Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Infrastructure for teacher reflection and instructional change: An exploratory study

  • Published:
Journal of Educational Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the US, instruction reforms, especially those intended to help teachers move beyond typical teaching practices, have regularly fallen short of aspirations. An important reason for this state of affairs is that reforms, often fail to provide teachers sufficient infrastructure they need to overcome fundamental uncertainties of teaching. Progress has been made in recent years in developing conceptual frameworks that help explain why some professional learning experiences provided by infrastructure might be more effective than others. Despite the progress that has been made, however, these new ways of thinking have generally not made deep inroads into practice and there is a scarcity of research on what happens when new ideas about professional learning are put into practice. This study of 887 teachers in a large urban district attempts to address some of these gaps in the literature by investigating how teachers’ engagement in a range of different professional learning experiences provided through infrastructure are associated with two learning outcomes—reflective practice and changed literacy instructional practices. We found that teachers were more likely to reflect on their practice and change their literacy instruction when their learning experiences focused directly on classroom teaching. We also found that teachers who worked with coaches more often and who engaged in reflective practice more regularly were more likely to report changing their literacy teaching.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In a set of analyses not displayed in Table 1, we introduced aggregate measures of teachers’ learning experiences into the school-level model one at a time. We viewed these aggregate measures as indicators of the prevalence of infrastructure in schools, and were interested in seeing whether and how such infrastructure was associated with average levels of reflective practice in schools. None of the aggregate measures of teachers’ professional learning experiences were significantly associated with teachers’ engagement in reflective practice.

  2. As with the reflective practice outcome, we examined the associations between aggregate measures of teachers’ professional learning experiences and reported changes in their literacy instruction. All but one of these associations were statistically significant. In some models, overall levels of teacher collaboration in a school were significantly and negatively associated with reported changes in literacy instructional practices. This association, however, was not significant for all models.

References

  • Barnes, C. A. (2002). Standards reform in high-poverty schools: Managing conflict and building capacity. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, B. (1987). The effectiveness of staff development training practices: A meta-analysis. Oregon: University of Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73(2), 125–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1990). Making the most of experience. Studies in Continuing Education, 12(2), 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A., Camburn, E., & Seashore Louis, K. (1999). Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(Supplement), 751–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camburn, E. M. (2010). Embedded teacher learning opportunities as a site for reflective practice: An exploratory study. American Journal of Education, 116(4), 463–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camburn, E. M., & Han, S. W. (2009). Investigating connections between distributed leadership and instructional change. Distributed Leadership: Different Perspectives, 7, 25–45. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9737-9_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K. (2011). Teaching and its predicaments. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1990). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 347–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102(2), 294–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Moffitt, S. L. (2009). The ordeal of equality: Did federal regulation fix the schools?. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., Moffitt, S. L., & Goldin, S. (2007). Policy and practice: The dilemma. American Journal of Education, 113(4), 515–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., Peurach, D. J., Glazer, J. L., Gates, K. E., & Goldin, S. (2014). Improvement by design: The promise of better schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correnti, R., & Rowan, B. (2007). Opening up the black box: Literacy instruction in schools participating in three comprehensive school reform programs. American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 298–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cristol, K., & Ramsey, B. S. (2014). Common core in the districts: An early look at early implements. Washington, DC: Thomas Fordham Institute.

  • Crockett, M. D. (2002). Inquiry as professional development: Creating dilemmas through teachers’ work. Teaching and Teacher Education., 18(2002), 609–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, P. (1987). Adult learning in the social context. London; New York: Published in the USA in association with Methuen, Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, M. B. (2002). Professional development to promote schoolwide inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(2002), 243–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C. C., Perry, R. R., & Hurd, J. (2009). Improving mathematics instruction through lesson study: A theoretical model and North American case. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12(4), 285–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1990). Informal and incidental learning in the workplace. London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Desimone, L. M., & Birman, B. F. (2003). Providing effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower program. Science Educator, 12(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugach, M. C., & Johnson, L. J. (1995). Unlocking expertise among classroom teachers through structured dialogue—Extending research on peer collaboration. Exceptional Children, 62(2), 101–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C. P., Metzger, M., Champion, K. M., & Sardin, L. (2008). Improving preschool classroom processes: Preliminary findings from a randomized trial implemented in Head Start settings. Early childhood research quarterly, 23(1), 10–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers, C. R. (2002). Seeing student learning: Teacher change and the role of reflection. Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 230–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowan, B., Camburn, E., & Barnes, C. (2004). Benefiting from comprehensive school reform: A review of research on CSR implementation. In C. Cross (Ed.), Putting the pieces together: Lessons from comprehensive school reform research (pp. 1–52). Washington DC: National Clearinghouse for Comprehensive School Reform.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowan, B., Correnti, R., Miller, R., & Camburn, E. M. (2009). School improvement by design: Lessons from a study of comprehensive school reform programs. In B. Schneider & G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1997). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambrige: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (Vol. 5126). London: Basic books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, C. (2007). Moving beyond identification: assisting schools in improvement. Washington DC: Center on Education Policy. Retrieved June 6, 2015, from http://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=307

  • Smylie, M. A. (1995). Teacher learning in the workplace: Implications for school reform. In T. R. G. M. Huberman (Ed.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tremmel, R. (1993). Zen and the art of reflective practice in teacher education. Harvard Educational Review, 63(4), 434–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 702–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (1996). Reflective teaching : An introduction. Mahwah, New York: L. Erlbaum Associates Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported with a Grant from the US Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences, award #R305E040085.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Eric M. Camburn

  2. University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA

    Seong Won Han

Authors
  1. Eric M. Camburn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seong Won Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric M. Camburn.

Appendix: Description of variables

Appendix: Description of variables

Reflective practice (α = 0.87)

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your professional learning experiences this year?

  • Gave me many opportunities to work on aspects of my teaching that I am trying to improve

  • Included enough time to think carefully about, try, and evaluate new ideas

  • Made me pay closer attention to particular things I was doing in the classroom

  • Led me to seek out additional information from other teachers, an instructional leader (e.g., coach), or some other source

  • Led me to think about an aspect of my teaching in a new way

  • Led me to try new things in the classroom

  • Made me question the teaching methods I use

  • Made me question my beliefs and assumptions about which teaching methods work best with students

Changes in English/Language art instructional practice (α = 0.94)

Please indicate how much you changed the following aspects of your reading/Language arts or English teaching this year:

  • Student assessment

  • Student grouping

  • Materials used

  • The topics covered

  • The teaching methods you use

  • The kinds of work you have students to

  • The kinds of questions you ask students

  • Your understanding of the needs of individual students in your class

Professional development on instruction (α = 0.81)

Please indicate how many professional development sessions you participated in this year focused on the following topics:

  • Classroom management and/or student discipline

  • Educational technology

  • Reading/Language arts or English teaching

  • Classroom assessments

  • State or district standardized assessments

  • Curriculum materials or frameworks

  • Standards (content or performance standards)

Professional development on schoolwide issues (α = 0.82)

Please indicate how many professional development sessions you participated in this year focused on the following topics:

  • School decision-making and team building

  • School improvement planning

  • Social services for students

  • Safety or school climate

  • Parent involvement/community relations

  • Multicultural/diversity issues

Collaboration on instruction (α = 0.81)

This school year, how often did you observe any of the following people teach?

  • Another classroom teacher

This school year, how often did the following people observe you teach?

  • Another classroom teacher

This school year, how often did the following people give you feedback after observing you teach?

  • Another classroom teacher

This school year, how often did you have in depth discussions about your teaching with any of the following people?

  • Another classroom teacher

This school year, how often did any of the following people review your students’ work?

  • Another classroom teacher

Work with instructional experts (α = 0.86)

This school year, how often did you observe any of the following people teach?

  • A teacher-leader (coach, facilitator, mentor teacher)

This school year, how often did the following people observe you teach?

  • A teacher-leader (coach, facilitator, mentor teacher)

This school year, how often did the following people give you feedback after observing you teach?

  • A teacher-leader (coach, facilitator, mentor teacher)

This school year, how often did you have in depth discussions about your teaching with any of the following people?

  • A teacher-leader (coach, facilitator, mentor teacher)

This school year, how often did any of the following people review your students’ work?

  • A teacher-leader (coach, facilitator, mentor teacher)

Social support for instructional improvement (α = 0.90)

Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the school in which you work.

  • Teachers at this school respect colleagues who are expert in their craft

  • Teachers in this school trust each other

  • Teachers in this school really care about each other

  • Teachers respect other teachers who take the lead in school improvement efforts

  • Many teachers openly express their professional views at faculty meetings

  • Teachers in this school are willing to question one another’s views on issues of teaching and learning

  • We do a good job of talking through views, opinions, and values

  • Teachers are expected to continually learn and seek out new ideas in this school

  • Teachers are encouraged to experiment in their classrooms in this school

  • Teachers are encouraged to take risks in order to improve their teaching

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Camburn, E.M., Han, S.W. Infrastructure for teacher reflection and instructional change: An exploratory study. J Educ Change 16, 511–533 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-015-9252-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-015-9252-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation