http://jte.sagepub.com/content/62/4/339.short?

rss=1&ssource=mfr
journal of teacher educaton
What Makes Good Teachers Good? A
Cross-Case Analysis of the Connection
Between Teacher Effectiveness and
Student Achievement
1. !ames ". #tronge 1 $
2. %homas !. &ard 1
3. 'esle &. (rant 1
1.
1
College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA
1. !ames ". #tronge) *ollege of &llam and +ar,) #chool of -ducaton) ./
0o1 2394) &llamsburg) 56 23123 -mal: jhstro78m.edu
Astract
This study examined classroom practices of effective versus less effective teachers (based on
student achievement gain scores in reading and mathematics). In Phase I of the study,
hierarchical linear modeling was used to assess the teacher effectiveness of 3! fifth"grade
teachers in terms of student learning gains. In Phase II, 3# teachers ($! top %uartile and $&
bottom %uartile) participated in an in"depth cross"case analysis of their instructional and
classroom management practices. 'lassroom observation findings (Phase II) were compared
with teacher effectiveness data (Phase I) to determine the impact of selected teacher
behaviors on the teachers( overall effectiveness drawn from a single year of value"added data.
http)**the+ournal.com*articles*#$$*,*-*measuring"teacher"effectiveness"are"we"creating"
an"education"nightmare.aspx
Measuring Teacher Efectiveness: Are We Creating an
Education Nightmare?
0, .atrca 9eubel
:6/:2/11
.e seem to be setting ourselves up for disaster education. /fforts are underway not only to
adopt value"added models to rate the effectiveness of individual teachers, but to use these
models to identify those at the very bottom who might later lose their positions and those at
the very top who might then be eligible for merit pay. 0et in all the policy discussions and
public commentary, there1s been little focus on learners and on how, precisely, we define the
%ualities of a good teacher.
The movement to revise methods for teacher evaluation to include such models came about in
an effort to undermine current evaluation systems that tend to rate most teachers as
satisfactory (2ull, #$$).
/ducators are concerned because their evaluations will be tied to results of their students(
standardi3ed testing, which are used in value"added calculations, while other factors, such as
experience and training, are diminished. There1s concern that the increase in testing that will
be re%uired to use those models to rate all teachers might come at the expense of learners,
ta4ing the +oy out of learning and ma4ing it boring, as President 5bama pointed out
(67emar4s,6 #$$). 8nd there1s concern about our lac4 of agreement on what it means to be
an effective educator.
The need for highly effective teachers is a given. 9ut when, as part of the discussion, I heard
policy ma4ers and business leaders proclaim that experience and advanced degrees do not
necessarily matter in teaching (:trauss, #$), I too4 a loo4 at my own career""which began
about four decades ago""and concluded that I do not agree. ;uestions came to mind regarding
the nature of teaching and to what degree value"added models could really help school
districts identify teacher effectiveness to merit changing existing compensation systems that
have traditionally been based on experience and degrees.
<y goal is to shed light on several complexities that might not be reflected in test score data
to better appreciate the difficulty in revising a teacher evaluation system and then lin4 results
to merit compensation. =et1s begin this two"part series with a %uic4 loo4 at value"added
models, why it1s important to agree on the nature of teaching, and why experience and
degrees are, in fact, relevant.
A !uick "iew of the "alue-Added #i$htmare
The debate across the nation on teaching effectiveness and its connection to students1
standardi3ed testing results has been fueled by the >nited :tates ?epartment of /ducation1s
7ace to the Top program, which has urged states and districts to use teacher performance to
inform personnel decisions (>.:. ?epartment of /ducation, #@). It has resulted in several
states passing laws ma4ing student achievement a significant factor in teacher evaluations""at
least & percent in some states, according to the Institute for a 'ompetitive .or4force (#$$).
Aor example, these are illustrated within Alorida1s teacher merit pay bill (Postal, #$$) and
5hio1s :enate 9ill & (Aields, #$$), both of which were signed by their respective state
governors in <arch, #$$. Implementation plans will also re%uire additional tests to be
created for sub+ects not covered by existing state standardi3ed tests. 9oth states plan to phase
out the merit of experience and advanced degrees in their revised compensation plans.
Balue"added models re%uire annual testing of students, and if high"sta4es for teachers are
attached to results, all teachers will need to be included, with high"sta4es testing in art, music,
physical education, electives, and so on. This is li4ely to lead to huge funding issues to
maintain all systems over time.
'onsider the need for common curriculum and then new tests each year that are highly
correlated with the curriculum. Tests will need to be piloted to ensure that they are valid and
reliable before implementing them on the large scale. Teachers will need ongoing
professional development, particularly in schools with high teacher turnover, not +ust to
interpret results, but to learn how to use data to improve instruction. If used for teacher
evaluation, results will need to consider the amount of time learners were assigned to a
teacher, particularly when students might have entered after the start of a school year.
;ead more at http://thejournal.com/artcles/2:11/:6/:2/measurng<teacher<
e=ect>eness<are<8e<creatng<an<educaton<
nghtmare.asp1?4@.45A-BCoorBslD.99
http)**uncw.edu*cte*et*articles*bulger*
The Journal of Effective Teaching
an online journal devoted to teaching excellence

Journal of Effective Teaching, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2002
Stack the Deck in Favor of our Students !" #sing the
Four Aces of Efective Teaching
#ean +. 0ulger
En>erst, of &sconsn<-au *lare
9epartment of Anesolog, and 6thletcs
-au *lare) &F 443:2
.hone G314H 236<3322
D6C G314H 236<4:34
bulgersm7u8ec.edu
9ereI !. +ohr
6ppalachan #tate En>erst,
9epartment of "ealth) 'esure) and -1ercse #cence
0oone) J* 226:2
.hone G222H 262<3143
D6C G222H 262<3132
mohrdj7appstate.edu
;chard %. &alls
&est 5rgna En>erst,
*ollege of ;esources and -ducaton < ;esearch and %ranng *enter
+organto8n) &5 264:6
.hone G3:4H 293<4313 e1t. 1234
r8alls78>u.edu
$e" Words: /utcomes) *lart,) -ngagement) and -nthusasm
A!stract
%he research on teacher e=ect>eness has pro>ded educatonal professonals
8th a relat>el, clear understandng of the fundamental prncples for e=ect>e
nstructonal practce. %eachng professors should use these emprcall,
supported prncples as a bass for the determnaton of ther o8n nstructonal
e=ect>eness n the classroom. %he purpose of ths artcle s to descrbe the Dour
6ces of -=ect>e %eachng G/utcomes) *lart,) -nthusasm) and -ngagementH as
a conceptual frame8orI for ncreased self<reKect>e practce among teachers n
hgher educaton settngs.
%ntroduction
If you had to select four instructional principles that best describe your
teaching, what would they be? How do the instructional principles that you have
identifed contribute to student learning in your classroom? What strategies do
you employ to systematically implement these instructional principles in a
variety of educational contexts?
%he t,pes of self<reKect>e Luestons lsted abo>e pro>de the bass for the
contnual reMnement of an nd>dualNs nstructonal practces. 6s a teachng
professor) ,ou should be 8llng to engage n the rgorous self<e1amnaton of
,our o8n teachng phlosoph,) methodolog,) and e=ect>eness. %he purpose of
ths artcle s to descrbe the ODour 6ces of -=ect>e %eachngO G&alls) 1999H as a
conceptual frame8orI for ncreased self<reKect>e practce among teachers n
hgher educaton settngs P3Q. Dollo8ng the completon of ths artcle) the reader
8ll be able GaH to e1plan the theoretcal ratonale for the Dour 6ces of -=ect>e
%eachng) GbH to descrbe the Dour 6ces of -=ect>e %eachng) and GcH to pro>de
suggestons for the applcaton of these fundamental nstructonal prncples to
teachng practce.
&esearch on Teacher Efectiveness
%eachng e=ect>eness s dependent upon the nteracton bet8een the
nstructorNs subject<matter Ino8ledge and teachng GpedagogcalH ablt,. %he
follo8ng scenaros llustrate the nature of the comple1 nteracton bet8een
these t8o crtcal >arables:
1. 6n nd>dual ma, possess a substantal amount of subject<matter
Ino8ledge) ,et be unable to desgn and mplement nstructonal methods to
enhance student learnng due to a lacI of pedagogcal ablt,.
2. *on>ersel,) an nd>dual ma, possess some generc pedagogcal sIlls)
,et ha>e lmted subject<matter Ino8ledge and agan be predsposed to
ne=ect>e teachng.
%hese scenaros ndcate that t s mpossble to be an e=ect>e teacher
8thout beng competent n both subject<matter Ino8ledge and pedagogcal
ablt,. *onseLuentl,) subject<matter Ino8ledge remans a necessar,
prereLuste for e=ect>e teachng) not the sole determnant.
%eachers) nstructors) and professors are reLured to fulMll man, roles and
perform man, dutes that ma, be consdered ancllar,. 6t the core of the roles
and dutes s the actual practce of teachng. %he prmar, purpose of ths
teachng practce s to facltate student learnng. 'earnng ma, be deMned as a
change n beha>ors) atttudes) or capabltes. -=ect>e teachers promote
student learnng) and related nstructonal methods ha>e been e1tens>el,
documented n the educatonal research lterature.
%he research lterature on Oteacher e=ect>enessO and re>e8s 8rtten
summarBng that bod, of research pro>de gudance Ge.g.) 0roph, & (ood) 1926
P1QR 9unIn & 9oenau) 192: P2QR Dsher) 0erlner) Dlb,) +arla>e) *ahen) &
9sha8) 192: P3QR ;osenshne & Durst) 1933 P4QR #mth) 1939 P4QR &alls) 1994
P6QH. %he Mndngs are based on Oprocess<productO research. Fn other 8ords) 8hen
a teacher does ths GprocessH) t results n ths sort of student ache>ement
GproductH. &hen a teacher causes ths to happen GprocessH) t results n student
learnng GproductH. ;osenshne and Durst G1933H 8rote the Mrst major re>e8 of
ths research lterature P4Q. %he, concluded that the M>e most mportant teacher<
e=ect>eness >arables are GaH *lart,) GbH 5arablt,) GcH -nthusasm) GdH %asI<
orented and/or 0usnesslIe 0eha>ors) and GeH #tudent /pportunt, to 'earn
*rteron +ateral. 0roph, and (ood G1926H P1Q 8rote a major re>e8 of the
lterature to that date) Mndng strong support for the components of e=ect>e
teachng dentMed b, ;osenshne and Durst G1933H P4Q but summarBng the
strong elements under d=erent headngs. %he, also found ncreased support for
such process >arables as Otme on tasI.O &alls G1994H 8as not so parsmonus)
lstng 99 process<product relatonshps for e=ect>e teachng P6Q.
The Four Aces of Efective Teaching
%he ODour 6ces of -=ect>e %eachngO G&alls) 1999H summarBe the most
pre>alent recommendatons from the teachng<e=ect>eness research lterature
P3Q. %he, are the strongest lnIs bet8een 8hat teachers can do and the learnng
that students ache>e. %he Dour 6ces represent a consoldated 8a, of thnIng
about the OprocessO of teachng as t nKuences the OproductO Gstudent learnngH.
Sou ma, thnI of them as catal,sts for learnng. #tudent learnng s better) faster)
and/or more long<lastng 8hen teachers are able to pla, the Dour 6ces. %he Dour
6ces of -=ect>e %eachng are summarBed n Dgure 1.
Ace ': (utcomes
%he Mrst 6ce of -=ect>e %eachng concerns the utlBaton of an outcomes<
based nstructonal orentaton. /utcomes enable students to focus ther
attenton on clear learnng goals. %hese outcomes nform students of 8here the,
are gong and ho8 the, 8ll get there. /utcomes also pro>de the teacher 8th a
frame8orI for desgnng and del>erng the course content. Durthermore)
outcomes enable teachers to assess student learnng as a measure of ther o8n
nstructonal e=ect>eness. +ore e=ect>e teachers use desgnated outcomes as
a bass for the establshment of currcular algnment. *urrcular algnment s the
degree to 8hch the emplo,ed nstructonal methods and assessment technLues
enable the student to acLure and/or demonstrate the desred outcomes.
What were the desired student outcomes for your last class meeting? Were
the outcomes directly stated or implied? What did your students actually learn,
and how was that learning documented? Did the employed instructional
strategies efectively contribute to each students ability to accomplish the
stated outcomes?
Ace ): C*arit"
%he second 6ce of -=ect>e %eachng n>ol>es the clart, of nstructon. +ore
e=ect>e teachers t,pcall, pro>de students 8th hghl, e1plct drectons and
e1planatons concernng the course organBaton and content. &hen del>erng
nstructon) nothng should be left to chance. Ff students are not meetng ,our
e1pectatons) ,our methods of del>er, ma, lacI the reLured degree of clart,.
&hen a teacher tells) sho8s) and maIes the message a>alable from alternate
perspect>es to alternate senses) that teacher s engaged n e=ect>e
nstructonal practce. 6ddtonall,) the course should be structured n a 8a, that
a=ords students the opportunt, to maIe connectons bet8een the ne8 materal
that s beng presented and the concepts that the, ha>e alread, learned. %hs
nstructonal strateg, s referred to as currcular sca=oldng. &hen a teacher
helps students connect ne8 nformaton 8th 8hat the, alread, Ino8) the
teacher s assstng these students n accurate organBaton of nformaton.
During your last class meeting, what instructional techni!ues did you employ
to provide the students with a clear explanation of the lesson content? What
types of illustrations, demonstrations, heuristics, and the li"e were used to
supplement and clarify verbal explanation? Were there any concepts and#or
s"ills that you were able to incorporate from previous lessons and courses? Did
you allocate su$cient time for your students to as" !uestions so that you could
clarify information? Did you ma"e complex sub%ect matter clear and easy to
learn?
Ace +: Engagement
%he thrd 6ce of -=ect>e %eachng s engagement. %hs prncple suggests
that students learn b, dong. %he formal lecture represents an archac model
deMned b, nstructor as del>erer and student as rece>er. %hs model e1emplMes
one<8a, communcaton and perpetuates an ncomplete model of educaton.
6ccordngl,) teachers must create a d,namc) educatonal en>ronment that
a=ords students the opportunt, to practce e>er, concept that the, are learnng.
+ore e=ect>e teachers utlBe nstructonal strateges that engage students
repeatedl, throughout the entre lesson. %hs engagement should begn earl, n
the lesson and contnue throughout the lesson ntroducton) bod,) and closure.
6s a general rule) a teacher should lmt a lecture to no more than thrt, mnutes
before emplo,ng a learnng act>t, that act>el, engages all students G&alls &
*ather) 1923H P2Q. Durthermore) these engagement act>tes are ntended to
facltate the de>elopment of the Ino8ledge) sIlls) and atttudes that 8ll enable
the student to accomplsh the pre>ousl, dentMed lesson outcomes. %hs t,pe of
currcular algnment s a crtcal component of an e=ect>e) student<centered
learnng en>ronment.
In your last class, how much time were your students engaged in learning
activities other than note ta"ing? &n how many occasions during your last class
did students have the opportunity to be actively engaged in the learning
process? How many of your students are asleep or of'tas" at any point in a
given lesson?
Ace ,: Enthusiasm
%he fourth 6ce of -=ect>e %eachng s enthusasm. 6s straghtfor8ard as t
ma, seem) Of ,ou hate to teach t) ,our students 8ll hate to learn t.T
*on>ersel,) f ,ou lo>e to teach t) ,our students ma, >er, 8ell lo>e to learn t.
-nthusasm s contagous. +ore e=ect>e teachers dspla, a hgh le>el of
enthusasm that reKects ther professonal competence and conMdence. %hese
characterstcs are der>ed from the nd>dual teacherUs subject matter
Ino8ledge and nstructonal e1perence. %eachers can begn to establsh a
post>e learnng en>ronment b, sho8ng ther passon for the subject matter)
usng student names) renforcng student partcpaton durng class) and beng
act>e n mo>ng among the students. %he most crtcal component for fosterng
classroom enthusasm) ho8e>er) s student success. 6ccordngl,) t s the
teacherNs responsblt, to establsh a classroom en>ronment that allo8s for a
hgh degree of student ache>ement. Eltmatel,) hgh le>els of student
ache>ement ser>e as a po8erful mot>ator for both student and teacher.
Were your students excited about attending your last class? Were you
excited about teaching your last class? What have you done to efectively
communicate your passion for the sub%ect matter that you teach to your
students? What strategies do you employ to stay current in your feld of study
and communicate your excitement about new developments? How have your
past teaching, research, and service been used to positively impact the
teaching'learning environment for your students?
Sam-*e .esson
Fn order to optmBe student learnng) teachers should plan to ntegrate the
Dour 6ces of -=ect>e %eachng throughout each lesson. %he follo8ng sectons
descrbe the components of an e=ect>e lesson) the purpose of each component)
and respect>e strateges for the practcal applcaton of the Dour 6ces of
-=ect>e %eachng.
%nstant Activit"
6n nstant act>t, s an educatonal nter>enton that s used to engage
students mmedatel, upon enterng the classroom. 6n nstant act>t, can ser>e
as a re>e8 of pre>ous course materal) a pre>e8 of upcomng nformaton) and
a management technLue for organBng the class. 6n nstant act>t, can be
used 8th nd>duals) small groups) or an entre class. %o ache>e success 8th an
nstant act>t,) the tasIs should be clear) smple) and based on studentsU pror
Ino8ledge and/or sIlls. Dor e1ample) the teacher could engage students as the,
enter class b, GaH asIng the students to formulate Luestons based on the
assgned readngs for that class perod and ha>ng peers ans8er them) GbH
admnsterng an nformal pre<test on the lessonNs Ie, concepts) GcH allo8ng
students to 8orI n small groups to ans8er teacher<drected Luestons that ha>e
been 8rtten on the board) or GdH encouragng students to reKect on ther o8n
personal e1perences regardng the da,Ns topc as a catal,st for n<class
dscusson and subseLuent learnng of subject matter to be ntroduced.
.esson (!/ectives
6fter the students complete an nstant act>t,) the teacher should present
the students 8th dal, object>es GoutcomesH. %he central concept s to specf,
these object>es n terms of student performance. %hese outcomes nform
students of 8hat the, should Ino8 or be able to do at the completon of the
lesson. %eachers can subseLuentl, assess student ache>ement of the stated
object>es as an ndcator of student learnng and ther o8n nstructonal
e=ect>eness. Dor dal, object>es to be utlBed e=ect>el,) the, should be clear)
measurable) and drectl, related to the desred course competences. Dor
e1ample) follo8ng a lesson on cardo>ascular Mtness) the students n a health
promoton course ma, be reLured GaH to deMne cardo>ascular Mtness) GbH to
dentf, the bod,Ns ph,sologcal response to e1ercse and the assocated health<
related beneMts) and GcH to desgn an e1ercse program to enhance a patentNs
cardo>ascular Mtness. Fn another e1ample) follo8ng a lesson on buo,anc,)
students n a ph,scs course ma, be reLured: GaH to deMne 6rchmedes prncple)
GbH to sol>e a problem n>ol>ng buo,anc,) GcH to maIe an object that Koats) and
GdH to dscuss the e=ects of 8ater dsplacement on boat desgn.
Advance (rgani0er
6n ad>ance organBer can be a topcal outlne) dagram) or concept map that
has the prmar, purpose of pro>dng a coherent structure for the presentaton of
the n>ol>ed nstructonal materal. 6n e=ect>e ad>ance organBer clarMes the
scope and seLuence of a lesson for the teacher and student b, pro>dng an
o>er>e8 of the lesson content. 6ccordngl,) an ad>ance organBer asssts
students n structurng ther thnIng) class notes) and out<of<class stud,. 6 lesson
on stress management) for e1ample) ma, nclude the follo8ng seLuentall,
arranged components: GaH deMnton of stress) GbH ph,sologcal response of the
human bod, to stress) GcH causes of stress) and GdH e=ect>e stress management
technLues. Fn another e1ample) a statstcs teacher mght present a dagram to
represent the t,pes of graphng technLues that 8ll be dscussed durng the
lesson and the amount of tme that 8ll be allocated to each technLue Gsee
Dgure 2H.
.esson 1od"
%he lesson bod, t,pcall, represents the major porton of the lesson 8here
the teacher pro>des nformaton to the students and asssts n ther constructon
of functonal Ino8ledge structures. %radtonall,) the lesson bod, s consttuted
b, a lecture or lecture<dscusson format. +ore e=ect>e teachers use the Dour
6ces of -=ect>e %eachng durng the lesson bod,. 9urng ths tme) nformaton
should be presented enthusastcall, and clearl,. Durthermore) the lesson should
buld upon studentsN pror Ino8ledge and act>el, engage the students
repeatedl,. Fn addton) the materal presented and the assgned act>tes should
ser>e as a means for students to ache>e the dal, lesson object>es GoutcomesH.
%o accomplsh ths) teachers should desgn learnng act>tes and dstrbute them
throughout the lesson bod,. Dor e1ample) a teacher ma, ha>e students GaH 8rte
a Lueston that others ans8er) GbH assemble slps of paper to construct a
sentence or a stor, outlne) GcH dra8 a graph of a phenomenon from memor,) GdH
speculate about e=ects of rec,clng) GeH crcle 8ords on a 8orIsheet) GfH locate
9sne, on the Fnternet) GgH dscuss "amletNs dlemma) GhH buld a mutual fund) GH
tell each other messages about a ballNs trajector, 8th ther bacIs turned to each
other) GjH branstorm pro>sons for a treat,) and GIH about 4:: other deas.
.esson C*osure
6 closure should brng ,our lesson full crcle. 6lthough a closure s consdered
a necessar, part of an e=ect>e lesson) man, teachers ma, sacrMce ths porton
of the lesson due to tme constrants. 6 closure) ho8e>er) s a >tal part of an
e=ect>e lesson and can ser>e as the tme to reterate the lesson object>es)
clarf, the organBaton of the lesson) summarBe the lesson bod,) checI for
student understandng) and pre>e8 the upcomng lesson. +ost mportantl,) a
closure can ma1mBe student engagement tme through the use of a >aret, of
reKect>e act>tes. Sour students should engage n an e=ect>e closure on a
dal, bass. Dor e1ample) after re>e8ng the Ie, ponts of a lesson on cultural
d>erst, and communcaton sIlls n the 8orIplace) the teacher can engage the
students n a reKect>e act>t, b, reLurng them to lst three strateges for
mpro>ng ther o8n communcaton sIlls n a culturall, d>erse 8orI
en>ronment.
%he precedng llustraton of a sample lesson represents one s,stematc
approach for ntegratng the Dour 6ces of -=ect>e %eachng nto educatonal
practce. /nl, ,our magnaton and commtment to ,our students lmt the
possbltes of ho8 ,ou mght emplo, these prncples.
The Fina* 2and
6 teacherNs prmar, responsblt, s to facltate learnng. %he research
lterature on teacher e=ect>eness g>es e1cellent gudance for dong the job of
teachng 8ell. %he Dour 6ces of -=ect>e %eachng Goutcomes) clart,)
engagement) and enthusasmH assst n brngng order out of potental chaos. %he
aces represent prncples that) 8hen s,stematcall, mplemented) can enhance
student learnng and be used as a >ehcle for contnual self<e1amnaton to
mpro>e ,our nstructonal e=ect>eness. %he basc tenets of the Dour 6ces of
-=ect>e %eachng should be stocI tems n the arsenal of conscentous objectors
to bad educaton. %herefore) f ,ou fanc, ,ourself a student ad>ocate 8ho does
not 8ant to gamble 8th nstructonal practce and student learnng) then bet on
a sure thng and stacI the decI n fa>or of ,our students b, utlBng the Dour
6ces of -=ect>e %eachng.
(an you fnd and mar" examples of the components of an efective lesson in
this article? (an you fnd and mar" examples of the )our *ces of +fective
,eaching in this article? (an you explain the )our *ces of +fective ,eaching to a
colleague? (an you design a new lesson or redesign a previous lesson using the
instructional and organi-ational principles described in this article?
&eferences
0roph,) !.) & (ood) %.'. G1926H. %eacher beha>or and student ache>ement. Fn
+.*. &ttrocI G-d.H) Handboo" of research on teaching G3
rd
ed.H. Je8 SorI:
+acmllan. P;Q
9unIn) +.) & 9oneau) #. G192:H. 6 replcaton stud, of unLue and jont
contrbutors to >arance n student ache>ement. .ournal of +ducational
/sychology, 01, 394<4:3. P;Q
Dsher) *.&.) 0erlner) 9.*.) Dlb,) J.J.) +arla>e) ;.) *ahen) '.#.) & 9sha8) +.+.
G192:H. %eachng beha>ors) academc learnng tme) and student ache>ement:
6n o>er>e8. Fn *. 9enham & 6. 'eberman G-ds.H) ,ime to learn2 &ashngton)
9.*.: Jatonal Fnsttute of -ducaton. P;Q
;osenshne) 0.) & Durst) J. G1933H. ;esearch on teacher performance crtera. Fn
0./. #mth G-d.H) 3esearch in teacher education4 * symposium2 -ngle8ood *l=s)
J!: .rentce<"all. P;Q
#mth) '. G1939H. %asI<orented lessons and student ache>ement. .ournal of
+ducational 3esearch, 05, 16<19. P;Q