What Teachers Take from Professional Development: Cases and Implications

In this article, we report on an 18-month longmathematics professional development projectwith elementary school teachers. Using a modelwe developed, three participant case studieswere analyzed with respect to not only theprofessional development milieu, but also howthese teachers interacted with the professionaldevelopment experience. In particular we foundthat having teachers reflect on new, authenticreform-oriented mathematics learningexperiences leads some teachers to take aninquiry stance concerning their own teaching,resulting in self-sustaining changes in theirmathematics instructional practices. Thisimplies that professional development forelementary mathematics teachers should includechallenging mathematics learning experiencescomplete with opportunities to reflect on personal and professional implications.     

Peer relations across contexts: individual-network homophily and network inclusion in and after school

Peer relations across 2 contexts (in school and after school) were examined for 577 participants, approximately 12 years old, from 3 middle schools in Milan, Italy. The primary research questions were: Do peer networks from different contexts uniquely contribute to explaining variance in individual behavior? Do measures of peer preference and peer network inclusion across contexts uniquely contribute to explaining individual depressive symptoms? Structural equation models showed that both the in-school and the after-school peer networks uniquely contributed to explaining variance in 2 types of individual problem behavior (in-school problem behavior, after-school delinquency), and that similarity with the 2 peer networks varied according to behaviors specific to each context and across gender. Finally, both in-school and after-school peer network inclusion contributed to explaining variance in depressive symptoms, after controlling for classroom peer preference.     

Teachers' attributions for students' low achievement: A validation of cooper and good's attributional categories

Teachers' explanations for students' low achievement were reliably classified using the attributional coding system proposed by Cooper and Good (1983). Teachers most frequently attributed low achievement to a typical pattern of low effort. They viewed acquired student characteristics (e.g., low motivation, poor work habits) as more important than either teacher variables or classroom variables in explaining students' low achievement. Implications of these attribution patterns for improving student achievement and for developing student self-esteem are discussed.