. G. (1995). Students at risk. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Manoli, P., & Papadopoulou, M. (2012). Graphic organizers as a reading strategy: Research findings and
issues. Creative Education, 3(3), 348–356.
Many, T. W., & Sparks-Many, S. K. (2015). Leverage: Using PLCs to promote lasting improvement in schools.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Marin, L. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit
instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(1), 1–13.
Marion, S., & Leather, P. (2015). Assessment and accountability to support meaningful learning. Education
Policy Analysis Archives, 23(9), 1–19.
Marsh, J. A. (2012). Interventions promoting educators’ use of data: Research insights and gaps. Teachers
College Record, 114(11), 1–48.
Marston, N. (2017). 6 steps to successful co-teaching. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/tools/6-steps-to-
successful-co-teaching.html
Mart, C. T. (2013). A passionate teacher: Teacher commitment and dedication to student learning. Interna-
tional Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 2(1), 437–442.
Martin, D. P., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2015). Do student self-efficacy and teacher-student interaction qual-
ity contribute to emotional and social engagement in fifth grade math? Journal of School Psychology, 53,
359–373.
Martin, N. K., Sass, D. A., & Schmitt, T. A. (2012). Teacher efficacy in student engagement, instructional
management, student stressors, and burnout: A theoretical model using in-class variables to predict
teachers’ intent-to-leave. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 546–559.
Martone, A., & Sireci, S. G. (2009). Evaluating alignment between curriculum, assessment, and instruction.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J. (2017). The new art and science of teaching. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree and Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. J. (2003). Classroom management that works. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Norford, J. S., Paynter, D. E., Pickering, D. J., & Gaddy, B. B. (2001). A handbook for classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes: Performance assessment using
the dimensions of learning model. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strat-
egies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Mason, D. A., Schroeter, D. D., Combs, R. K., & Washington, K. (1992). Assigning average-achieving eighth
graders to advanced mathematics classes in an urban junior high. The Elementary School Journal, 92(5),
587–599.
Mason, J. (2012). Scaffolding reflective inquiry—Enabling why-questioning while e-learning. Research &
Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 7(3), 175–198.
Masson, A., Klop, T., & Osseweijer, P. (2016). An analysis of the impact of student–scientist interaction in
a technology design activity, using the expectancy-value model of achievement related choice. Interna-
tional Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 81–104.
Matsumura, L. C., Patthey-Chavez, G. G., Valeds, R., & Garnier, H. (2002). Teacher feedback, writing
assignment quality, and third-grade students’ revision in lower- and higher-achieving urban schools. The
Elementary School Journal, 103, 3–26.

Mazer, J. P. (2013). Student emotional and cognitive interest as mediators of teacher communication behav-
iors and student engagement: An examination of direct and interaction effects. Communication Education,
62(3), 253–277.
McDonald, M., Kazemi, E., Kavanagh, S. S. (2013). Core practices and pedagogies of teacher education: A
call for a common language and collective activity. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 378–386.
McFadden, J., Ellis, J., Anwar, T., & Roehrig, G. (2014). Beginning science teachers’ use of a digital video
annotation tool to promote reflective practices. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(3),
458–470.
McIntosh, K., MacKay, L., Hume, A., Doolittle, J., Vincent, C., Horner, R., & Ervin, R. (2011). Develop-
ment and initial validation of a measure to assess factors related to sustainability of school-wide positive
behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 13(4), 208–218.
McKenzie, E. N. (2013). National Board certification and developmentally appropriate practices: Percep-
tions of impact. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 27(2), 153–165.
McKeown, D., Brindle, M., Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Collins, A. A., & Brown, M. (2016). Illuminating
growth and struggles using mixed methods: Practice-based professional development and coaching for
differentiating SRSD instruction in writing. Reading and Writing, 29(6), 1105–1140.
McKown, C., & Weinstein, R. S. (2008). Teacher expectations, classroom context, and the achievement gap.
Journal of School Psychology, 46, 235–261.
McLean, A. (2003). The motivated school. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McLeod, J., Fisher, J., & Hoover, G. (2003). The key elements of classroom management: Managing time and
space, student behavior, and instructional strategies. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
McMillan, J. H. (2011). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective standards-based instruction
(5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
McMillan, J. H., Venable, J. C., & Varier, D. (2013). Studies of the effect of formative assessment on student
achievement: So much more is needed. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 18(2), 1–15.
Means, B., Chen, E., DeBarger, A., & Padilla, C. (2011). Teachers’ ability to use data to inform instruction:
Challenges and support. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation,
and Policy Development.
Meek, C. (2003). Classroom crisis: It’s about time. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(8), 592–595.
Mehta, J., & Doctor, J. (2013). Raising the bar for teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(7), 8–13.
Mehta, J., & Fine, S. (2015). The why, what, where, and how of deeper learning in American secondary schools.
Jobs for the Future. Retrieved from http://www.jff.org/sites/default/files/publications/materials/The-Why-
What-Where-How-121415.pdf
Meirink, J. A., Imants, J., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2010). Teacher learning and collaboration in innova-
tive teams. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(2), 161–181.
Merriam-Webster, Inc. (2006). Webster’s new explorer encyclopedic dictionary. Springfield, MA: Author.
Mertens, S. B., Flowers, N., Anfara, V. A., Jr., & Caskey, M. M. (2010). Common planning time. Middle
School Journal, 41(5), 50–57.
Metzler, J., & Woessmann, L. (2012). The impact of teacher subject knowledge on student achievement: Evi-
dence from within-teacher within-student variation. Journal of Developmental Economics, 99(2), 486–496.
Michelsen, C., & Sriraman, B. (2009). Does interdisciplinary instruction raise students’ interest in mathe-
matics and the subjects of the natural sciences? ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education,
41(1), 231–244.
Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Change in teacher efficacy and student self- and task-
related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to junior high school. Journal of Educational Psychol-
ogy, 81(2), 247–258.
Miles, R., & Thompson, T. (2015). “I had no idea!” A snapshot of science teacher perceptions of student
performance on state, national and international assessments. National Teacher Education Journal, 8(3),
61–66.
Miller, M. (2009). Achieving a wealth of riches: Delivering on the promise of data to transform teaching and learn-
ing (Policy brief). Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Miller, M. D., & Linn, R. L. (2012). Measurement and assessment in teaching (11th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Miller, M. D., Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (2013). Measurement and assessment in teaching (11th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

References 327
Miller-Cribbs, C. S., Davis, L., & Johnson, S. (2002). An exploratory analysis of factors that foster school
engagement and completion among African-American students. Children & Schools, 24(3), 159–174.
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—What is it and does
it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
47(4), 474–496.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher
knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Missett, T. C., Brunner, M. M., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., & Azano, A. P. (2014). Exploring teacher beliefs
and use of acceleration, ability grouping, and formative assessment. Journal for the Education of the Gifted,
37(3), 245–268.
Mitchell, M. M., Bradshaw, C. P., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Student and teacher perceptions of school climate: A
multilevel exploration of patterns of discrepancy. Journal of School Health, 80, 271–279.
Mitchell, R. D. (1998). World class teachers: When top teachers earn National Board certification, schools—
and students—reap the benefits. The American School Board Journal, 185 (9) 27–29.
Moeller, A. J., Theiler, J. M., & Wu, C. (2012). Goal setting and student achievement: A longitudinal study.
The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 153–169.
Molnar, A., Smith, P., Zahorik, J., Palmer, A., Halbach, A., & Ehrle, K. (1999). Evaluating the SAGE pro-
gram: A pilot program in targeted pupil-teacher reduction in Wisconsin. Educational Evaluation and Pol-
icy Analysis, 21(2), 165–178.
Monk, D. H. (1994). Subject area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student
achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13(2), 125–145.
Monsen, J. J., Ewing, D. L., & Kwoka, M. (2014). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion, perceived adequacy
of support and classroom learning environment. Learning Environment Research, 17(1), 113–126.
Moolenaar, N. M., Sleegers, P. J. C., & Daly, A. J. (2012). Teaming up: Linking collaboration networks, col-
lective efficacy, and student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 251–262.
Moon, S. M. (2009). Myth 15: High-ability students don’t face problems and challenges. Gifted Child Quar-
terly, 53, 274–276.
Morgan, R. D., & Lock, P. (2014). Erin Gruwell: A biological account of a teacher leader for change. Educa-
tional Leadership and Administration, 25, 65–76.
Morris, P. A., & Reardon, S. F. (2017). Moving education science forward by leaps and bounds: The need
for interdisciplinary approaches to improving children’s educational trajectories. Journal of Research on
Educational Effectiveness, 10(1), 1–6.
Mueller, R. G. (2016). Making them fit: Examining teacher support for student questioning. Social Studies
Research & Practice, 11(1), 40–55.
Muijs, D., Kyriakides, L., van der Werf, G., Creemers, B., Timperley, H., & Earl, L. (2014). State of the
art—teacher effectiveness and professional learning. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2),
231–256.
Muis, K. R., & Duffy, M. C. (2013). Epistemic climate and epistemic change: Instruction designed to change
students’ beliefs and learning strategies and improve achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology,
105(1), 213–225.
Mulholland, M., & O’Connor, U. (2016). Collaborative classroom practice for inclusion: Perspectives of
classroom teachers and learning support/resource teachers. International Journal of Inclusive Education,
20(1), 1070–1083.
Murillo, F., & Martinez-Garrido, C. (2014). Homework and primary-school students’ academic achievement
in Latin America. International Review of Education, 60(5), 661–681.
Murphy, C. E. (2009). Always working an angle: Exploration of the teacher-student relationship and engage-
ment. In L. P. McCoy (Ed.), Studies in teaching: 2009 research digest (pp 85–90). Winston-Salem, NC:
Wake Forest University.
Nadelson, L. S., Croft, G., Ennis, K., Harm, E., McClay, K., & Winslow, R. (2012). It takes a school: Explor-
ing the relationship between professional learning communities and student achievement. Teacher Edu-
cation & Practice, 25(3), 402–421.
NAGC/CEC. (2013). NAGC/CEC teacher preparation standards in gifted and talented education. Retrieved
from http://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/standards/NAGC-%20CEC%20CAEP%20standards%20%
282013%20final%29.pdf

Nagy, W., Townsend, D., Lesaux, N., & Schmitt, N. (2012). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as
language acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 91–108.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Time spent teaching core academic subjects in elementary
schools: Comparisons across community, school, teacher, and student characteristics. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Education and certification qualifications of departmentalized
public high school-level teachers of core subjects. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011317.pdf
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: An imperative for educational
reform. Washington, DC: Author.
National Council on Teacher Quality. (2014). Training our future teachers: Classroom management. Retrieved
from http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/Future_Teachers_Classroom_Management_NCTQ_Report
National Partnership for Teaching in At-Risk Schools. (2005). Qualified teachers for at-risk schools: A national
imperative. Washington, DC: Author.
Ndunda, M., Van Sickle, M., Perry, L., & Capelloni, A. (2017). University-urban high school partnership:
Math and science professional learning communities. School Science & Mathematics, 117(3/4), 137–145.
NEA Today. (2013). Beyond PISA: How the United States compares with high-achieving nations on key educational
issues. Retrieved from http://neatoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/US-InternationalComparisons.pdf
Nelson, C., & Prindle, N. (1992). Gifted teacher competences: Ratings by rural principals and teachers com-
pared. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15(4), 357–369.
The New Teacher Project. (2013). Perspectives of irreplaceable teachers. Retrieved from http://tntp.org/assets/
documents/TNTP_Perspectives_2013.pdf
Newhouse, C. (2017). STEM the boredom: Engage students in the Australian curriculum using ICT with
problem-based learning and assessment. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 26(1), 44–57.
Nikakis, S. (2002). What makes an expert teacher of the gifted? Learning Matters, 7(1), 42–44.
Ning, H. K., Lee, D., & Lee, W. O. (2015). Relationships between teacher value orientations, collegiality,
and collaboration in school professional learning communities. Social Psychology of Education, 18(2),
337–354.
No Child Left Behind Act, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 (2002).
Noblit, G. W., Rogers, D. L., & McCadden, B. M. (1995). In the meantime: The possibilities of caring. Phi
Delta Kappan, 76(9), 680–685.
Noddings, N. (2005). What does it mean to educate the whole child? Educational Leadership, 63(1), 8–13.
Noddings, N. (2012). The caring relation in teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 38(6), 771–781.
Noguera, P., Darling-Hammond, L., & Friedlaender, D. (2015). Equal opportunity for deeper learning.
Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560802.pdf
Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., Cerezo, R., & Valle, A. (2015a). Teachers’ feedback on
homework, homework-related behaviors, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Research,
108(3), 204–216.
Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., Valle, A., & Epstein, J. L. (2015b). Relationships between
perceived parental involvement in homework, student homework behaviors, and academic achieve-
ment: Differences among elementary, junior high, and high school students. Metacognition Learning, 10,
375–406.
Nurmi, J. (2012). Students’ characteristics and teacher-child relationships in instruction: A meta-analysis.
Educational Research Review, 7(3), 177–197.
O’Connor, E. (2010). Teacher-child relationships as dynamic systems. Journal of School Psychology, 48(3),
187–218.
OECD. (2012). Country note: United States. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/PISA-2012-
results-US.pdf
OECD. (2013a). Innovative learning environments. Paris: Author.
OECD. (2013b). PISA 2012 results: What makes schools successful? Resources, policies and practices (Vol. 4).
doi:10.1787/9789264201156-en
Ogan-Bekiroglu, F., & Suzuk, E. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ assessment literacy and its implementation
into practice. The Curriculum Journal, 25(3), 344–371.
Oliver, R., M., Wehby, J. H., & Nelson, J. R. (2015). Helping teachers maintain classroom management prac-
tices using a self-monitoring checklist. Teaching & Teacher Education, 51, 113–120.

References 329
Olson, J. K., Tippett, C. D., Milford, T. M., Ohana, C., & Clough, M. P. (2015). Science teacher preparation
in a North American context. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26, 7–28.
Omoteso, B. A., & Semudara, A. (2011). The relationship between teachers’ effectiveness and management
of classroom misbehaviours in secondary schools. Psychology (Irvine), 2(9), 902–908.
O’Neill, T. B. (2010). Fostering spaces of student ownership in middle school science. Equity & Excellence in
Education, 43(1), 6–20.
Opolot-Okurut, C. (2010). Classroom learning environment and motivation towards mathematics among
secondary school students in Uganda. Learning Environments Research, 13, 267–277.
Opuni, K. A. (2012). Impact of caring teachers and character values instruction on student achievement in
inner-city middle schools. Journal of Modern Education Review, 2(1), 1–8.
Orlich, D. C., Harder, R. J., Callahan, R. C., & Gibson, H. W. (2001). Teaching strategies: A guide to better
instruction (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Orthner, D. K., Akos, P., Rose, R., Jones-Sanpei, H., Mercado, M., & Woolley, M. E. (2010). CareerStart:
A middle school student engagement and academic achievement program. Children & Schools, 32,
223–234.
Osher, D., Bear, G. G., Sprague, J. R., & Doyle, W. (2010). How can we improve school discipline? Educa-
tional Researcher, 39(1), 48–58.
Ost, B. (2014). How do teachers improve? The relative importance of specific and general human capital.
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 6(2), 127–51.
Ost, B., & Schiman, J. C. (2015). Grade-specific experience, grade reassignments, and teacher turnover.
Economics of Education Review, 46, 112–126.
Osterman, K. F. (2010). Teacher practices and students’ sense of belonging. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N.
Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing (pp. 239–260).
New York: Springer.
O’Sullivan, A. J., Harris, P., Hughes, C. S., Toohey, S. M., Balasooriya, C., Velan, G., et al. (2012). Linking
assessment to undergraduate student capabilities through portfolio examination. Assessment & Evalua-
tion in Higher Education, 37(3), 379–391.
Paiva, J. C., & Morais, C., Moreira, L. (2017). Activities with parents on the computer: An ecological frame-
work. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 1–14.
Pakarinen, E., Kiuru, N., Lerkkanen, M., Poikkeus, A., Siekkinen, M., & Nurmi, J. (2010). Classroom orga-
nization and teacher stress predict learning motivation in kindergarten children. European Journal of
Psychology of Education, 25(3), 281–300.
Palardy, G. J., & Rumberger, R. W. (2008). Teacher effectiveness in first grade: The importance of back-
ground qualifications, attitudes, and instructional practices for student learning. Educational Evaluation
and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 111–140.
Palmer, P. J. (1990). Good teaching: A matter of living the mystery. Change, 22(1), 11–16.
Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2013). Self-assessment: Theoretical and practical connotations: When it
happens, how is it acquired and what to do to develop it in our students. Electronic Journal of Research in
Educational Psychology, 11(2), 551–76.
Panadero, E., Alonso-Tapia, J., & Huertas, J. A. (2012). Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on
self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences,
22(6), 806–813.
Panadero, E., Brown, G., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of known
unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 803–830.
Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited:
A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144.
Panadero, E., & Romero, M. (2014). To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regula-
tion, performance and self-efficacy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 133–148.
Pancsofar, N., & Petroff, J. G. (2016). Teachers’ experiences with co-teaching as a model for inclusive educa-
tion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(10), 1043–1053.
Pane, J. F., Steiner, E. D., Baird, M. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2015). Continued progress: Promising evidence on
personalized learning. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Pantić, N., & Wubbels, T. (2012). Teachers’ moral values and their interpersonal relationships with students
and cultural competence. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(3), 451–460.

Papay, J. P., & Kraft, M. A. (2015). Productivity returns to experience in the teacher labor market: Method-
ological challenges and new evidence on long-term career improvement. Journal of Public Economics, 130,
105–119.
Papay, J., West, M., Fullerton, J., & Kane, T. (2012). Does an Urban Teacher Residency increase student
achievement? Early evidence from Boston. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34, 413–434.
Park, D.-Y., & Logsdon, C. (2015). Effects of modeling instruction on descriptive writing and observational
skills in middle school. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 13(1), 71–94.
Park, V., Daly, A. J., & Guerra, A. W. (2012). Strategic framing: How leaders craft the meaning of data use for
equity and learning. Educational Policy, 27(4), 645–675.
Parson, S. A., Dodman, S. L., Burrowbridge, S. C. (2013). Broadening the view of differentiated instruction.
Phi Delta Kappan, 95(1), 38–42.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). P21 framework definitions. Retrieved from www.p21.org/storage/
documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related
outcomes: A meta-analysis of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 270–300.
Patrick, B. C., Hisley, J., Kempler, T., & College, G. (2000). What’s everybody so excited about? The effects
of teacher enthusiasm on student intrinsic motivation and vitality. Journal of Experimental Education,
68(3), 217–236.
Peart, N. A., & Campbell, F. A. (1999). At-risk students’ perceptions of teacher effectiveness. Journal for a
Just and Caring Education, 5(3), 269–284.
Peercy, M. M., Martin-Beltrán, M., Silverman, R. D., & Nunn, S. J. (2015). “Can I ask a question?” ESOL
and mainstream teachers engaged in distributed and distributive learning to support English language
learners’ text comprehension. Teacher Education Quarterly, 42(4), 33–58.
Pekrun, R., Cusack, A., Murayama, K., Elliot, A. J., & Thomas, K. (2014). The power of anticipated feed-
back: Effects on students’ achievement goals and achievement emotions. Learning and Instruction, 29,
115–124.
Pennisi, A. C. (2012). A partnership across boundaries: Arts integration in high schools. Teaching Artist
Journal, 10(2), 102–109.
Pentimonti, J. M., Justice, L. M., Yoemans-Maldonado, G., McGinty, A. S., Slocum, L., & O’Connell, A.
(2017). Teachers’ use of high- and low-support scaffolding strategies to differentiate language instruction
in high-risk/economically disadvantaged settings. Journal of Early Intervention, 39(2), 125–146.
Perle, J. G. (2016). Teacher-provided positive attending to improve student behavior. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 48(5), 250–257.
Perrin, B., Banks, F., & Dargue, B. (2004). Student vs. software pacing of instruction: An empirical comparison
of effectiveness. Paper presented at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Confer-
ence, Orlando, FL.
Peters, S., & Reid, D. K. (2009). Resistance and discursive practice: Promoting advocacy in teacher under-
graduate and graduate programmes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(4), 551–558.
Peterson, E. R., Rubie-Davies, C., Osborne, D., & Sibley, C. (2016). Teachers’ explicit expectations and
implicit prejudiced attitudes to educational achievement: Relations with student achievement and the
ethnic achievement gap. Learning & Instruction, 42, 123–140.
Phillips, K. J. R. (2010). What does “highly qualified” mean for student achievement evaluating the rela-
tionships between teacher quality indicators and at-risk students’ mathematics and reading achievement
gains in first grade. The Elementary School Journal, 110(4), 464–493.
Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of classroom pro-
cesses: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38, 109–119.
Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., & Allen, J. P. (2012). Teacher-student relationships and engagement: Concep-
tualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions. In S. L. Christenson, A.
L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 365–386). New York:
Springer.
Pisacreta, J., Tincani, M., & Connell, J. E. (2011). Increasing teachers’ use of a 1:1 praise-to-behavior correc-
tion ratio to decrease student disruption in general education classrooms. Behavioral Interventions, 26(4),
243–260.
Pitzer, J., & Skinner, E. (2017). Predictors of changes in students’ motivational resilience over the school
year. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 41(1), 15–29.

References 331
Plunkett, M., & Kronborg, L. (2011). Learning to be a teacher of the gifted: The importance of examining
opinions and challenging misconceptions. Gifted and Talented International, 26(1–2), 31–46.
Pollock, J. E. (2007). Improving student learning: One teacher at a time. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Popham, W. J. (2011). Assessment literacy overlooked: A teacher educator’s confession. The Teacher Educator,
46, 265–273.
Popham, W. J. (2013). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Porter, A., & Brophy, J. (1988). Synthesis of research on good teaching: Insights from the work of the Insti-
tute for Research on Teaching. Educational Leadership, 45 (8), 74–85.
Postholm, M. B., & Wæge, K. (2016). Teachers’ learning in school-based development. Education Research,
58(1), 24–38.
Pransky, K., & Bailey, F. (2002). To meet your students where they are you first have to find them: Working
with culturally and linguistically diverse at-risk students. The Reading Teacher, 56(4), 370–383.
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2010). Prepare and inspire: K–12 education in
science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for America’s future. Washington, DC: Author.
Pressley, M., Raphael, L., Gallagher, J. D., & DiBella, J. (2004). Providence St. Mel School: How a school that
works for African American students works. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 216–235.
Pressley, M., Wharton-McDonald, R., Allington, R., Block, C. C., & Morrow, L. (1998). The nature of effective
first-grade literacy instruction (CELA Research Report No. 11007). Albany, NY: Center on English Learn-
ing and Achievement.
Pressman, R. M., Sugarman, D. B., Nemon, M. K., Desjarlais, J., Owens, J. A., & Schettini-Evans, A. (2015).
Homework and family stress: With consideration of parents’ self confidence, educational level, and cul-
tural background. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 43(4), 297–313.
Pringle, B. E., Lyons, J. E., & Brooker, K. C. (2010). Perceptions of teacher expectations by African American
high school students. Journal of Negro Education, 79(1), 33–40.
Prytula, M., Noonan, B., & Hellsten, L. (2013). Toward instructional leadership: Principals’ perceptions of
large-scale assessment in schools. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration & Policy, 140, 1–30.
Putnam, C., O’Donnell, J., & Bertozzi, N. (2010). Scaffolding and fading within and across a six-semester CDIO
design sequence. Proceedings of the 6th International CDIO Conference. Ecole Polytechnique, Montreal.
Quek, C. G. (2005). A national study of scientific talent development in Singapore. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, The College of William and Mary, Willamsburg, VA.
Rash, P. K., & Miller, A. D. (2000). A survey of the practices of teachers of the gifted. Roeper Review, 22(3),
192–194.
Reardon, S. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between rich and poor: New evidence and
possible explanations. In G. J. Duncan & R. J. Murnane (Eds.), Whither opportunity? Rising inequality,
schools, and children’s life chances (pp. 91–115). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Reardon, S. F. (2013). The widening income achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 70(8), 10–16.
Reddy, Y. M., & Andrade, H. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in
Reed, D. K. (2012). Clearly communicating the learning objective matters! Middle School Journal, 43(5),
16–24.
Reese, T. (2014). Lesson closure: Stick the landing. Education Update, 56(6), 5.
Reeves, A. R. (2011). Where great teaching begins: Planning for student thinking and learning. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Regan, K. S., & Michaud, K. M. (2011). Best practices to support student behavior. Beyond Behavior, 20(2),
40–47.
Reglin, G., Akpo-Sanni, J., & Losike-Sedimo, N. (2012). The effect of a professional development classroom
management model on at-risk elementary students’ misbehaviors. Education, 133(1), 3–18.
Reinfried, S., Aeschbacher, U., & Rottermann, B. (2012). Improving students’ conceptual understanding of
the greenhouse effect using theory-based learning materials that promote deep learning. International
Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 21(2), 155–178.
Reinholz, D. (2016). The assessment cycle: A model for learning through peer assessment. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(2), 301–315.
Reinke, W. M., Stormont, M., Herman, K. C., Wang, Z., Newcomer, L., & King, K. (2014). Use of coaching
and behavior support planning for students with disruptive behavior within a universal classroom man-
agement program. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 22(2), 74–82.

Reinsvold, L. A., & Cochran, K. F. (2012). Power dynamics and questioning in elementary science class-
rooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 745–768.
Reis, S. M., McCoach, D. B., Little, C. A., Muller, L. M., & Kaniskan, R. B. (2011). The effects of differenti-
ated instruction and enrichment pedagogy on reading achievement in five elementary schools. American
Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2009). Myth 1: The gifted and talented constitute one single homogeneous
group and giftedness is a way of being that stays in the person over time and experiences. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 53, 233–235.
Reis, S. M., & Small, M. A. (2001). Gifted and talented learners: Many, varied, unique, and diverse. In F. A.
Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching the gifted and talented (pp. 1–42). Waco,
TX: Prufrock Press.
Remillard, J., & Heck, D. (2014). Conceptualizing the curriculum enactment process in mathematics educa-
tion. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 46(5), 705–718.
Renzulli, J. S. (1968). Identifying key features in programs for the gifted. Exceptional Children, 35, 217–221.
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Slovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate,
student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712.
Ribeiro, C. M., & Yáñez, J. C. (2012). Discussing a teacher MKT and its role on teacher practice when
exploring data analysis. PNA, 6(3), 105–114.
Rice, J. K. (2010). The impact of teacher experience: Examining the evidence and policy implications. Washington,
DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
Rich, M. (2015, April 11). Where are the teachers of color? New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.
nytimes.com/2015/04/12/sunday-review/where-are-the-teachers-of-color.html
Ridling, R., & Rayner, S. (2012). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learn-
ing and behavior. New York: Routledge.
Riedling, A. M. (2007). An educator’s guide to information literacy: What every high school senior needs to know.
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2014). Effects of problem scope and creativity instructions on
idea generation and selection. Creativity Research Journal, 26(2), 185–191.
Riley, T. (2015). Differentiating the learning environment. In F. A. Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and
materials for teaching the gifted (pp. 201–220). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Baroody, A. E., Larsen, R. A. A., Curby, T. W., & Abry, T. (2015). To what extent do
teacher–student interaction quality and student gender contribute to fifth graders’ engagement in math-
ematics learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 170–185.
Rimpola, R. C. (2014). Collaborative planning and teacher efficacy of high school mathematics co-teachers.
Educational Planning, 21(3), 41–53.
Rita, R., & Martin-Dunlop, C. (2011). Perceptions of the learning environment and association with cogni-
tive achievement among gifted biology students. Learning Environments Research, 14(1), 25–38.
Rivkin, S. H., & Schiman, J. C. (2015). Instruction time, classroom quality, and academic achievement. The
Economic Journal, 125, 425–448.
Roache, J., & Lewis, R. (2011). Teachers’ views on the impact of classroom management on student respon-
sibility. Australian Journal of Education, 55(2), 132–146.
Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Fletcher, J., Stuebing, K., & Barth, A. (2013). Effects of a response-based, tiered
framework for intervening with struggling readers in middle school. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(3),
237–254.
Roberts, J. L., & Roberts, R. A. (2015). Writing units that remove the learning ceiling. In F. A. Karnes & S.
M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (pp. 221–256). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Rockoff, J. E., Jacob, B. A., Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2011). Can you recognize an effective teacher when
you recruit one? Education Finance and Policy, 6(1), 43–74.
Rojas, L., & Liou, D. D. (2017). Social justice teaching through the sympathetic touch of caring and high
expectations for students of color. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 28–40.
Ronfeldt, M., Farmer, S. O., McQueen, K., & Grissom, J. A. (2015). Teacher collaboration in instructional
teams and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 52(3), 475–514.
Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student achievement. American

References 333
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher-student
relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of
Educational Research, 81, 493–529.
Rosário, P., Núñez, J. C., Vallejo, G., Cunha, J., Nunes, T., Mourão, R., & Pinto, R. (2015). Does homework
design matter? The role of homework’s purpose in student mathematics achievement. Contemporary Edu-
Rose, R. A., Woolley, M. E., Orthner, D. K., Akos, P. K., & Jones-Sanpei, H. A. (2012). Increasing teacher use
of career-relevant instruction: A randomized control trial of CareerStart. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 34(3), 295–312.
Rosen, Y., & Tager, M. (2014). Making student thinking visible through a concept map in computer-based
assessment of critical thinking. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 50, 249–270.
Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know.
American Educator, 36(1), 12–19.
Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. In M. C. Wittrock (ed.), Handbook of research on
teaching (3rd ed., pp. 376–391). New York: Macmillan.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual
development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Educational technology research past and pres-
ent: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1),
17–35. Retrieved from www.cedtech.net/articles/112.pdf
Rowan, B., Chiang, F. S., & Miller, R. J. (1997). Using research on employees’ performance to study the
effects of teachers on students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 70, 256–284.
Rowell, L. (2013). Academic motivation: Concepts, strategies, and counseling approaches. Professional School
Counseling, 16(3), 158–171.
Rowley, J. F. (2012). Professional development needs of teachers to identify and cater for gifted students.
Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 21(2), 75–80.
Rubie-Davies, C. M. (2006). Teacher expectations and student self-perceptions: Exploring relationships. Psy-
chology in the School, 43(5), 537–552.
Rubie-Davies, C. M. (2010). Teacher expectations and perceptions of student attributes: Is there a relation-
ship? Educational Psychology, 80(1), 121–135.
Rubie-Davies, C. M., Flint, A., & McDonald, L. G. (2012). Teacher beliefs, teacher characteristics, and school
contextual factors: What are the relationships? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2), 270–288.
Rubie-Davies, C. M., Peterson, E., Irving, E., Widdowson, D., & Dixon, R. (2010). Expectations of achieve-
ment: Student, teacher and parent perceptions. Research in Education, 83(1), 36–53.
Rubie-Davies, C. M., Peterson, E. R., Sibley, C. G., & Rosenthal, R. (2015). A teacher expectation inter-
vention: Modeling the practices of high expectation teachers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40,
72–85.
Rubie-Davies, C. M., & Rosenthal, R. (2016). Intervening in teachers’ expectations: A random effects
meta-analytic approach to examining the effectiveness of an intervention. Learning & Individual Differ-
ences, 50, 83–92.
Rychly, L., & Graves, E. (2012). Teacher characteristics for culturally responsive pedagogy. Multicultural
Perspectives, 14(1), 44–49.
Ryken, A. E., & Hamel, F. L. (2016). Looking again at “surface-level” reflections. Teacher Education Quarterly,
43(4), 31–54.
Sabers, D. S., Cushing, K. S., & Berliner, D. C. (1991). Differences among teachers in a task characterized by
simultaneity, multidimensionality, and immediacy. American Educational Research Journal, 28(1), 63–88.
Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2016). Understanding misconceptions: Teaching and learning in middle school
physical science. American Educator, 40(1), 26–32.
Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Coyle, H. P., Cook-Smith, N., & Miller, J. L. (2013). The influence of teach-
ers’ knowledge on student learning in middle school physical science classrooms. American Educational
Sagor, R., & Cox, J. (2013). At-risk students: Reaching and teaching them (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Sakiz, G., Pape, S. J., & Hoy, A. W. (2012). Does perceived teacher affective support matter for middle
school students in mathematics classrooms? Journal of School Psychology, 50, 235–255.

Saklofske, D. H., Austin, E. J., Mastoras, S. M., Beaton, L., & Osborne, S. E. (2012). Relationships of per-
sonality, affect, emotional intelligence and coping with student stress and academic success: Different
patterns of association for stress and success. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(2), 251–257.
Salleh, U. K. M., & Darmawan, I. G. N. (2013). Differences between in-field and out-of-field history teachers
influence on students learning experience in Malaysian secondary schools. Creative Education, 4(9), 5–9.
Salopek, J. J. (2011). How to manage your classroom effectively. Education Update, 53, 1–3.
Samson, J. F., & Collins, B. A. (2012). Preparing all teachers to meet the needs of English language learners:
Applying research to policy and practice for teacher effectiveness. Washington, DC: Center for American
Progress.
Sanchez, C. (2017). English language learners: How your state is doing. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/
sections/ed/2017/02/23/512451228/5-million-english-language-learners-a-vast-pool-of-talent-at-risk
Sánchez, O., De Paul Chism, N. F., Serafini, K., & Judd, T. (2012). Empowering culturally diverse students
within a collaborative learning community: A student perspective. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 11(3),
406–412.
Sanders, M., & Jordan, W. (2000). Student-teacher relations and academic achievement in high school. In
M. Sanders (Ed.), Schooling students placed at risk: Research, policy, and practice in education of poor and
minority adolescents. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sanders, M. G., & Jordan, W. J. (2012). Schooling students placed at risk: Research, policy, and practice in the
education of poor and minority adolescents. New York: Routledge.
Sandford, B. A., & Hsu, C. (2013). Alternative assessment and portfolios: Review, reconsider, and revitalize.
International Journal of social Science Studies, 1(1), 215–221.
Sandilos, L. E., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Cohen, J. J. (2017). Warmth and demand: The relation between
students’ perceptions of the classroom environment and achievement growth. Child Development, 88,
1321–1337. doi:10.1111/cdev.12685.
Santilli, V., Miller, A. N., & Katt, J. (2011). A comparison of the relationship between instructor nonverbal
immediacy and teacher credibility in Brazilian and U.S. classrooms. Communication Research Reports,
28(3), 266–274.
Sawyer, R. K. (2011). What makes good teachers great? The artful balance of structure and improvisation.
In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Structure and improvisation in creative teaching (pp. 1–24). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Scager, K., Akkerma, S. F., Pilot, A., & Wubbels, T. (2014). Challenging high-ability students. Studies in
Scherer, M. (2012). The challenges of supporting new teachers: A conversation with Linda Darling-
Hammond. Educational Leadership, 69(8), 18–23.
Schiefele, U., Streblow, L., & Retelsdorf, J. (2013). Dimensions of teacher interest and their relations to
occupational well-being and instructional practices. Journal for Educational Research Online, 5(1), 7–37.
Schifter, C. C., Natarajan, U., Ketelhut, D. J., & Kirchgessner, A. (2014). Data-driven decision making: Facil-
itating teacher use of student data to inform classroom instruction. Contemporary Issues in Technology and
Teacher Education, 14(4), 419–432.
Schildkamp, K., Ehren, M., & Lai, M. K. (2012). Editorial article for the special issue on data-based decision
making around the world: From policy to practice to results. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,
23(2), 123–131.
Schildkamp, K., Poortman, C. L., & Handelzalts, A. (2016). Data teams for school improvement. School
Effectiveness & School Improvement, 27(2), 228–254.
Schildkamp, K., Poortman, C., Luyten, H., & Ebbeler, J. (2017). Factors promoting and hindering data-
based decision making in schools. School Effectiveness & School Improvement, 28(2), 242–258.
Schleicher, A. (2015). School for 21st-century leaners: Strong leaders, confident teachers, innovative approaches.
International Summit on the Teaching Profession. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264231191-en
Schmidt, W. H., Cogan, L. S., Houang, R. T., & McKnight, C. C. (2011). Content coverage differences across
districts/states: A persisting challenge for U.S. education policy. American Journal of Education, 117(3),
399–427.
Schneider, M. C., Egan, K. L., & Julian, M. W. (2013). Classroom assessment in the context of high-stakes test-
ing. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), Sage handbook of research on classroom assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schueler, S., Roesken-Winter, B., Weißenrieder, J., Lambert, A., & Römer, M. (2015). Characteristics of out-
of-field teaching: Teacher beliefs and competencies. Proceedings of the Ninth Congress of the European
Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Prague, Czech Republic.

References 335
Schumacher, G., Grigsby, B., & Vesey, W. (2015). Determining effective teaching behaviors through the hir-
ing processes. International Journal of Educational Management, 29(1), 139–155.
Schussler, D. L., Stooksberry, L. M., & Bercaw, L. A. (2010). Understanding teacher candidate dispositions:
Reflecting to build self-awareness. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(4), 350–363.
Scoffham, S., & Barnes, J. (2011). Happiness matters: Towards a pedagogy of happiness and well-being. The
Curriculum Journal, 22(4), 535–548.
Scott, M. T. (2014). Multicultural differentiated instruction for gifted students. Advances in Special Education,
26, 147–166.
Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2012). Schools that learn:
A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education (Updated and
revised). New York: Crown Publishing.
Shatzer, R. H., Caldarella, P., Hallam, P. R., & Brown, B. L. (2013). Comparing the effects of instructional and
transformational leadership on student achievement: Implications for practice. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 42(4), 445–459.
Shellard, E., & Protheroe, N. (2000). Effective teaching: How do we know it when we see it? The Informed
Educator Series. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
Sheng, Z., Sheng, Y., & Anderson, C. J. (2011). Dropping out of school among ELL students: Implications to
schools and teacher education. The Clearing House, 84, 98–103.
Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high
school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158–176.
Shernoff, D. J., Tonks, S. M., & Anderson, B. (2014). The impact of the learning environment on student
engagement in high school classrooms. National Society for the Study of Education, 113(1), 166–177.
Shield, M., & Dole, S. (2013). Assessing the potential of mathematics textbooks to promote deep learning.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(2), 183–199.
Shim, J. M. (2014). A Bourdieunian analysis: Teachers’ beliefs about English language learners’ academic
challenges. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 16(1), 40–55.
Shore, B. M., & Delcourt, M. A. B. (1996). Effective curricular and program practices in gifted education and
the interface with general education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 138–154.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2),
4–14.
Siegel, M. A., & Wissehr, C. (2011). Preparing for the plunge: Preservice teachers’ assessment literacy. Jour-
nal of Science Teacher Education, 22(4), 371–391.
Siegle, D., Gubbins, E. J., O’Rourke, P., Langley, S. D., Mun, R. U., Luria, S. R., et al. (2016). Barriers to
underserved students’ participation in gifted programs and possible solutions. Journal for the Education of
the Gifted, 39(2), 103–131.
Siegle, D., Rubenstein, L. D., & Mitchell, M. S. (2014). Honors students’ perceptions of their high school
experiences: The influence of teachers on student motivation. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(1), 35–50.
Silverman, S. K. (2010). What is diversity? An inquiry into preservice teacher beliefs. American Educational
Simon, N. E., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can
do. Teachers College Record, 117(3), 1–36.
Simonsen, B., Freeman, J., Dooley, K., Maddock, E., Kern, L., & Myers, D. (2017). Effects of targeted pro-
fessional development on teachers’ specific praise rates. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19(1),
37–47.
Singham, M. (2001). The achievement gap. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, 586.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2009). Does school context matter? Relations with teacher burnout and job
satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 518–524.
Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Holmes, G., Madden, N. A., & Chamberlain, A. (2013). Effects of a data-driven
district reform model on state assessment outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 50(2),
371–396.
Smart, J. B., & Marshall, J. C. (2013). Interactions between classroom discourse, teacher questioning, and
student cognitive engagement in middle school science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 249–267.
Smith, M. A., & Schmidt, K. (2012). Teachers are making a difference: Understanding the influence of favor-
ite teachers. The Qualitative Report, 17(36), 1–25.
Smith, P. S., Trygstad, P. J., & Banilower, E. R. (2016). Widening the gap: Unequal distribution of resources
for K–12 science instruction. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(8). doi:10.14507/epaa.v24.2207

Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., & Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school systems
improve student achievement. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.
Solis, M., Vaughn, S., Swanson, E., & McCulley, L. (2012). Collaborative models of instruction: The empiri-
cal foundations of inclusion and co-teaching. Psychology in the Schools, 49(5), 498–510.
Sorhagen, N. S. (2013). Early teacher expectations disproportionately affect poor children’s high school per-
formance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 465–477.
Sousa, D. A. (2011). How the brain learns (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Spear-Swerling, L., & Zibulsky, J. (2014). Making time for literacy: Teacher knowledge and time allocation
in instructional planning. Reading and Writing, 27(8), 1353–1378.
Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M., & Thijs, J. T. (2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance of teacher-student
relationships. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 457–477.
Squires, D. (2012). Curriculum alignment research suggests that alignment can improve student achieve-
ment. The Clearing House, 85, 129–135.
Srivastava, M., de Boeer, A. A., & Pijl, S. J. (2017). Preparing for the inclusive classroom: Changing teachers’
attitudes and knowledge. Teacher Development, 21(4), 561–579.
Stahl, R. J. (1994). Using “think-time” and “wait-time” skillfully in the classroom. ERIC Digest. Bloomington, IN:
ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 370 885)
Starko, A. (2013a). Creativity in the classroom: School of curious delight (5th ed.). New York: Routledge.
Starko, A. (2013b). Creativity on the brink? Educational Leadership, 70(5), 54–56.
Starko, A. J., & Schack, G. D. (1989). Perceived need, teacher efficiency, and teacher strategies for the gifted
and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 118–122.
Stein, L. (2010). Lead students—Don’t just manage them. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(4), 82–86.
Stephens, K. R., & Karnes, F. A. (2015). Product development for gifted students. In F. A. Karnes & S. M.
Bean (Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (pp. 165–200). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). What is an “expert student?” Educational Researcher, 32(8), 5–9.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). The theory of successful intelligence as a basis for gifted educa-
tion. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(4), 265–277.
Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2012). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effec-
tive feedback and promote student learning (2nd ed.). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Stiggins, R. J. (1991). Assessment literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(7), 534–539.
Stiggins, R. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10),
758–765.
Stiggins, R. J. (2014). Improve assessment literacy outside of schools too. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(2), 67–72.
Stiggins, R., & DuFour, R. (2009). Maximizing the power of formative assessments. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9),
640–644.
Stols, G. (2013). An investigation into the opportunity to learn that is available to grade 12 mathematics
learners. South African Journal of Education, 33(1), 1–18.
Stone, J. E. (2002). The value added achievement gains of NBPTS-certified teachers in Tennessee: A brief report.
Retrieved from www.education-consumers.com/briefs/stoneNBPTS.shtm
Strati, A. D., Schmidt, J. A., & Maier, K. S. (2017). Perceived challenge, teacher support, and teacher
obstruction as predictors of student engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(1), 131–147.
Strauss, R. P., & Sawyer, E. A. (1986). Some new evidence on teacher and student competencies. Economics
of Education Review, 5, 41–48.
Strauss, V. (2015, May 21). Why we should diversify the overwhelmingly white U.S. teaching force—
and how. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answersheet/
wp/2015/05/21/why-we-should-diversify-the-overwhelming-white-u-s-teaching-force-and-how/
Stripling, B. K. (Ed.). (1999). Learning and libraries in an information age: Principles and practice. Englewood,
CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Stronge, J. H., Grant, L. W., & Xu, X. (2015). Searching for excellence in a new age: Rethinking teacher
qualities to promote student success for 21st century learning. In J. A. Bellanca (Ed.), Connecting the dots:
Teacher effectiveness and deeper professional learning (Chapter 11). Bloomington, IN: SolutionTree.
Stronge, J. H., Grant, L. W., & Xu, X. (2017). Designing effective assessments. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Stronge, J. H., Grant, L. W., Xu, X., Popp, P., Sun, Y., & Little, C. (2014). West meets east: Lessons learned from
great teachers in the United States and China. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

References 337
Stronge, J. H., Little, C. A., & Grant, L. W. (2009). Qualities of talented teachers: Reflections and new direc-
tions. In B. MacFarlane & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Leading change in gifted education: The festschrift of Dr.
Joyce VanTassel-Baska (pp. 389–401). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Stronge, J. H., Tucker, P. D., & Ward, T. J. (2003, April). Teacher effectiveness and student learning: What do
good teachers do? Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting,
Chicago.
Stronge, J. H., Ward, T. J., & Grant, L. W. (2011). What makes good teachers good? A cross-case analysis
of the connection between teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education,
62(4), 339–355.
Stronge, J. H., Ward, T. J., Tucker, P. D., & Hindman, J. L. (2008). What is the relationship between teacher
quality and student achievement? An exploratory study. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education,
20(3–4), 165–184.
Stronge, J. H., Ward, T. J., Tucker, P. D., Hindman, J. L., McColsky, W., & Howard, B. (2007). A compari-
son of National Board certified teachers and non-National Board certified teachers: Is there a difference
in teacher effectiveness and student achievement? Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 20(3),
185–210.
Stronge, J. H., & Xu, X. (2015). Instructional planning for effective teaching. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Suldo, S. M., Friedrich, A. A., White, T., Farmer, J., Minch, D., & Michalowski, J. (2009). Teacher support
and adolescents’ subjective well-being: A mixed-methods investigation. School Psychology Review, 38(1),
67–85.
Sullivan, A. M., Johnson, B., Owens, L., & Conway, R. (2014). Punish them or engage them? Teachers’ views of
unproductive student misbehaviors in the classroom. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(6), 43–56.
Sun, M., Loeb, S., & Grissom, J. A. (2017). Building teacher teams: Evidence of positive spillovers from
more effective colleagues. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 104–125.
Synar, E., & Maiden, J. (2012). A comprehensive model for estimating the financial impact of teacher turn-
over. Journal of Education Finance, 38(2). Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_educa-
tion_finance/v038/38.2.synar.html#b6
Talanquer, V., Bolger, M., & Tomanek, D. (2015). Exploring prospective teachers’ assessment practices:
Noticing and interpreting student understanding in the assessment of written work. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 52(5), 585–609.
Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of
research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation
study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4–28.
Tas, Y. (2016). The contribution of perceived classroom learning environment and motivation to student
engagement in science. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 557–577.
Tas, Y., Sungur, S., & Oztekin, C. (2016). Development and validation of science homework scale for mid-
dle-school students. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 14(3), 417–444.
Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Clark, K. F., & Walpole, S. (1999). Center for the improvement of early reading
achievement: Effective schools/accomplished teachers. The Reading Teacher, 53(2), 156–159.
Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D. S., & Rodriquez, M. C. (2003). Reading growth in high-poverty
classrooms: The influence of teacher practices that encourage cognitive engagement in literary learning.
The Elementary School Journal, 104(1), 3–28.
Taylor, B., Pressley, M., & Pearson, D. (2000). Effective teachers and schools: Trends across recent studies.
Retrieved from http://education.umn.edu/CI/taylor/Files/EfftTchrspaper.pdf
Taylor, D. B., Mraz, M., Nichols, W. D., Rickelman, R. J., & Wood, K. D. (2009). Using explicit instruction
to promote vocabulary learning for struggling readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning
Difficulties, 25(2–3), 205–220.
Tekene, L. (2008). Questions as a technique for scaffolding children’s learning. Exchange, 179, 51–53.
Thomas, J. A., & Montgomery, P. (1998). On becoming a good teacher: Reflective practice with regard to
children’s voices. Journal of Teacher Education, 49(5), 372–380.
Thompson, D. R., Kaur, B., Koyama, M., & Bleiler, S. K. (2013). A longitudinal view of mathematics
achievement of primary students: Case studies from Japan, Singapore, and the United States. ZDM: The
International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(1), 73–89.
Thomson, D. L. (2010). Beyond the classroom walls: Teachers’ and students’ perspectives on how online
learning can meet the needs of gifted students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(4), 662–712.

Thoonen, E. E. J., Sleegers, P. J. C., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T. D., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to improve
teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and leadership practices. Edu-
cational Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496–536.
Thurlings, M., Evers, A. T., & Vermeulen, M. (2015). Toward a model of explaining teachers’ innovative
behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 430–471.
Tirri, K. (2011). Holistic school pedagogy and values: Finnish teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Interna-
tional Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 159–165.
Titsworth, S., Mazar, J. P., Goodboy, A. K., Bolkan, S., & Myers, S. A. (2015). Two meta-analyses exploring
the relationship between teacher clarity and student learning. Communication Education, 64(4), 385–418.
Titsworth, S., McKenna, T. P., Mazer, J. P., & Quinlan, M. M. (2013). The bright side of emotion in the class-
room: Do teachers’ behaviors predict students’ enjoyment, hope, and pride? Communication Education,
62(2), 191–209.
Tobin, K. (1980). The effect of an extended teacher wait-time on science achievement. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 17, 469–475.
Tobin, K., & Capie, W. (1982). Relationships between classroom process variables and middle school sci-
ence achievement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 441–454.
Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Tomlison, C. A. (2000). Reconcilable differences: Standards-based teaching and differentiation. Educational
Leadership, 58(1), 6–11.
Tomlinson, C.A. (2003). Differentiation of instruction in the early grades. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC:
ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED443572)
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). Alexan-
dria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2016). The caring teacher’s manifesto. Educational Leadership, 72(6), 89–90.
Tomlinson, C.A., & Allan, S.D. (2000). Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Moon, T. R. (2013). Assessment and student success in a differentiated classroom. Alexan-
dria, VA: ASCD.
Torrez, C. F., & Waring, S. M. (2009). Elementary school students, artifacts and primary sources: Learning to
engage in historical inquiry. Social Studies Research and Practice, 4(2), 79–86.
Townsend, D., Filippini, A., Collins, P., & Biancarosa, G. (2012). Evidence for the importance of academic
word knowledge for the academic achievement of diverse middle school students. The Elementary School
Journal, 112(3), 497–518.
Toy, R. (2015). Differentiation of processes for the gifted. In F. A. Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and
materials for teaching the gifted (pp. 139–164). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Tremblay, P. (2013). Comparative outcomes of two instructional models for students with learning disabil-
ities: Inclusion with co-teaching and solo-taught special education. Journal of Research in Special Educa-
tional Needs, 13(4), 251–258.
Tröbst, S., Kleickmann, T., Lange-Schubert, K., Rothkopf, A., & Möller, K. (2016). Instruction and students’
declining interest in science. American Educational Research Journal, 53(1), 162–193.
Trussell, R. P., Lewis, T. J., & Raynor, C. (2016). The impact of universal teacher practices and function-
based behavior interventions on the rates of problem behaviors among at-risk students. Education and
Treatment of Children, 39(3), 261–282.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2000). The ties that bind: The importance of trust in schools. Essentially Yours, 4,
1–5.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Johnson, D. (2011). Exploring literacy teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs: Potential
sources at play. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 751–761.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & McMaster, P. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy: For professional development for-
mats and their relationship to self-efficacy and implementation of a new teaching strategy. The Elemen-
tary School Journal, 110(2), 228–245.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teach-
ing and Teacher Education, 17, 783–805.
Tsui, L. (1999). Courses and instruction affecting critical thinking. Research in Higher Education, 40, 185–200.

References 339
Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from four institutional case
studies. Journal of Higher Education, 73(6), 740–763.
Turner, J. C., Christensen, A., Kackar-Cam, H. Z., Trucano, M., & Fulmer, S. M. (2014). Enhancing students’
engagement: Report of a 3-year intervention with middle school teachers. American Educational Research
Journal, 51(6), 1195–1226.
Tze, V. M. C., Daniels, L. M., & Klassen, R. M. (2016). Evaluating the relationship between boredom and
academic outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 119–144.
Tzivinikou, S. (2015). Collaboration between general and special education teachers: Developing co-teach-
ing skills in heterogeneous classes. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 64, 108–119.
Urhahne, D. (2015). Teacher behavior as a mediator of the relationship between teacher judgment and stu-
dents’ motivation and emotion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 73–82.
Uzi, K., Michal, E., Ilana, R., Orit, Z., & Malka, M. (2013). Helping students with LD to succeed: The role of
teachers’ hope, sense of coherence and specific self-efficacy. European Journal of Special Needs Education,
28(4), 427–439.
Vahey, P., Rafanan, K., Patton, C., Swan, K., Hooft, M. V., Kratcoski, A., et al. (2012). A cross-disciplinary
approach to teaching data literacy and proportionality. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81(2),
179–205.
Vaille, W., & Quigley, S. (2002). Selective students’ views of the essential characteristics of effective teachers.
Retrieved from www.aare.edu.au/02pap/via02437.htm
Valant, J., & Newark, D. A. (2016). The politics of achievement gaps: U.S. public opinion on race-based and
wealth-based differences in test scores. Educational Researcher, 45(6), 331–346.
Valli, L. (1997). Listening to other voices: A description of teacher reflection in the United States. Peabody
Journal of Education, 72(1), 67–88.
Van den Bergh, L., Denessen, E., Hornstra, L., Voeten, M., & Holland, R. W. (2010). The implicit prejudiced
attitudes of teachers: Relations to teacher expectations and the ethnic achievement gap. American Educa-
tional Research Journal, 47(2), 497–527.
Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2015). Effects of feedback in computer-based
learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research,
85(4), 475–511.
Van der Kleij, F. M., Vermeulen, J. A., Schildkamp, K., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2015). Integrating data-based
decision making: Assessment for learning and diagnostic testing in formative assessment. Assessment in
Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(3), 324–343.
Van Driel, J. H., & Berry, A. (2012). Teacher professional development focusing on pedagogical content
knowledge. Educational Researcher, 41(1), 26–28.
Van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Visscher, A. J., & Fox, J. (2016). Assessing the effects of a school-wide data-based
decision-making intervention on student achievement growth in primary schools. American Educational
van Kuijk, M. E., Deunk, M. I., Bosker, R. J., & Ritzema, E. S. (2014). Goals, data use, and instruction: The
effect of a teacher professional development program on reading achievement. School Effectiveness and
School Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy and Practice, 27(2), 135–156.
van Uden, J. M., Ritzen, H., & Pieters, J. M. (2014). Engaging students: The role of teacher beliefs and inter-
personal teacher behavior in fostering student engagement in vocational education. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 37, 21–32.
Van Voorhis, F. L. (2011). Maximum homework impact: Optimizing time, purpose, communication, and
collaboration. In S. Redding, M. Murphy, & P. Sheley (Eds.), Handbook on family and community engage-
ment (109–112). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Vandevoort, L. G., Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Berliner, D. C. (2004). National Board certified teachers and
their students’ achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(46), 1–117.
Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Dochy, F., Mouratidis, A., et al. (2012). Identifying
configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and structure: Associations with self-regulated
learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 432–439.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1998). The development of academic talent: A mandate for educational best practice.
Phi Delta Kappan, 79(10), 760–764.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2005). Lessons learned from curriculum differentiation, instruction, and assessment.
Presentation at the National Curriculum Network Conference, Williamsburg, VA.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (2014). Performance-based assessment. Gifted Child Today, 37(1), 41–47.

VanTassel-Baska, J., & Hubbard, G. F. (2016). Classroom-based strategies for advanced learners in rural
settings. Journal of Advanced Academics, 27(4), 285–310.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Little, C. (2003). Content-based curriculum for high-ability learners. Waco, TX: Prufrock
Press.
Vatterott, C. (2011). Making homework central to learning. Educational Leadership, 69(3), 59–64.
Vaughn, S., Bos, C. S., & Schumm, J. S. (2000). Teaching exceptional, diverse, and at-risk students in the general
education classroom (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Velasquez, A., West, R., Graham, C., & Osguthorpe, R. (2013). Developing caring relationships in schools: A
review of research on caring and nurturing pedagogies. Review of Education, 1(2), 162–190.
Velayutham, S., & Aldridge, J. M. (2013). Influence of psychosocial classroom environment on students’
motivation and self-regulation in science learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Research in
Science Education, 43, 507–527.
Vidergor, H. E., & Eilam, B. (2011). Impact of professional development program for teachers of the gifted.
Gifted and Talented International, 26(1–2), 143–161.
Villavicencio, F. T. (2011). Critical thinking, negative academic emotions, and achievement: A meditational
analysis. Asia-Pacific Education Research, 20(1), 118–126.
von der Embse, N., Sandilos, L. E., Pendergast, L., & Mankin, A. (2016). Teacher stress, teaching-efficacy,
and job satisfaction in response to test-based educational accountability policies. Learning and Individual
Differences, 50, 308–317.
Voss, T., Kunter, M., & Baumert, J. (2011). Assessing teacher candidates’ general pedagogical/psychological
knowledge: Test construction and validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 952–969.
Wadlington, E., & Wadlington, P. (2011). Teacher dispositions: Implications for teacher education. Child-
hood Education, 87(5), 323–326.
Wahlage, G., & Rutter, R. (1986). Evaluation of model program for at-risk students. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Walberg, H. J. (1984). Improving the productivity of America’s schools. Educational Leadership, 41(8), 19–27.
Waldrip, B., Yu, J. J., & Prain, V. (2016). Validation of a model of personalized learning. Learning Environ-
ment Research, 19, 169–180.
Walker, H. M., Ramsey, E., & Gresham, F. M. (2003/2004). Heading off disruptive behavior: How early
intervention can reduce defiant behavior—And win back teaching time. American Educator. Retrieved
from https://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/winter-2003-2004/heading-disruptive-behavior
Walker-Dalhouse, D. (2005). Discipline: Responding to socioeconomic and racial differences. Childhood Edu-
cation, 82(1), 24–30.
Walkey, F. H., McClure, J., Meyer, L. H., & Weir, K. F. (2013). Low expectations equal no expectations: Aspi-
rations, motivation, and achievement in secondary school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(4),
306–315.
Walkington, C., & Hayata, C. (2017). Designing learning personalized to students’ interests: Balancing rich
experiences with mathematical goals. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 49(4),
519–530.
Wallace, T. L., & Chhuon, V. (2014). Proximal processes in urban classrooms. American Educator. Retrieved
from https://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/winter-2003-2004/heading-disruptive-behavior
Walls, R. T., Nardi, A. H., von Minden, A. M., & Hoffman, N. (2002). The characteristics of effective and
ineffective teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(1), 39–48.
Walsh, J. A., & Sattes, B. D. (2005). Quality questioning: Research-based practice to engage every learner. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Walsh, J. A., & Sattes, B. D. (2015). Questioning for classroom discussion: Purposeful speaking, engaged listening,
deep thinking. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Walsh, M. E., Madaus, G. F., Raczek, A. E., Dearing, E., Foley, C., An, C., Lee-St. John, T. J., & Beaton, A.
(2014). A new model for student support in high-poverty urban elementary schools: Effects on ele-
mentary and middle school academic outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 51(4), 704–737.
Walsh, R. L., Kemp, C. R., Hodge, K. A., & Bowes, J. M. (2012). Searching for evidence-based practice: A
review of the research on educational interventions for intellectually gifted children in the early child-
hood years. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35(2), 103–128.
Wan, S. W.-Y. (2016). Differentiated instruction: Hong Kong prospective teachers’ teaching efficacy and
beliefs. Teachers and Teaching, 22(2), 148–176.

References 341
Wang, M., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. (1993a). Toward a knowledge base for school learning. Review of
Educational Research, 63 (3), 249–294.
Wang, M., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. (1993b). What helps students learn? Educational Leadership, 51
(4), 74–79.
Wang, M., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and aca-
demic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633–662.
Wang, M.-T., Brinkworth, M., & Eccles, J. (2013). Moderating effects of teacher–student relationship in ado-
lescent trajectories of emotional and behavioral adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 49(4), 690–705.
Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A
longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction,
28, 12–23.
Watson, C. (2014). Effective professional learning communities? The possibilities for teacher as agents of
change in schools. British Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 18–29.
Watson, S., Miller, T., Davis, L., & Carter, P. (2010). Teachers’ perceptions of the effective teacher. Research
in the Schools, 17(2), 11–22.
Watson, W., Sealey-Ruiz, Y., & Jackson, I. (2016). Daring to care: The role of culturally relevant care in
mentoring black and Latino male high school students. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 19(5), 980–1002.
Watters, J. J. (2010). Career decision making among gifted students: The mediation of teachers. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 54(3), 222–238.
Waugh, C. K., & Gronlund, N. E. (2012). Assessment of student achievement (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review
of Educational Research, 73(1), 89–122.
Webb, D. (2013). Pedagogies of hope. Studies in Philosophy & Education, 32(4), 397–414.
Weiland, I., Hudson, R., & Amador, J. (2014). Preservice formative assessment interviews: The development
of competent questioning. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 12(2), 329–252.
Weiss, I. R., & Miller, B. (2006, October). Deepening teacher content knowledge for teaching: A review of the
evidence. Retrieved from http://hub.mspnet.org/media/data/weissmiller.pdf?media_000000006130.pdf
Weiss, I. R., & Pasley, J. D. (2004, March). What is high-quality instruction? Educational Leadership, 61(5),
24–28.
Weissbourd, R., & Anderson, T. R. (2016). Do we value caring? Educational Leadership, 73(6), 54–58.
Welner, K. G., & Carter, P. L. (2013). Achievement gaps arise from opportunity gaps. In P. L. Carter & K.
G. Welner (Eds.), Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance (pp.
1–10). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality.
Princeton, NJ: Millikan Family Foundation and Educational Testing Service.
Wenglinsky, H. (2002). How schools matter: The link between teacher classroom practices and student
academic performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(12). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/
epaa/v10n12/
Wenglinsky, H. (2004). Closing the racial achievement gap: The role of reforming instructional practices.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(64). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n64/
Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Jour-
nal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419.
Wentzel, K. (2002). Are effective teachers like good parents? Teaching styles and student adjustment in early
adolescence. Child Development, 73, 287–301.
Wentzel, K. R. (2010). Students’ relationships with teachers. In J. L. Meece & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Handbook of
research on schools, schooling, and human development (pp. 75–91). New York: Routledge.
Westberg, K., & Archambault, F. (1997). A multi-site case study of successful classroom practices for high
ability students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41(1), 42–51.
Whalen, S. P. (1998). Flow and the engagement of talent: Implications for secondary schooling. NASSP
Bulletin, 82(595), 22–37.
Wharton-McDonald, R., Pressley, M., & Hampston, J. M. (1998). Literacy instruction in nine first-grade
classrooms: Teacher characteristics and student achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 99(2),
101–128.
Whipp, J. L., & Geronime, L. (2015). Experiences that predict early career teacher commitment to and
retention in high-poverty urban schools. Urban Education. Retrieved from http://uex.sagepub.com/
content/early/2015/03/26/0042085915574531.abstract

Wiggins, G. (2012). Feedback for learning: Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1),
10–16.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wiggins, G., & Wilbur, D. (2015). How to make your questions essential. Educational Leadership, 73(1),
10–15.
Wijnia, L., Loyens, S. M. M., van Gog, T., Derous, E., & Schmidt, H. G. (2014). Is there a role for direct
instruction in problem-based learning? Comparing student-constructed versus integrated model
answers. Learning and Instruction, 34, 22–31.
Williams, P., Sullivan, S., & Kohn, L. (2012). Out of the mouths of babes: What do secondary students
believe about outstanding teachers? American Secondary Education, 40(2), 104–119.
Williams, R. E. (2010). Administrator and teacher perceptions of the qualities of effective teacher. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA.
Williamson, R., & Blackburn, B. R. (2010). 4 myths about rigor in the classroom. Larchmont, NY: Eye on
Education.
Wills, H. P., Kamps, D., Hansen, B., Conklin, C., Bellinger, S., Neaderhiser, J., & Nsubuga, B. (2010). The
classwide function-based intervention team program. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for
Children and Youth, 54(3), 164–171.
Wingert, J. R., Wasileski, S. A., Peterson, L., Mathews, L. G., Lanou, A. J., & Clarke, D. (2011). Enhancing
integrative experiences: Evidence of student perceptions of learning gains from cross-course interac-
tions. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(3), 34–57.
Winters, M. A., Dixon, B. L., & Greene, J. P. (2012). Observed characteristics and teacher quality: Impacts of
sample selection on a value added model. Economics of Education Review, 31(1), 19–32.
Wise, Arthur E. (2007). Setting the Record Straight. Journal of Educational Controversy, 2(2). Retrieved from:
http://cedar.wwu.edu/jec/vol2/iss2/13
Wolk, S. (2002). Being good: Rethinking classroom management and student discipline. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Wolk, S. (2008). Joy in school. Educational Leadership, 66(1), 8–15.
Woo, H., & Henfield, M. S. (2016). Student and teacher factors’ impact on fourth grade students’ mathemat-
ics achievement: An HLM analysis of TIMSS 2007. Journal of Mathematics Education, 9(1), 69–87.
Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Weinstein, C. S. (2011). Student and teacher perspectives on classroom management.
In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, con-
temporary issues (pp. 181–223). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wright, S. P., Horn, S. P., & Sanders, W. L. (1997). Teacher and classroom context effects on student achieve-
ment: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 57–67.
Wubbels, T. (2011). An international perspective on classroom management: What should prospective
teachers learn? Journal of Teaching Education, 22(2), 113–131.
Xu, J. (2011). Homework completion at the secondary school level: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Educa-
tional Research, 103(3), 171–182.
Xu, Y., & Brown, G. T. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and
Xu, Z., Hannaway, J., & Taylor, C. (2011). Making a difference? The effects of Teach for America in high
school. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30, 447–469.
Xu, Z., Özek, U., & Hansen, M. (2014). Teacher performance trajectories in high- and low-poverty schools.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(4), 458–477.
Yeh, C., & Santagata, R. (2015). Preservice teachers’ learning to generate evidence-based hypotheses about
the impact of mathematics teaching on learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 21–34.
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007, December). Reviewing the evidence
on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Washington, DC: Regional Educational
Laboratory Southwest.
Young, V. M., & Kim, D. H. (2010). Using assessments for instructional improvement: A literature review.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 18(19), 1–36. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/809
Yuen, M., Chan, S., Chan, C., Fung, D. C.-L., Cheung, W. M., Kwan, T., & Leung, F. K.-S. (2016). Differen-
tiation in key learning areas for gifted students in regular classes. Gifted Education International. Retrieved
from http://gei.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/05/17/0261429416649047.abstract

References 343
Yurtseven, N., & Altun, S. (2015). Intercultural sensitivity in today’s global classes: Pre-service teachers’
perceptions. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 2(1), 49–54.
Zahorik, J., Halbach, A., Ehrle, K., & Molnar, A. (2003). Teaching practices for smaller classes. Educational
Leadership, 61(1), 75–77.
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student
academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational
Research, 86(4), 981–1015.
Zeiser, K. L., Taylor, J., Rickles, J., Garet, M. S., & Segeritz, M. (2014). Evidence of deeper learning outcomes:
Findings from the study of deeper learning opportunities and outcomes (Report 3). Washington, DC: Ameri-
can Institutes for Research.
Zieger, L. B., & Tan, J. (2012). Improving parent involvement in secondary schools through communication
technology. Journal of Literacy & Technology, 13(2), 30–54.
Zuiker, S., & Whitaker, J. R. (2014). Refining inquiry with multi-form assessment: Formative and summative
assessment functions for flexible inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 1037–1059.
Zwozdiak-Myers, P., & Capel, S. (2013). Communicating with pupils. In S. Capel, M. Leask, & T. Turner
(Eds.), Learning to teach in the secondary school: A companion to school experience. Abingdon, UK:
Routledge.

About the Author
James H. Stronge is president and CEO of Stronge and
Associates Educational Consulting, LLC, an educational con-
sulting company that focuses on teacher and leader effective-
ness with projects internationally and in many U.S. states.
Additionally, he holds a distinguished professorship—the
Heritage Professor of Education—in the Educational Policy,
Planning, and Leadership (EPPL) Area at the College of William and Mary,
in Williamsburg, Virginia. He teaches doctoral courses within the School
of Education’s EPPL Program, with a particular focus on human resource
leadership, legal issues in education, and research design.
Dr. Stronge’s research interests include policy and practice related to
teacher quality and effectiveness, teacher and administrator evaluation,
and teacher selection. He has worked with numerous state departments
of education, school districts, and national and international educational
organizations to design and implement evaluation and hiring systems for
teachers, administrators, and support personnel. Recently, he completed
work on new teacher and principal evaluation systems for American inter-
national schools in conjunction with the Association of American Schools
in South America and supported by the U.S. Department of State. Stronge
has made more than 350 presentations at regional, national, and interna-
tional conferences, and conducted workshops for educational organiza-
tions extensively throughout the United States and internationally. Among
his current research projects are (1) international comparative studies of
national award-winning teachers in the United States and China, and (2)
influences of economic and societal trends on student academic perfor-
mance in countries globally. His most recent book, What Makes a World-
Class School and How We Can Get There, was published in 2017 by ASCD.
Dr. Stronge has authored, coauthored, or edited 30 books and more
than 200 articles, chapters, and technical reports. He was a founding
member of the board of directors for the Consortium for Research on
Educational Assessment and Teaching Effectiveness. He was selected as
the 2012 national recipient of the Millman Award from CREATE in rec-
ognition of his work in the field of teacher and administrator evaluation.
348

QualitiesOfEffectiveTeachers3rdEd Stronge 0318

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

QualitiesOfEffectiveTeachers3rdEd Stronge 0318

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

QualitiesOfEffectiveTeachers3rdEd Stronge 0318

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

QUALITIES OF EFFECTIVE TEACHERS

Browse excerpts from ASCD books: www.ascd.org/books

PAPERBACK ISBN: 978-1-4166-2586-5 ASCD product #118042 n3/18

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 4 2/5/18 7:04 AM

Part 1: What It Means to Be an Effective Teacher. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 2: Professional Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Chapter 3: Instructional Planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Chapter 4: Instructional Delivery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Chapter 5: Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

Chapter 6: Learning Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Chapter 7: Professionalism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

Chapter 8: Effective Teaching: What Does It All Mean? . . . . . . . . . . . 252

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 5 2/5/18 7:04 AM

Part 2: Teacher Effectiveness: Resources You Can Use. . . . . . . . . 261

Section I: Teacher Skills Assessment Checklists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263

Section II: Positive Qualities and Red Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

About the Author. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 6 2/5/18 7:04 AM

How We Came to Know What We

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 9 2/5/18 7:04 AM

Organization of the Book

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 10 2/5/18 7:04 AM

communication and complexity of instructional content by using appro-

Intended Audiences for the Book

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 11 2/5/18 7:04 AM

• Teachers who wish to improve their own performance through

Each group contributes to the education of students and has a vested

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 12 2/5/18 7:04 AM

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 3 2/5/18 7:04 AM

is important to understand what teachers should do to promote positive

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 4 2/5/18 7:04 AM

replace a teacher who is in the bottom 5th percentile of effectiveness with

At-Risk and High-Ability Students

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 5 2/5/18 7:04 AM

Effective Teachers of At-Risk Students

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 6 2/5/18 7:04 AM

(Reardon, 2013). As a result of this shift, studies indicate that Americans

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 7 2/5/18 7:04 AM

• Segregation of students in which high concentrations of minority

And, perhaps most germane to the discussion presented in this book,

Effective Teachers of High-Ability Students

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 8 2/5/18 7:04 AM

have not been formally identified as gifted. High-ability students generally

In addition to these qualities, other types of giftedness or intelligence

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 9 2/5/18 7:04 AM

challenge to promote learning (Little, 2012). Research also highlights the

Effective Teachers in the 21st Century

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 10 2/5/18 7:04 AM

Framework for Effective Teaching

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 11 2/5/18 7:04 AM

1.1 Framework for Effective Teaching

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 12 2/5/18 7:04 AM

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 301 2/5/18 7:04 AM

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 302 2/5/18 7:04 AM

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 303 2/5/18 7:04 AM

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 304 2/5/18 7:04 AM

QualityEffTeacher3rdEd.indd 305 2/5/18 7:04 AM