Microteaching: An Opportunity for Meaningful Professional Development

Microteaching is a way of doing professional development for teachers wanting to incorporate new evidence-based and high-leverage practices into their instructional toolboxes. Given how much work is required in teaching and the limited time professionals have available, microteaching is an accessible process that supports instructional improvement by practicing evidence-based and high leverage strategies. Professionals, working with a small group of peers, engage a four-phase process that includes planning, enactment of a strategy, as well as individual and group reflection. Professionals use the opportunity to explore a teaching strategy that is responsive to student needs in the context of critical friends. Having an opportunity to try it out before introducing it in the classroom can be a valuable way to work out bugs, discover aspects that need development, and build a sense of efficacy. Microteaching is a way to support collegial growth by seeing into each other’s classroom practice.

Contextualizing communities in an instructional improvement initiative: exploring STEM faculty engagement in teaching-related conversations

A frequently cited strategy for fostering science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) instructional improvements is creating communities where faculty can share and learn evidence-based teaching practices. Despite research-documented benefits, little is known about why (and with whom) faculty engage in teaching-related conversations, including those fostered by initiative communities. We explored how STEM faculty engage in teaching-related conversations, via analysis of faculty interviews and discussion networks, to identify factors potentially influencing teaching-related conversations over the life of an initiative. Our results suggest aspects that might inhibit STEM faculty from engaging in teaching-related conversations, including: 1) faculty members’ autonomy with teaching practices; 2) faculty members’ varied interests in teaching improvements; 3) varied degrees of support to engage in teaching-related conversations; and 4) a lack of inclusive and non-judgmental spaces to talk about teaching. We suggest that those fostering STEM faculty communities consider working with others across the institution to map the instructional improvement opportunities faculty may already take part in and attend to areas lacking support. Initiative leaders and designers should also elicit and build off faculty members’ teaching-related knowledge and concerns. We further suggest making conversational spaces inclusive and safe, to help faculty honestly share teaching-related challenges and insights. We recommend creating and fostering spaces that bring faculty together across department boundaries. Our study echoes prior research by drawing attention to administrative support for instructional improvement initiatives, which can foster and sustain opportunities for faculty to talk about teaching and learn instructional improvements.

An Empirically Grounded System of Supports for Improving the Quality of Mathematics Teaching on a Large Scale

Research on the teaching and learning of mathematics has made significant progress in recent years. However, this work has had only limited impact on classroom instruction in many countries. We report on an eight-year project in which we partnered with several large urban school districts in the US that were attempting to support mathematics teachers’ development of ambitious, inquiry-oriented instructional practices. These partnerships provided contexts in which we could iteratively test and revise conjectures about instructional improvement strategies intended to support teachers’ and others’ learning. The product of this work is a theory of action for instructional improvement at scale that spans from the classroom to school system instructional leadership. We present project findings as they relate to key elements of the theory including: teachers’ knowledge, perspective and practices; instructional materials and student assessments; participatory supports for teachers’ learning; and additional supports for currently struggling students.

Leadership for Instructional Improvement

Effectively integrating creative experiential learning opportunities into classroom-based science instruction to enhance students’ applied learning continues to be a challenge for many middle school educators. This article explores how educators in one urban middle school leveraged design research thinking in conjunction with collaborative data-teaming processes to develop a targeted professional learning intervention program to help seventh- and eighth-grade teachers learn how to integrate Makerspace hands-on experiential and project-based learning activities into their STEM instructional practices to better engage students in applied science learning in middle school classrooms. A literature-informed discussion is included on how the middle school principal and the school’s instructional improvement team utilized focused professional development activities and intensive Professional Learning Community (PLC) conversations to positively transform teachers’ pedagogical mindsets and instructional practices in support of integrating Makerspace and related project-based experiential learning opportunities as valuable components of classroom-based science teaching and learning. Finally, a number of design principles derived from the middle school case study highlighted in this article are offered that may be of practical use to school leaders interested in applying educational design research methods to enhance their own campus-based instructional improvement efforts.

The interpersonal side of research-practice partnerships

In the past decade, research-practice partnerships (RPPs) have grown in number and reputation. Stephanie Brown and Annie Allen describe the varied ways partnerships facilitate more sustained and productive relationships between researchers and practitioners. They share key findings from a comparative case study of three different types of RPPs focused on mathematics instructional improvement conducted by the National Center for Research in Policy and Practice (NCRPP) and make recommendations for how partnerships can build more authentic bridges between research and practice.

Understanding Conditions for Teaching Innovation in Postsecondary Education: Development and Validation of the Survey of Climate for Instructional Improvement (SCII)

Adoption of evidence based instructional practices is not widespread in American institutions of higher education. This is due in part to reforms focusing on individual teaching practices rather than conditions for system reform. Since measurement of organizational conditions is critical for widespread change, we developed and validated the Survey of Climate for Instructional Improvement (SCII). SCII has 30 Likert-scale statements, 5 supplementary questions, and 9 demographic items. It is designed to measure five aspects of organizational climate in postsecondary settings: leadership, collegiality, resources, respect for teaching, and organizational support. The goal of this paper is to describe (a) our development process, (b) steps in validation, and (c) patterns in the data from 917 instructors at six institutions of higher education in the United States. Our results indicate that the instrument is reliable and has the potential to differentiate among institutions, disciplines, departments, and other demographic variables. Although the survey is interdisciplinary, we highlight notable organizational climate differences between STEM and non-STEM disciplines. We also identify organizational climate differences for cis-gender women and graduate student instructors, highlighting unique professional support needs for these groups. We expect our findings and the instrument to be useful for campus change leaders, faculty developers, higher education researchers, and discipline-based education researchers.