Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences) ›› 2021, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (5): 12-54.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2021.05.002
• ? • Previous Articles Next Articles
Yi Wei1, Bin Luo2, Xiuyan Lin2, Zhijun Yang2, Meng Wang2
Online:
2021-05-20
Published:
2021-05-24
Yi Wei, Bin Luo, Xiuyan Lin, Zhijun Yang, Meng Wang. The Effects of District-level and School-level Teaching-research Activities on Student Achievement: Evidence from Haidian District of Beijing[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2021, 39(5): 12-54.
"
维度 | 一级指标 | 二级指标 |
1. 教师背景信息 | 个人背景 | 年龄;性别 |
教育背景 | 学历背景;学科训练 | |
2. 工作情况 | 职位 | 与学校劳动关系;职称 |
工作经历 | 教龄;行政职务;工作奖项 | |
时间安排 | 教学时间;其他时间 | |
3. 教学情况 | 教学实践 交流合作 自我效能 | 课堂教学活动;学生评价方法; 同事交流与合作; 与教学实践相关的自我效能 |
4. 教师专业发展 | 区级常规教研活动 | 教研活动参与频率 |
区级专题教研活动 | “基于学科能力表现的教学改进”专题教研活动的参与频率 | |
“考试评价研讨”专题教研活动的参与频率 | ||
“深度学习”专题教研活动的参与频率 | ||
校本教研活动 | 正式和非正式校本教研活动参与频率 | |
5. 评价与反馈 | 评价主体来源和类型 | 区教研员;学校教学管理干部;同事;自身 |
影响 | 对教学实践和学生成绩的影响 | |
6. 学校氛围和支持 | 学校环境 | 对教研活动的支出;对教师个人和专业发展的支持 |
工作满意度 | 职业认同感;学校归属感;倦怠感;工作压力 |
"
几乎不 | 每学期1—2次 | 每学期3—4次 | 每学期5次以上 | ||
教材教法 | 教龄>5 | 2.3% | 4.0% | 11.4% | 82.4% |
教龄≤5 | 2.6% | 9.7% | 20.2% | 67.5% | |
研究课 | 教龄>5 | 5.6% | 31.3% | 38.7% | 24.5% |
教龄≤5 | 4.7% | 27.8% | 39.1% | 28.3% | |
专家讲座 | 教龄>5 | 3.3% | 40.0% | 32.3% | 24.4% |
教龄≤5 | 5.5% | 37.8% | 31.2% | 25.5% | |
课题项目研讨 | 教龄>5 | 18.5% | 41.6% | 23.7% | 16.3% |
教龄≤5 | 19.9% | 37.8% | 26.0% | 16.3% | |
中心组活动 | 教龄>5 | 76.3% | 9.7% | 6.5% | 7.5% |
教龄≤5 | 75.6% | 13.1% | 6.6% | 4.7% | |
跨学科教研 | 教龄>5 | 70.6% | 23.8% | 3.8% | 1.8% |
教龄≤5 | 74.5% | 20.2% | 3.9% | 1.3% | |
学术会议 | 教龄>5 | 57.4% | 36.4% | 4.6% | 1.5% |
教龄≤5 | 65.1% | 31.2% | 3.1% | 0.5% | |
教师自己的优秀经验和成果分享 | 教龄>5 | 52.1% | 40.2% | 5.9% | 1.8% |
教龄≤5 | 63.3% | 31.0% | 4.2% | 1.6% |
"
几乎不 | 每学期1—2次 | 每学期3—4次 | 每学期5次以上 | ||
学科课程的整合与开发 | 教龄>5 | 18.3% | 39.8% | 21.7% | 20.3% |
教龄≤5 | 21.3% | 39.4% | 26.0% | 13.4% | |
学科核心知识与思想方法的理解 | 教龄>5 | 5.6% | 29.6% | 30.4% | 34.5% |
教龄≤5 | 7.1% | 33.1% | 35.7% | 24.2% | |
学科关键问题的确定 | 教龄>5 | 6.3% | 27.4% | 32.2% | 34.1% |
教龄≤5 | 8.7% | 31.5% | 36.0% | 23.9% | |
单元整体教学 | 教龄>5 | 4.6% | 17.5% | 29.5% | 48.5% |
教龄≤5 | 6.3% | 21.5% | 35.4% | 36.8% | |
深度学习活动的设计与实施 | 教龄>5 | 8.2% | 35.7% | 31.3% | 24.8% |
教龄≤5 | 13.4% | 34.1% | 34.7% | 17.9% | |
促进学习的持续性评价 | 教龄>5 | 11.5% | 41.1% | 28.6% | 18.8% |
教龄≤5 | 17.3% | 39.1% | 29.4% | 14.2% | |
中高考命题方向和命题思路 | 教龄>5 | 9.4% | 43.1% | 28.4% | 19.0% |
教龄≤5 | 19.7% | 43.0% | 25.7% | 11.6% | |
分析和使用学生评价数据 | 教龄>5 | 13.0% | 45.0% | 27.9% | 14.1% |
教龄≤5 | 25.7% | 42.0% | 24.4% | 7.9% | |
跨学科能力的教学 | 教龄>5 | 33.2% | 43.6% | 15.3% | 8.0% |
教龄≤5 | 38.9% | 43.3% | 13.7% | 4.2% |
"
参与人数 | 未参与人数 | 参与率 | |||
基于学科能力表现的教学改进项目 | 总体 | 1118 | 842 | 57.0% | |
教师教龄 | 教龄>5 | 988 | 596 | 62.4% | |
教龄≤5 | 130 | 246 | 34.6% | ||
教师类型 | 学科带头人 | 335 | 170 | 66.3% | |
市/国家级研究课等获奖 | 425 | 218 | 66.1% | ||
骨干教师 | 611 | 320 | 65.6% | ||
考试评价研讨项目 | 总体 | 866 | 1094 | 44.2% | |
教师教龄 | 教龄>5 | 759 | 825 | 47.9% | |
教龄≤5 | 107 | 269 | 28.5% | ||
教师类型 | 学科带头人 | 280 | 225 | 55.4% | |
市/国家级研究课等获奖 | 351 | 292 | 54.6% | ||
骨干教师 | 475 | 456 | 51.0% | ||
深度学习项目 | 总体 | 1105 | 855 | 56.4% | |
教师教龄 | 教龄>5 | 953 | 631 | 60.2% | |
教龄≤5 | 152 | 224 | 40.4% | ||
教师类型 | 学科带头人 | 326 | 179 | 64.6% | |
市/国家级研究课等获奖 | 421 | 222 | 65.5% | ||
骨干教师 | 578 | 353 | 62.1% |
"
从不 | 较少 | 有时 | 经常 | ||
与同事分享教学经验与资源 | 教龄>5 | 0.0% | 1.3% | 27.3% | 71.4% |
教龄≤5 | 0.0% | 5.5% | 33.1% | 61.4% | |
与同事讨论某类学生的学业发展问题 | 教龄>5 | 0.1% | 2.9% | 35.6% | 61.4% |
教龄≤5 | 0.3% | 5.2% | 37.3% | 57.2% | |
与同事研讨教学中遇到的问题 | 教龄>5 | 0.0% | 1.4% | 20.9% | 77.7% |
教龄≤5 | 0.3% | 1.6% | 25.7% | 72.4% | |
接受专家指导 | 教龄>5 | 0.8% | 16.9% | 51.1% | 31.1% |
教龄≤5 | 1.6% | 26.8% | 44.4% | 27.3% | |
参与校本课程及其他教辅材料开发 | 教龄>5 | 2.4% | 24.1% | 43.5% | 29.9% |
教龄≤5 | 7.9% | 27.6% | 40.4% | 24.1% | |
集体备课 | 教龄>5 | 0.2% | 2.4% | 18.5% | 78.8% |
教龄≤5 | 1.6% | 6.0% | 25.7% | 66.7% | |
校内听评课 | 教龄>5 | 0.0% | 3.8% | 45.3% | 50.9% |
教龄≤5 | 0.5% | 4.5% | 43.6% | 51.4% |
"
路径 | 中介效应 | 95%置信区间 | |
2.5%下限 | 2.5%上限 | ||
学科能力→校本教研→教学组织行为 | 0.019 | 0.002 | 0.036 |
学科能力→校本教研→评价策略 | 0.018 | 0.002 | 0.034 |
学科能力→校本教研→自我效能 | 0.026 | 0.003 | 0.048 |
考试评价研讨→校本教研→教学组织行为 | 0.032 | 0.016 | 0.049 |
考试评价研讨→校本教研→评价策略 | 0.029 | 0.015 | 0.049 |
考试评价研讨→校本教研→自我效能 | 0.043 | 0.022 | 0.066 |
深度学习→校本教研→教学组织行为 | 0.018 | 0.003 | 0.034 |
深度学习→校本教研→评价策略 | 0.016 | 0.002 | 0.034 |
深度学习→校本教研→自我效能 | 0.024 | 0.003 | 0.045 |
"
增值估计 | 标准分 | |||||||||||
总体 | 2016年 | 2017年 | 2018年 | 2019年 | 总体 | 2016年 | 2017年 | 2018年 | 2019年 | |||
数学 | 一组 | 0.88 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.92 | 0.57 | 0.76 | 0.85 | 0.84 | 0.82 | 0.61 | |
二组 | 0.48 | 0.56 | 0.53 | 0.45 | 0.31 | 0.21 | 0.27 | 0.25 | 0.20 | 0.15 | ||
三组 | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.04 | ?0.34 | ?0.37 | ?0.30 | ?0.28 | ?0.43 | ||
四组 | ?0.65 | ?0.74 | ?0.72 | ?0.66 | ?0.44 | ?1.30 | ?1.37 | ?1.25 | ?1.26 | ?1.44 | ||
语文 | 一组 | 0.82 | 0.82 | 0.84 | 0.90 | 0.65 | 0.67 | 0.68 | 0.71 | 0.72 | 0.60 | |
二组 | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.47 | 0.47 | 0.37 | 0.20 | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.20 | 0.12 | ||
三组 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.07 | ?0.32 | ?0.31 | ?0.30 | ?0.28 | ?0.40 | ||
四组 | ?0.61 | ?0.67 | ?0.57 | ?0.65 | ?0.53 | ?1.17 | ?1.28 | ?1.06 | ?1.16 | ?1.31 | ||
化学 | 一组 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 1.03 | 1.09 | 0.66 | 0.67 | 0.74 | 0.67 | 0.75 | 0.57 | |
二组 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.72 | 0.58 | 0.41 | 0.21 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.18 | 0.13 | ||
三组 | 0.01 | ?0.04 | 0.05 | 0.00 | ?0.07 | ?0.53 | ?0.55 | ?0.49 | ?0.47 | ?0.64 | ||
四组 | ?0.71 | ?0.70 | ?0.82 | ?0.71 | ?0.45 | ?1.52 | ?1.51 | ?1.61 | ?1.40 | ?1.60 |
"
增值估计 | 标准分 | |||||||||||
总体 | 2016年 | 2017年 | 2018年 | 2019年 | 总体 | 2016年 | 2017年 | 2018年 | 2019年 | |||
数学 | 一组 | 0.87 | 0.96 | 0.92 | 0.89 | 0.62 | 0.77 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.81 | 0.66 | |
二组 | 0.44 | 0.49 | 0.50 | 0.43 | 0.28 | 0.19 | 0.23 | 0.26 | 0.20 | 0.12 | ||
三组 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.09 | ?0.02 | ?0.33 | ?0.32 | ?0.27 | ?0.26 | ?0.48 | ||
四组 | ?0.61 | ?0.70 | ?0.67 | ?0.63 | ?0.37 | ?1.23 | ?1.29 | ?1.17 | ?1.21 | ?1.36 | ||
语文 | 一组 | 0.81 | 0.84 | 0.80 | 0.79 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.71 | 0.69 | 0.70 | |
二组 | 0.37 | 0.45 | 0.41 | 0.38 | 0.22 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.18 | 0.02 | ||
三组 | 0.02 | 0.09 | ?0.06 | 0.07 | ?0.02 | ?0.32 | ?0.29 | ?0.32 | ?0.21 | ?0.42 | ||
四组 | ?0.51 | ?0.66 | ?0.45 | ?0.56 | ?0.35 | ?1.01 | ?1.27 | ?0.85 | ?1.00 | ?1.04 | ||
化学 | 一组 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 1.01 | 1.10 | 0.65 | 0.69 | 0.78 | 0.70 | 0.75 | 0.57 | |
二组 | 0.56 | 0.52 | 0.63 | 0.55 | 0.40 | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.14 | 0.14 | ||
三组 | 0.01 | ?0.07 | 0.02 | 0.05 | ?0.05 | ?0.52 | ?0.55 | ?0.48 | ?0.43 | ?0.62 | ||
四组 | ?0.67 | ?0.59 | ?0.73 | ?0.74 | ?0.44 | ?1.47 | ?1.38 | ?1.51 | ?1.43 | ?1.61 |
"
一模 | 二模 | |||||||||
大于 | 小于 | X2 | p值 | 大于 | 小于 | X2 | p值 | |||
教材教法分析 | 语文 | 98.4% | 99.3% | 0.21 | 0.65 | 98.2% | 100.0% | 1.47 | 0.23 | |
数学 | 95.4% | 98.5% | 1.82 | 0.18 | 95.2% | 99.2% | 3.39 | 0.07 | ||
化学 | 98.6% | 100.0% | 0.10 | 0.75 | 98.6% | 100.0% | 0.13 | 0.72 | ||
研究课 | 语文 | 94.7% | 97.9% | 2.10 | 0.15 | 94.7% | 97.9% | 2.00 | 0.16 | |
数学 | 92.5% | 93.1% | 0.00 | 0.95 | 92.9% | 91.5% | 0.11 | 0.74 | ||
化学 | 97.2% | 97.1% | 0.00 | 1.00 | 97.2% | 97.3% | 0.00 | 1.00 | ||
专家讲座 | 语文 | 97.3% | 100.0% | 2.90 | 0.09 | 97.3% | 100.0% | 2.84 | 0.09 | |
数学 | 93.3% | 95.4% | 0.47 | 0.49 | 92.9% | 96.9% | 2.18 | 0.14 | ||
化学 | 99.1% | 100.0% | 0.00 | 1.00 | 99.1% | 100.0% | 0.00 | 0.98 | ||
课题项目研讨及分享 | 语文 | 86.1% | 82.8% | 0.82 | 0.36 | 86.2% | 82.5% | 0.98 | 0.32 | |
数学 | 72.2% | 67.2% | 1.02 | 0.31 | 72.0% | 67.7% | 0.74 | 0.39 | ||
化学 | 96.7% | 92.9% | 1.11 | 0.29 | 96.7% | 93.2% | 0.91 | 0.34 | ||
中心组成员活动 | 语文 | 21.8% | 15.2% | 2.75 | 0.10 | 21.5% | 16.1% | 1.80 | 0.18 | |
数学 | 25.7% | 16.0% | 4.84 | <0.05 | 25.3% | 17.7% | 2.84 | 0.09 | ||
化学 | 38.8% | 20.0% | 7.46 | <0.01 | 39.3% | 19.2% | 8.92 | <0.01 | ||
跨学科教研 | 语文 | 28.9% | 35.2% | 1.93 | 0.16 | 29.3% | 33.6% | 0.83 | 0.36 | |
数学 | 23.8% | 22.9% | 0.01 | 0.91 | 23.8% | 23.1% | 0.00 | 0.96 | ||
化学 | 35.5% | 32.9% | 0.07 | 0.79 | 36.0% | 31.5% | 0.31 | 0.58 | ||
国家、市、区级学术会议 | 语文 | 46.0% | 39.3% | 1.85 | 0.17 | 45.8% | 39.9% | 1.44 | 0.23 | |
数学 | 34.9% | 32.8% | 0.12 | 0.73 | 34.2% | 35.4% | 0.02 | 0.89 | ||
化学 | 50.5% | 44.3% | 0.58 | 0.45 | 50.2% | 45.2% | 0.37 | 0.54 | ||
分享自己的优秀经验及成果 | 语文 | 51.9% | 40.0% | 6.23 | <0.05 | 51.4% | 42.0% | 3.82 | 0.05 | |
数学 | 41.4% | 36.6% | 0.79 | 0.37 | 41.1% | 37.7% | 0.37 | 0.54 | ||
化学 | 57.9% | 47.1% | 2.07 | 0.15 | 58.8% | 45.2% | 3.51 | 0.06 |
"
一模 | 二模 | |||||||||
大于 | 小于 | X2 | p值 | 大于 | 小于 | X2 | p值 | |||
学科课程的整合与开发 | 语文 | 89.4% | 84.8% | 1.94 | 0.16 | 88.9% | 86.7% | 0.36 | 0.55 | |
数学 | 71.5% | 74.8% | 0.39 | 0.53 | 70.8% | 77.7% | 2.11 | 0.15 | ||
化学 | 83.6% | 80.0% | 0.27 | 0.60 | 83.4% | 80.8% | 0.11 | 0.75 | ||
学科核心知识、思想方法的理解 | 语文 | 95.5% | 93.8% | 0.41 | 0.52 | 95.3% | 94.4% | 0.06 | 0.80 | |
数学 | 92.7% | 93.1% | 0.00 | 1.00 | 92.5% | 93.8% | 0.12 | 0.73 | ||
化学 | 95.3% | 94.3% | 0.00 | 0.97 | 95.3% | 94.5% | 0.00 | 1.00 | ||
学科教学关键问题的确定和解决 | 语文 | 95.2% | 92.4% | 1.25 | 0.26 | 94.9% | 93.7% | 0.12 | 0.73 | |
数学 | 90.4% | 89.3% | 0.04 | 0.84 | 90.0% | 90.8% | 0.01 | 0.92 | ||
化学 | 96.3% | 94.3% | 0.14 | 0.71 | 96.2% | 94.5% | 0.08 | 0.78 | ||
单元整体教学 | 语文 | 96.6% | 93.8% | 1.79 | 0.18 | 96.6% | 93.7% | 1.91 | 0.17 | |
数学 | 92.9% | 93.9% | 0.04 | 0.84 | 92.5% | 95.4% | 0.93 | 0.34 | ||
化学 | 96.3% | 98.6% | 0.32 | 0.57 | 96.2% | 98.6% | 0.40 | 0.53 | ||
深度学习活动的设计与实施 | 语文 | 94.5% | 93.1% | 0.21 | 0.65 | 94.7% | 92.3% | 0.82 | 0.36 | |
数学 | 84.1% | 89.3% | 1.82 | 0.18 | 83.5% | 91.5% | 4.62 | <0.05 | ||
化学 | 94.9% | 95.7% | 0.00 | 1.00 | 94.8% | 95.9% | 0.00 | 0.95 | ||
促进学习的持续性评价 | 语文 | 91.0% | 92.4% | 0.15 | 0.70 | 91.0% | 92.3% | 0.11 | 0.74 | |
数学 | 79.9% | 84.0% | 0.84 | 0.36 | 79.3% | 86.2% | 2.64 | 0.10 | ||
化学 | 92.1% | 94.3% | 0.13 | 0.72 | 92.4% | 93.2% | 0.00 | 1.00 | ||
中高考命题方向和命题思路 | 语文 | 90.8% | 90.3% | 0.00 | 0.99 | 90.7% | 90.9% | 0.00 | 1.00 | |
数学 | 84.7% | 90.1% | 2.00 | 0.16 | 84.3% | 91.5% | 3.79 | 0.05 | ||
化学 | 92.5% | 87.1% | 1.29 | 0.26 | 92.4% | 87.7% | 0.99 | 0.32 | ||
分析和使用学生评价数据 | 语文 | 85.0% | 87.6% | 0.44 | 0.51 | 84.9% | 88.1% | 0.73 | 0.39 | |
数学 | 81.4% | 84.0% | 0.31 | 0.58 | 80.8% | 86.2% | 1.64 | 0.20 | ||
化学 | 91.6% | 87.1% | 0.75 | 0.39 | 91.5% | 87.7% | 0.52 | 0.47 | ||
跨学科能力的教学 | 语文 | 67.6% | 60.7% | 2.20 | 0.14 | 68.0% | 58.7% | 4.06 | 0.04 | |
数学 | 61.1% | 58.8% | 0.14 | 0.71 | 59.7% | 63.8% | 0.57 | 0.45 | ||
化学 | 79.9% | 71.4% | 1.73 | 0.19 | 80.6% | 69.9% | 3.01 | 0.08 |
"
大于 | 小于 | chi/t | p | ||
语文 | 校内听评课 | 100.00% | 100.00% | ||
集体备课 | 99.68% | 100.00% | 0.554 | 0.457 | |
参与校本课程及其他教学辅助材料的开发 | 98.06% | 97.08% | 0.612 | 0.434 | |
就教学中遇到的问题与同事进行研讨 | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
与同事讨论某类学生的学业发展问题 | 99.84% | 100.00% | 0.277 | 0.599 | |
与同事分享教学经验与资源 | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
接受专家指导 | 99.84% | 100.00% | 0.277 | 0.599 | |
校本教研-正式 | 3.398(0.419) | 3.311(0.443) | 2.301 | <0.05 | |
校本教研-非正式 | 3.740(0.390) | 3.653(0.410) | 2.483 | <0.05 | |
数学 | 校内听评课 | 100.00% | 100.00% | ||
集体备课 | 99.79% | 100.00% | 0.341 | 0.559 | |
参与校本课程及其他教学辅助材料的开发 | 95.71% | 91.82% | 3.571 | 0.059 | |
就教学中遇到的问题与同事进行研讨 | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
与同事讨论某类学生的学业发展问题 | 99.57% | 100.00% | 0.684 | 0.408 | |
与同事分享教学经验与资源 | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
接受专家指导 | 98.93% | 96.86% | 3.227 | 0.072 | |
校本教研-正式 | 3.282(0.463) | 3.176(0.482) | 2.420 | <0.05 | |
校本教研-非正式 | 3.625(0.432) | 3.579(0.466) | 1.108 | 0.269 | |
化学 | 校内听评课 | 100.00% | 100.00% | ||
集体备课 | 100.00% | 98.68% | 2.790 | 0.095 | |
参与校本课程及其他教学辅助材料的开发 | 99.06% | 94.74% | 5.100 | <0.05 | |
就教学中遇到的问题与同事进行研讨 | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
与同事讨论某类学生的学业发展问题 | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
与同事分享教学经验与资源 | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
接受专家指导 | 99.06% | 97.37% | 1.160 | 0.281 | |
校本教研-正式 | 3.377(0.432) | 3.118(0.572) | 3.595 | <0.001 | |
校本教研-非正式 | 3.689(0.406) | 3.530(0.490) | 2.516 | <0.05 |
"
一模 | 二模 | |||||||
增值估计 (学校随机) | 增值估计 (学校固定) | 标准分 | 增值估计 (学校随机) | 增值估计 (学校固定) | 标准分 | |||
数学 | 一组 | 0.010 | 0.056 | 0.771 | 0.011 | 0.055 | 0.786 | |
二组 | 0.006 | ?0.001 | 0.206 | 0.006 | ?0.001 | 0.183 | ||
三组 | 0.002 | ?0.004 | ?0.274 | 0.001 | ?0.001 | ?0.273 | ||
四组 | ?0.022 | ?0.011 | ?1.225 | ?0.022 | ?0.008 | ?1.159 | ||
语文 | 一组 | 0.009 | 0.061 | 0.671 | 0.012 | 0.053 | 0.708 | |
二组 | 0.006 | 0.003 | 0.194 | 0.007 | 0.001 | 0.151 | ||
三组 | 0.002 | 0.014 | ?0.267 | 0.001 | 0.008 | ?0.278 | ||
四组 | ?0.021 | ?0.018 | ?1.102 | ?0.025 | ?0.015 | ?1.022 | ||
化学 | 一组 | 0.016 | 0.002 | 0.690 | 0.015 | 0.003 | 0.707 | |
二组 | 0.010 | ?0.001 | 0.203 | 0.009 | 0.005 | 0.168 | ||
三组 | 0.000 | 0.023 | ?0.464 | 0.000 | 0.031 | ?0.451 | ||
四组 | ?0.030 | ?0.011 | ?1.352 | ?0.028 | ?0.018 | ?1.351 |
"
一模 | 二模 | |
年级组长 | 0.004 | 0.03 |
(0.026) | (0.027) | |
备课组长 | 0.014 | 0.018 |
(0.019) | (0.020) | |
学科教研组长 | ?0.004 | 0.001 |
(0.025) | (0.026) | |
没有职务 | 0 | ?0.02 |
(0.027) | (0.028) | |
区/市/国家骨干教师 | 0.103*** | 0.115*** |
(0.020) | (0.021) | |
区/市/国家学科带头人 | 0.102*** | 0.091*** |
(0.023) | (0.024) | |
市/国家研究课、教学设计、教学展示 | 0.048* | 0.050* |
(0.020) | (0.021) | |
市/国家科研论文 | 0.018 | 0.008 |
(0.020) | (0.021) |
"
大于(n=272) | 小于(n=276) | p值 | 低增值教师 | 中等增值教师 | 高增值教师 | p值 | |
教材教法分析 | 98.2% | 98.2% | 1.000 | 99.1% | 98.2% | 97.2% | 0.573 |
研究课 | 93.8% | 94.9% | 0.681 | 97.3% | 92.1% | 98.1% | <0.05 |
专家讲座 | 97.4% | 96.0% | 0.492 | 97.3% | 96.7% | 96.3% | 0.904 |
课题项目研讨及分享 | 86.4% | 81.9% | 0.184 | 87.5% | 80.9% | 90.7% | <0.05 |
中心组成员活动 | 26.1% | 22.1% | 0.320 | 17.0% | 22.5% | 36.4% | <0.01 |
跨学科教研 | 28.7% | 26.8% | 0.695 | 28.6% | 27.7% | 27.1% | 0.970 |
国家、市、区级学术会议 | 48.9% | 43.5% | 0.235 | 47.3% | 42.6% | 56.1% | <0.05 |
分享自己的优秀经验及成果 | 52.6% | 48.9% | 0.440 | 56.3% | 45.9% | 59.8% | <0.05 |
大于(n=272) | 小于(n=276) | p值 | 低增值教师 | 中等增值教师 | 高增值教师 | p值 | |
学科课程的整合与开发 | 83.8% | 83.0% | 0.878 | 83.0% | 84.2% | 81.3% | 0.780 |
学科核心知识、思想方法的理解 | 95.2% | 94.6% | 0.877 | 92.9% | 94.5% | 98.1% | 0.187 |
学科教学关键问题的确定和解决 | 94.9% | 93.8% | 0.743 | 93.8% | 93.9% | 96.3% | 0.631 |
单元整体教学 | 96.3% | 93.5% | 0.187 | 92.0% | 95.1% | 97.2% | 0.203 |
深度学习活动的设计与实施 | 92.6% | 89.5% | 0.253 | 90.2% | 90.6% | 93.5% | 0.620 |
促进学习的持续性评价 | 89.7% | 86.2% | 0.264 | 87.5% | 87.2% | 90.7% | 0.632 |
中高考命题方向和命题思路 | 92.6% | 91.3% | 0.674 | 91.1% | 91.2% | 95.3% | 0.363 |
分析和使用学生评价数据 | 90.1% | 85.1% | 0.105 | 84.8% | 86.6% | 93.5% | 0.108 |
跨学科能力的教学 | 65.8% | 63.4% | 0.618 | 59.8% | 65.0% | 68.2% | 0.415 |
"
大于 | 小于 | p值 | 低增值 | 中等增值 | 高增值 | p值 | |
校内听评课 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | ||
集体备课 | 100.0% | 99.6% | 1 | 100.0% | 99.7% | 100.0% | 0.717 |
参与校本课程及其他教学辅助材料的开发 | 98.9% | 96.7% | 0.152 | 99.1% | 97.0% | 99.1% | 0.25 |
就教学中遇到的问题与同事进行研讨 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | ||
与同事讨论某类学生的学业发展问题 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | ||
与同事分享教学经验与资源 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | ||
接受专家指导 | 100.0% | 98.9% | 0.252 | 99.1% | 99.4% | 100.0% | 0.652 |
"
OLS | FE | ||||
平均 | 数学 | 语文 | 化学 | ||
区级常规教研 | |||||
教研平均参与度(形式) | ?0.012 | ?0.014 | ?0.039 | ?0.170+ | ?0.07 |
(0.037) | (0.010) | (0.046) | (0.089) | (0.123) | |
教研平均参与度(内容) | 0.008 | 0.015* | 0.120*** | 0.083** | 0.26 |
(0.027) | (0.006) | (0.034) | (0.032) | (0.289) | |
蕴含有效专业发展特征的 区级常规教研 | |||||
聚焦课程内容 | ?0.002 | 0.022*** | 0.078** | 0.062* | ?0.23 |
(0.021) | (0.005) | (0.028) | (0.027) | (0.153) | |
融入主动学习 | 0.007 | ?0.002 | 0.060* | 0.069* | 0.11 |
(0.022) | (0.005) | (0.028) | (0.032) | (0.068) | |
示范和模范 | 0.013 | 0.014* | 0.111*** | 0.022 | 0.126 |
(0.024) | (0.006) | (0.024) | (0.027) | (0.113) | |
专家指导和支持 | 0.003 | 0.016** | 0.088** | 0.090*** | ?0.151+ |
(0.022) | (0.005) | (0.033) | (0.026) | (0.079) | |
区级专题教研 | |||||
学科能力 | 0.013 | 0.010** | 0.036 | 0.03 | ?0.022 |
(0.013) | (0.004) | (0.024) | (0.018) | (0.030) | |
考试评价研讨 | 0.030+ | 0.011** | ?0.004 | 0.057** | ?0.039 |
(0.016) | (0.004) | (0.026) | (0.018) | (0.025) | |
深度学习 | ?0.012 | ?0.005 | ?0.071* | 0.028 | ?0.062+ |
(0.015) | (0.004) | (0.030) | (0.024) | (0.032) | |
教研员个性化指导 | 0.015 | 0.009* | 0.026 | 0.018 | ?0.04 |
(0.024) | (0.004) | (0.024) | (0.024) | (0.032) |
"
OLS | FE | ||||
平均 | 数学 | 语文 | 化学 | ||
区级常规教研 | |||||
教研平均参与度(形式) | ?0.015 | ?0.015 | ?0.042 | ?0.128 | 0.068 |
(0.038) | (0.010) | (0.049) | (0.087) | (0.126) | |
教研平均参与度(内容) | 0.014 | 0.016** | 0.137*** | 0.088** | 0.608* |
(0.029) | (0.006) | (0.036) | (0.031) | (0.296) | |
蕴含有效专业发展特征的 区级常规教研 | |||||
聚焦课程内容 | 0.009 | 0.026*** | 0.084** | 0.070** | 0.032 |
(0.022) | (0.005) | (0.029) | (0.026) | (0.157) | |
融入主动学习 | 0.012 | ?0.001 | 0.086** | 0.081** | 0.187** |
(0.024) | (0.005) | (0.030) | (0.031) | (0.070) | |
示范和模范 | 0.016 | 0.016** | 0.112*** | 0.041 | 0.378** |
(0.025) | (0.006) | (0.026) | (0.026) | (0.115) | |
专家指导和支持 | 0.003 | 0.013* | 0.145*** | 0.090*** | ?0.293*** |
(0.023) | (0.005) | (0.035) | (0.025) | (0.081) | |
区级专题教研 | |||||
学科能力 | 0.006 | 0.008* | 0.016 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
(0.013) | (0.004) | (0.026) | (0.018) | (0.030) | |
考试评价研讨 | 0.033* | 0.012** | 0.037 | 0.036* | ?0.02 |
(0.015) | (0.004) | (0.028) | (0.018) | (0.026) | |
深度学习 | ?0.021 | ?0.010* | ?0.044 | 0.017 | ?0.061+ |
(0.015) | (0.004) | (0.032) | (0.023) | (0.033) | |
教研员个性化指导 | 0.009 | 0.009* | 0.024 | 0.004 | ?0.002 |
(0.021) | (0.005) | (0.025) | (0.024) | (0.033) |
"
一模 | 二模 | 一模 | 二模 | ||
教材教法分析 | ?0.013* | ?0.015* | 学科课程整合与开发 | 0.011* | 0.019*** |
(0.006) | (0.006) | (0.004) | (0.005) | ||
研究课 | ?0.013** | ?0.010* | 理解学科核心知识、思想方法 | 0.023*** | 0.021*** |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.004) | (0.005) | ||
专家讲座 | 0 | ?0.009+ | 确定与解决学科教学关键问题 | 0.018*** | 0.017*** |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.004) | (0.005) | ||
课题项目研讨及分享 | ?0.014** | ?0.019*** | 单元整体教学 | 0.011* | 0.014** |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | ||
中心组成员活动 | 0.016*** | 0.019*** | 设计实施深度学习活动 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
(0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | (0.005) | ||
跨学科教研 | ?0.018* | ?0.020** | 促进学习的持续性评价 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
(0.007) | (0.007) | (0.005) | (0.005) | ||
学术会议 | 0.013+ | 0.029*** | 中高考命题方向和思路 | ?0.004 | ?0.007 |
(0.007) | (0.007) | (0.005) | (0.005) | ||
分享成果 | ?0.007 | ?0.007 | 分析和使用学生评价数据 | 0.009+ | 0.008 |
(0.007) | (0.007) | (0.005) | (0.005) | ||
跨学科能力的教学 | 0 | ?0.002 | |||
(0.005) | (0.005) |
"
OLS | FE | |||
一模 | 二模 | 一模 | 二模 | |
校本教研平均参与度 | 0.067* | 0.082** | 0.016* | 0.038*** |
(0.027) | (0.028) | (0.007) | (0.007) | |
校本教研-正式 | 0.084* | 0.112** | 0.005 | 0.042*** |
(0.041) | (0.041) | (0.010) | (0.011) | |
校本教研-非正式 | 0.098* | 0.109* | 0.045*** | 0.063*** |
(0.039) | (0.043) | (0.011) | (0.011) | |
校内听评课 | ?0.062+ | ?0.04 | ?0.025** | 0 |
(0.031) | (0.029) | (0.008) | (0.008) | |
集体备课 | 0.078* | 0.078* | ?0.002 | 0.008 |
(0.035) | (0.035) | (0.010) | (0.010) | |
校本课程及教辅材料开发 | 0.065* | 0.078* | 0.016** | 0.028*** |
(0.027) | (0.029) | (0.006) | (0.006) | |
与同事研讨教学问题 | 0.097* | 0.101* | 0.019+ | 0.030** |
(0.039) | (0.043) | (0.010) | (0.010) | |
与同事讨论学生学业发展问题 | 0.047 | 0.066* | 0.027*** | 0.049*** |
(0.029) | (0.032) | (0.008) | (0.008) | |
与同事分享教学经验与资源 | 0.060* | 0.052+ | 0.041*** | 0.038*** |
(0.029) | (0.031) | (0.009) | (0.010) | |
接受专家指导 | 0.061* | 0.075** | 0.006 | 0.030*** |
(0.028) | (0.028) | (0.006) | (0.007) |
蔡金花, 曾文婕 初中教师专业素养与发展需求研究——基于深圳市的调查 上海教育科研 2018 7 61 66 蔡金花, 曾文婕. (2018). 初中教师专业素养与发展需求研究—基于深圳市的调查. 上海教育科研,(7),61—66. | |
陈纯槿 国际视域下的教师专业发展及其影响因素——基于TALIS数据的实证研究 比较教育研究 2017 39 6 84 92 陈纯槿. (2017). 国际视域下的教师专业发展及其影响因素—基于TALIS数据的实证研究. 比较教育研究,39(6),84—92. | |
崔允漷 关于我国当前中小学教师专业发展活动的调查研究 全球教育展望 2011 40 9 25 31 崔允漷. (2011). 关于我国当前中小学教师专业发展活动的调查研究. 全球教育展望,40(9),25—31. | |
陈向明, 王志明 义务教育阶段教师培训调查: 现状、问题与建议 开放教育研究 2013 4 11 19 陈向明, 王志明. (2013). 义务教育阶段教师培训调查: 现状、问题与建议. 开放教育研究,(4),11—19.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-2179.2013.04.003 |
|
丛立新. (2011). 沉默的权威: 中国基础教育教研组织. 北京: 北京师范大学出版社. | |
柯政, 洪志忠 教师专业发展的本土理解——基于对132位中学高级教师的调查 教育发展研究 2011 18 48 56 柯政, 洪志忠. (2011). 教师专业发展的本土理解—基于对132位中学高级教师的调查. 教育发展研究,(18),48—56. | |
李勉, 张平平, 罗良.(2018). 教师因素对学生发展的影响:国际大型教育质量监测项目的数据结果与启示 . 中国考试, (11), 53-61. | |
李琼, 张倩, 樊世奇 国际视野中的我国乡村教师专业发展: 与PISA高绩效东亚四国TALIS数据的比较 外国中小学教育 2018 11 55 63 李琼, 张倩, 樊世奇. (2018). 国际视野中的我国乡村教师专业发展: 与PISA高绩效东亚四国TALIS数据的比较. 外国中小学教育,(11),55—63. | |
李琼, 朱旭东, 赵萍 北京农村教师参与专业发展活动的满意度与需求调查研究 教师教育研究 2013 25 1 35 40 李琼, 朱旭东, 赵萍. (2013). 北京农村教师参与专业发展活动的满意度与需求调查研究. 教师教育研究,25(1),35—40. | |
梁威, 卢立涛, 黄冬芳. (2011). 撬动中国基础教育的支点: 中国特色教研制度发展研究. 北京: 教育科学出版社. | |
卢乃桂 国际视野中的教师专业发展 比较教育研究 2006 2 71 76 卢乃桂. (2006). 国际视野中的教师专业发展. 比较教育研究,(2),71—76.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-7667.2006.02.015 |
|
罗俊, 汪丁丁, 叶航, 陈叶烽 走向真实世界的实验经济学——田野实验研究综述 经济学(季刊) 2015 14 3 853 844 罗俊, 汪丁丁, 叶航, 陈叶烽. (2015). 走向真实世界的实验经济学—田野实验研究综述. 经济学(季刊),14(3),853—844. | |
穆洪华 我国公办小学教师培训存在的问题及对策——基于中国基础教育质量监测数据的研究分析 教师发展研究 2018 2 1 38 47 穆洪华. (2018). 我国公办小学教师培训存在的问题及对策—基于中国基础教育质量监测数据的研究分析. 教师发展研究,2(1),38—47. | |
宋萑, 王恒 教师校本培训转化促进机制研究——有调节的中介模型 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) 2019 2 108 115 宋萑, 王恒. (2019). 教师校本培训转化促进机制研究—有调节的中介模型. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),(2),108—115. | |
托马斯, 彭文蓉, 李建忠 学校增值表现与教师专业发展关联性探析 教育研究 2015 7 64 72 托马斯, 彭文蓉, 李建忠. (2015). 学校增值表现与教师专业发展关联性探析. 教育研究,(7),64—72. | |
王双龙 教师自我意识与学校支持氛围对教师专业发展的影响研究 教育科学研究 2017 11 74 78 王双龙. (2017). 教师自我意识与学校支持氛围对教师专业发展的影响研究. 教育科学研究,(11),74—78. | |
王艳玲, 胡惠闵 我国教研机构的类型与职能: 基于全国抽样调查的分析 教育发展研究 2020 40 Z2 23 31 王艳玲, 胡惠闵. (2020). 我国教研机构的类型与职能: 基于全国抽样调查的分析. 教育发展研究,40(Z2),23—31. | |
谢晨, 尹弘飚.(2021).教师视角下教研工作质量与发展均衡程度的省际比较研究. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 39(5), 55—67. | |
谢敏, 辛涛, 李大伟.(2008).教师资格和职业发展因素对学生数学成绩的影响:一个跨文化比较 . 心理与行为研究, 6(2), 124—129. | |
薛海平, 陈向明 我国中小学教师培训质量调查研究 教育科学 2012 28 6 53 57 薛海平, 陈向明. (2012). 我国中小学教师培训质量调查研究. 教育科学,28(6),53—57. | |
赵明仁, 周钧, 朱旭东 北京市中小学教师参与专业发展活动现状与需求的调查研究 教师教育研究 2009 21 1 62 67 赵明仁, 周钧, 朱旭东. (2009). 北京市中小学教师参与专业发展活动现状与需求的调查研究. 教师教育研究,21(1),62—67. | |
赵健, 裴新宁, 冯锐, 程佳铭, 金莺莲 我国教师的专业发展实践及其对学生成绩的影响: 基于五城市调研的分析 全球教育展望 2013 42 2 22 33 赵健, 裴新宁, 冯锐, 程佳铭, 金莺莲. (2013). 我国教师的专业发展实践及其对学生成绩的影响: 基于五城市调研的分析. 全球教育展望,42(2),22—33. | |
张文静, 辛涛, 康春花 教师变量对小学四年级数学成绩的影响: 一个增值性研究 教育学报 2010 06 2 69 76 张文静, 辛涛, 康春花. (2010). 教师变量对小学四年级数学成绩的影响: 一个增值性研究. 教育学报,06(2),69—76.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1298.2010.02.011 |
|
朱小虎, 张民选 教师专业发展的可能路径——基于TALIS2013上海和芬兰的比较分析 中国教育学刊 2017 9 1 8 朱小虎, 张民选. (2017). 教师专业发展的可能路径—基于TALIS2013上海和芬兰的比较分析. 中国教育学刊,(9),1—8. | |
Aaronson, D., Barrow, L., & Sander, W Teachers and student achievement in the Chicago public high schools Journal of Labor Economics 2007 25 1 95 135 Aaronson, D., Barrow, L., & Sander, W. (2007). Teachers and student achievement in the Chicago public high schools. Journal of Labor Economics , 25(1), 95—135.
doi: 10.1086/508733 |
|
Borko, H Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain Educational Researcher 2004 33 8 3 15 Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher , 33(8), 3—15.
doi: 10.3102/0013189X033008003 |
|
Boyd, D. J., Grossman, P. L., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J Teacher preparation and student achievement Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 2009 31 4 416 440 Boyd, D. J., Grossman, P. L., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). Teacher preparation and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 31(4), 416—440.
doi: 10.3102/0162373709353129 |
|
Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C. P., & Loef, M Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study American Educational Research Journal 1989 26 4 499 531 Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C. P., & Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal , 26(4), 499—531.
doi: 10.3102/00028312026004499 |
|
Charters, W. W., & Waples, D. (1929). Commonwealth teacher training study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. | |
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E Measuring the impacts of teachers I: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates American Economic Review 2014 104 9 2593 2632 Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers I: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. American Economic Review , 104(9), 2593—2632.
doi: 10.1257/aer.104.9.2593 |
|
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school a cross-subject analysis with student fixed effects Journal of Human Resources 2010 45 3 655 681 Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2010). Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school a cross-subject analysis with student fixed effects. Journal of Human Resources , 45(3), 655—681.
doi: 10.1353/jhr.2010.0023 |
|
Day, C. & J. Sachs. (2005). International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers. Open University Press, McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, Berkshire. | |
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto: Learning Policy Institute. | |
Darling-Hammond, L. et al. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. National Staff Development Council and the School Redesign Network at Stanford University. | |
Desimone, L. M Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures Educational Researcher 2009 38 3 181 199 Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher , 38(3), 181—199.
doi: 10.3102/0013189X08331140 |
|
European Commission, Directorate-General for Education and Culture. (2005). CPD for teachers and trainers, report of a Peer Learning Activity, held in Dublin, 26-29 September, 2005. | |
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers American Educational Research Journal 2001 38 4 915 945 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.
doi: 10.3102/00028312038004915 |
|
Glewwe, P. W., Hanushek, E. A., Humpage, S. D., & Ravina, R School resources and educational outcomes in developing countries: A review of the literature from 1990 to 2010 Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research 2011 4 13 Glewwe, P. W., Hanushek, E. A., Humpage, S. D., & Ravina, R. (2011). School resources and educational outcomes in developing countries: A review of the literature from 1990 to 2010. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research , 4—13. | |
Goldhaber, D., Liddle, S., & Theobald, R The gateway to the profession: Assessing teacher preparation programs based on student achievement Economics of Education Review 2013b 34 29 44 Goldhaber, D., Liddle, S., & Theobald, R. (2013b). The gateway to the profession: Assessing teacher preparation programs based on student achievement. Economics of Education Review , 34, 29—44.
doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.01.011 |
|
Good, T., Grouws, D., & Ebmeier, H. (1983). Active mathematics teaching. New York: Longman. | |
Guskey, T. R., & Sparks, D. (2002). Linking professional development to improvements in student learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. | |
Hanushek E A Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 1997 19 2 141 164 Hanushek E A. (1997). Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 19(2), 141—164.
doi: 10.3102/01623737019002141 |
|
Hanushek E A The failure of input-based schooling policies The Economic Journal 2003 113 485 F64 F98 Hanushek E A. (2003). The failure of input-based schooling policies. The Economic Journal , 113(485), F64—F98.
doi: 10.1111/1468-0297.00099 |
|
Hanushek, E., & Rivkin, S Constrained job matching: Does teacher job search harm disadvantaged urban schools? NBER working paper 2010 15816 Hanushek, E., & Rivkin, S. (2010). Constrained job matching: Does teacher job search harm disadvantaged urban schools?. NBER working paper, 15816.
doi: 10.3386/W15816 |
|
Harris, D. N., & Sass, T. R Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement Journal of Public Economics 2011 95 7 798 812 Harris, D. N., & Sass, T. R. (2011). Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement. Journal of Public Economics , 95(7), 798—812. | |
Hill, H. C., Beisiegel, M., & Jacob, R Professional development research Educational Researcher 2013 42 9 476 487 Hill, H. C., Beisiegel, M., & Jacob, R. (2013). Professional development research. Educational Researcher , 42(9), 476—487.
doi: 10.3102/0013189X13512674 |
|
Institute for Educational Sciences. (2012). Request for applications, education research grants (CFDA Number: 84.305A). Washington, DC: Author. | |
Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L Can principals identify effective teachers? Evidence on subjective performance evaluation in education Journal of Labor Economics 2008 26 1 101 136 Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2008). Can principals identify effective teachers? Evidence on subjective performance evaluation in education. Journal of Labor Economics , 26(1), 101—136.
doi: 10.1086/522974 |
|
Kane, T. J., Rockoff, J. E., & Staiger, D. O What does certification tell us about teacher effectiveness? Evidence from New York City Economics of Education Review 2008 27 6 615 631 Kane, T. J., Rockoff, J. E., & Staiger, D. O. (2008). What does certification tell us about teacher effectiveness? Evidence from New York City. Economics of Education Review , 27(6), 615—631.
doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2007.05.005 |
|
Ke, Z., Yin, H., & Huang, S Teacher participation in school-based professional development in China: Does it matter for their self-efficacy and teaching strategies? Teachers and Teaching 2019 25 7 821 836 Ke, Z., Yin, H., & Huang, S. (2019). Teacher participation in school-based professional development in China: Does it matter for their self-efficacy and teaching strategies?. Teachers and Teaching , 25(7), 821—836.
doi: 10.1080/13540602.2019.1662777 |
|
Kennedy, M How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research 2016 86 4 945 980 Kennedy, M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching?. Review of Educational Research , 86(4), 945—980.
doi: 10.3102/0034654315626800 |
|
Kennedy, M. (1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education (Research Monograph No. 13). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. | |
Lingard, B., Martino, W., & Rezai-Rashti, G Testing regimes, accountabilities and education policy: commensurate global and national developments Journal of Education Policy 2013 28 5 539 556 Lingard, B., Martino, W., & Rezai-Rashti, G. (2013). Testing regimes, accountabilities and education policy: commensurate global and national developments. Journal of Education Policy , 28(5), 539—556.
doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.820042 |
|
MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect Prevention Science 2000 1 4 173 181 MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect. Prevention Science , 1(4), 173—181.
doi: 10.1023/A:1026595011371 |
|
Meghir, C., & Rivkin, S. (2011). Chapter 1 - Econometric methods for research in education. In E. A. Hanushek, S. Machin, & L. Woessmann (Eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Education (Vol. 3, pp. 1-87): Elsevier. | |
National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future (1996), What matters most: Teaching for America’s future, National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future, New York, NY. | |
Opfer, V. D., Pedder, D. G., & Lavicza, Z The role of teachers’ orientation to learning in professional development and change: A national study of teachers in England Teaching and Teacher Education 2011 27 2 443 453 Opfer, V. D., Pedder, D. G., & Lavicza, Z. (2011). The role of teachers’ orientation to learning in professional development and change: A national study of teachers in England. Teaching and Teacher Education , 27(2), 443—453.
doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.09.014 |
|
Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation American Educational Research Journal 2007 44 921 958 Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal , 44, 921—958.
doi: 10.3102/0002831207308221 |
|
Supovitz, J. A. (2001). Translating teaching practice into improved student performance. In S. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 81-98). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. | |
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). U.S. Department of Education strategic plan, 2002-2007. Retrieved June 15, 2012, from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/stratplan2002-07/index.html | |
World Bank. (2018). World development report 2018: Learning to realize education’s promise. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi: 10.1596/978-1-4648-1096-1.License:CreativeCommonsAttributionCCBY3.0IGO. | |
Yin, H., Xie, C., Hu, H., & Wang, M Demystifying and sustaining the resilience of teacher educators in China: The perspectives of teaching research officers Asia Pacific Education Review 2020 21 2 311 323 Yin, H., Xie, C., Hu, H., & Wang, M. (2020). Demystifying and sustaining the resilience of teacher educators in China: The perspectives of teaching research officers. Asia Pacific Education Review , 21(2), 311—323.
doi: 10.1007/s12564-020-09626-0 |
|
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007–No.033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. | |
Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Chen, Q Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis Journal of Consumer Research 2010 37 2 197 206 Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research , 37(2), 197—206.
doi: 10.1086/651257 |
[1] | Ru Cai, Xinping zhang, Jijun Yao, Shike Zhou. Why the Principal Positive Leadership is Important: The Mediating Effect of Principal Positive Leadership on School Context and Student Achievement [J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2024, 42(2): 92-108. |
[2] | Lu Wang, Ruxia Ma, Le Peng. How Teachers Develop: A Depiction and Analysis Based on Experiential Learning Circle Theory [J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2024, 42(2): 30-45. |
[3] | Lu Wang, Ruxia Ma, Le Peng. Characteristics of Different Teacher Groups’ Teaching Behavior Improvement Based on Experiential Learning Cycle [J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2021, 39(2): 61-74. |
[4] | WANG Jia-Qiang. The NonReflective Approach to Teacher Development [J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educationa, 2014, 32(4): 40-46. |
[5] | SHEN Yu-Shun. Policy Analysis on Reform of Senior High SchoolEntrance Examination in China [J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educationa, 2014, 32(3): 26-30. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||