Questions interview Joan Heller and Kirsten Daehler
1. Modelling/performance standards: Some of the goals for the PD courses mentioned in the paper can be related to formative assessment, such as learning to “make instructional choices grounded in evidence of student thinking.”
A) Did you work with success criteria (performance standards) for these goals? B) If so, how were the success criteria for each goal shared with the teachers (as abstract standards and/or through video examples, or in other ways)?
2. Activating prior knowledge: Teacher surveys and content tests were administered to teachers during the first and last sessions of each teacher course. Was the prior knowledge regarding practices indicative for formative assessment (using evidence of student learning to adjust instruction to improve the response to identified student learning needs) also assessed beforehand?
3. Differentiation: Teachers may have had different needs and wishes regarding their development. In addition, teachers can have various misconceptions and negative beliefs regarding formative assessment, which can hinder teachers’ positive attitude necessary to improve their teaching practice.
(A) Did teacher leaders handle potential differences between teachers in prior knowledge and learning progress?
(B) Was intervention time spent on developing a positive teacher attitude towards formative assessment?
4. Monitoring: A) How was the progress of teachers with respect to the formative assessment goals monitored by the teacher leader and/or others during the meetings? B) Was this monitoring in reference to standards of good formative assessment? C) If so, what was done with monitoring results?
5. Retrieval practice: To solidify knowledge and skills, retrieval practice (deliberately stimulating the recall of the training content learned) can be beneficial. A) Was retrieval practice applied in the PD courses? B) If so, how and how often?
6. Spaced practice: Another instructional strategy that can be productive when developing a skill is spaced practice ( spreading practice over time). We could not find information on whether teachers had to work on learning tasks between the course sessions.
A) Were there any (or perhaps multiple) learning tasks/practice opportunities between sessions?
B) If yes, what did these look like?
7. Ratio instruction/practice: Each PD course included of 24 hours of contact time, divided into eight 3-hour sessions, spread over a period of 14 weeks. What was in your view the ratio of the PD received by teachers in terms of knowledge transmission and the PD focussing on practicing?
8. Representativeness of tasks: In the PD courses, teachers focused on improving their own knowledge regarding students’ (mis)conceptions, to be better able to recognize these, and on considering the implications of what was learned for teaching their own students.
A) How were teachers stimulated to integrate the learned content in their own teaching practice?
B) Did they focus on elements of the task, such as using a specific tool or technique in their lessons, or was there also a focus on improving teaching as a whole?
9. Class feedback: Did teachers receive guidance during their own lessons in how to implement the learned material?