Exploring the Impact of Professional Development Partnerships on Teaching and Learning
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Professional development for teachers is essential for embracing change and there are a variety of ways to provide it. The purpose of this study was to review a professional development program facilitated through a partner organization linked to a school. The research question guiding this study was: What are teachers’, administrators’, and partners’ perspectives about the impact of sustained professional development provided through a partnership at an alternative school for K-12 in Southern Alberta? The researcher followed the design of mixed methods methodology using interviews and document analysis. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with 29 teachers, three administrators, and three partners to explore the impact of the partnership. The perspectives of participants offered a rich understanding of the professional development program facilitated by the partners. Qualitative data were thematically analysed and quantitative data, which included accountability pillar and school review data, identified during document analysis were utilized to analyse trends to explore the potential influence of the partnership. Qualitative and quantitative data were integrated and triangulated to increase legitimation and to reduce the potential of researcher bias. The results of this study were presented through three major findings that emerged from the analysis: (a) scheduled time for professional development; (b) culture of pressure and support; and (c) changes in teaching practices. The importance of this study is multi-faceted and offers significant contributions to the body of research about the value of partnerships particularly in relation to the provision of sustained professional development within schools. The Partnership Model for Transformational Teacher Professional Development was developed based on the results from this study and offers a framework for those considering forming partnerships for sustained onsite professional development directed towards changing teaching practice and improving student learning. A variety of stakeholders hold potential as Professional Development Partners (PDP) and offer partnership opportunities for schools in different contexts. Potential PDP could include representatives from various stakeholders such as school districts, Ministries of Education, universities, teachers’ associations, teacher-leaders, permanent coaches, consultants, and innovation designers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,030 | 0,051 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,020 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».