Quality teaching frameworks and arts education: Seeking a compatible approach

References

• Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2013). Schools. Canberra: Author. ISSN 1035–3461.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2011). National professional standards for teachers. Carlton: MCEECDYA. ISBN: 978-0-9871650-3-9.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braden, J. (2004). Productive pedagogies, quality teaching and inclusion: High intellectual quality and students with disabilities. In B. Bartlett, F. Bryer, & D. Roebuck (Eds.), Educating: Weaving research into practice (Vol. 1, pp. 18–30). Nathan, Qld: Griffith University, School of Cognition, Language and Special Education.
   Google Scholar
• Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burnard, P., & White, J. (2008). Creativity and performativity: Counterpoints in British and Australian education. British Educational Research Journal, 34(5), 667–682.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charleroy, A., Gentry, C., Greco, A., Rubion, N., & Schatz, M. (2011). Arts education standards and 21st century skills. New York: The College Board. Retrieved from https://nccas.wikispaces.com/file/view/ArtsEducationStandards_21stCenturySkills.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Chong, S., & Ho, P. (2009). Quality teaching and learning: A quality assurance framework for initial teacher preparation programmes. International Journal Management in Education, 3(3/4), 302–314. Retrieved from http://www.nie.edu.sg/files/oaqm/FP%20QA%20Framework%20Paper.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Evaluating teacher effectiveness: How teacher performance assessments can measure and improve teaching. Washington DC: Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/evaluating-teacher-effectiveness_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Education. (2011). Teachers’ standards: Guidance for school leaders, school staff and governing bodies. London: Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Education. (2012). UK Teachers’ Standards. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations. (2010). OECD Review on evaluation and assessment frameworks for improving school outcomes: Country background report for Australia. Canberra: DEEWR. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/48523989.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education (1966 edn). New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, K. (2009). Sharpening our focus in measuring classroom instruction. Educational Researcher, 38(7), 518–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewing, R., Smith, D., Anderson, M., Gibson, R., & Manuel, J. (2004). Teachers as learners: Australian government quality teaching program. Sydney: Division of Professional Learning, Faculty of Education & Social Work. Retrieved from http://sydney.edu.au/education_social_work/professional_learning/resources/papers/AGQTP_reports/2003-04_QTAL_Teachers_%20As_Learners_Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Fleming, J., & Mansour, M. (2016). Reading the intersection of the qualitative and quantitative approaches. In J. Fleming, R. Gibson, & M. Anderson (Eds.), The arts, motivation and engagement: How the arts makes a difference. London: Routledge. 70–86
   Google Scholar
• Fleming, J., Ewing, R., Anderson, M., & Klieve, H. (2014). Reimagining the Wheel: The implications of cultural diversity for mainstream theatre programming in Australia. Theatre Research International, 39(2), 133–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleming, J., Gibson, R., & Anderson, M. (Eds). (2016). How arts education makes a difference. London: Routledge
   Google Scholar
• Fleming, J., Gibson, R., Anderson, M., Martin, A. J., & Sudmalis, D. (2015). Cultivating imaginative thinking: Teacher strategies used in high-performing arts education classrooms. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46(4), 435–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friesen, S. (2009). What did you do in school today? Teaching effectiveness: A framework and Rubric. Toronto: Canadian Education Association.
   Google Scholar
• Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, R., Fleming, J., Anderson, M., Martin, A., & Sudmalis, M. (2015). Testing times for the arts. Asia-Pacific Journal of Arts Education, 14(1), 1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Hamre, B. K., Goffin, S. G., & Kraft-Sayre, L. (2009). Classroom assessment scoring system (CLASS): Implementation guide. Virginia: Castl & Teachstone. Retrieved from http://www.vbgrowsmart.com/providers/Documents/CLASSImplementationGuide.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Downer, J. T., DeCoster, J., Mashburn, A. J., Jones, S., … Hamagami, A. (2013). Teaching through interactions: Testing a developmental framework of teacher effectiveness in over 4,000 classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 113(4), 461–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, A. (2014). The creative turn: Towards a new aesthetic imaginary. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Hattie, J. (2009). Visbile learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, D., Mills, M., Christie, P., & Lingard, B. (2006). Teachers and schooling making a difference: Productive pedagogies, assessment and performance. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of visual arts education (1st ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Isoré, M. (2009). Teacher evaluation: Current practices in OECD countries and a literature review. OECD Education Working Papers.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson, M., & Anderson, M. (2017). Transforming schools: Creativity, critical reflection, communication, collaboration. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Kellaghan, T., Greaney, V., & Murray, T. S. (2009). Using the results of a national assessment of educational achievement (Vol. 5). Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinhenz, E., Ingvarson, L., & Chadbourne, R. (2001). Teacher evaluation uncoupled: A discussion of teacher evaluation policies and practices in Australian States and their relation to quality teaching and learning. Australian Council of Educational Research annual conference, 2-10 December. Freemantle
   Google Scholar
• Ladwig, J. (2007). Modelling pedagogy in Australian school reform. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 2(2), 57–76.
   Google Scholar
• Ladwig, J. (2009). Working backwards towards curriculum: On the curricular implications of quality teaching. Curriculum Journal, 20(3), 271–286.
   Google Scholar
• Ladwig, J., & Gore, J. (2003). Companion paper 1: The future of quality teaching in NSW government schools. In NSW Department of Education and Training (Ed.), Report of the consultation on future directions for public education and training: One size doesn’t fit all (pp. 113–119). Sydney: Author. Retrieved from https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/reviews/futuresproject/report/l_comppaper1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ladwig, J., & Gore, J. (2006). Quality teaching in NSW public schools: A classroom practice guide. Ryde: Department of Education and Training.
   Google Scholar
• Ladwig, J., & King, M. (2003). Quality teaching in NSW public schools: An annotated bibliography. Sydney: NSW Department of Education and Training.
   Google Scholar
• Ladwig, J., Smith, M., Gore, J., Amosa, W., & Griffiths, T. (2007). Quality of pedagogy and student achievement: Multi-level replication of authentic pedagogy. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, 25-29 November, Freemantle. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2007/lad07283.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lingard, B., & Keddie, A. (2013). Redistribution, recognition and representation: Working against pedagogies of indifference. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 21(3), 427–447.
   Google Scholar
• Lingard, B., Ladwig, J., Mills, M., Bahr, N., Chant, D., Warry, M., … Luke, A. (2001). The Queensland school reform longitudinal study (pp. 1 & 2). Brisbane: Education Queensland.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, A. J. (2009). Motivation and engagement across the academic lifespan: A developmental construct validity study of elementary school, high school, and university/college students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 794–824.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, A. J., Mansour, M., Anderson, M., Gibson, R., Liem, G., & Sudmalis, D. (2013). The role of arts participation in students’ academic and nonacademic outcomes: A longitudinal study of school, home, and community factors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 709–727.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, M., Goos, M., Keddie, K., Honan, E., Pednergast, D., Gilbert, R., … Wright, T. (2009). Productive pedagogies: A refined methodology for analysing quality teaching practice. Australian Educational Researcher, 36(3), 67–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Association of Secondary School Principals. (2006). The arts: New possibilities for teaching and learning. Principal’s Research Review, 1(2), 1–5. issn: 1558-5948.
   Google Scholar
• Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. H., & Gamoran, A. (1995a). Authentic pedagogy: Standards that boost student performance. Report No. 8 Issues in restructuring schools. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin—Madison. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED390906.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Newman, F. M, & Secada, W. G. & Wehlage, G. G. (1995b). A guide to authentic instruction and assessment: Vision, standards, and scoring. Madison, W1: Centre on Organisation and Restructuring of Schools, Wisconsin Centre for Education Research, University of Wisconsin—Madison
   Google Scholar
• NSW Department of Education and Training. (2003). Quality teaching in NSW public schools: Discussion paper. Sydney: Author.
   Google Scholar
• NSW Department of Education and Training. (2005). Report on the consultation on future directions for public education and training: One size doesn’t fit all. Sydney: Author. Retrieved from https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/reviews/futuresproject/report/z_futuresreport.pdf
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris: Author.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2013). Synergies for better learning: An international perspective on evaluation and assessment. Paris: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachs, J. (2003). Teacher professional standards: Controlling or developing teaching? Teachers and Teaching, 9(2), 175–186.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative teaching: Collaborative discussion as disciplined improvization. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12–20.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, R. K. (2014). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, D. L., Bransford, J., & Sears, D. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning: Research and perspectives. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. 1–55.
   Google Scholar
• Seidel, S., Tishman, S., Winner, E., Hetland, L., & Palmer, P. (2010). The qualities of quality: Understanding excellence in arts education. Cambridge: Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/arts-education/arts-classroom-instruction/documents/understanding-excellence-in-arts-education.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevenson, J., & Deasy, R. J. (2005). Third space: When learning matters. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.
   Google Scholar
• Stronge, J. H., Ward, T. J., & Grant, L. W. (2011). What makes good teachers good? A cross-case analysis of the connection between teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 339–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terhart, E. (2011). Has John Hattie really found the hold grail of research on teaching? An extended review of visible learning. Journal of Curriulum Studies, 43(3), 425–438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker, P., & Stronge, J. H. (2005). Linking teacher evaluation and student learning. Alexandria: ASCD Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Vincent-Lancrin, S., Kärkkäinen, K., Pfotenhauer, S., Atkinson, A., Jocotin, G., & Rimini, M. (2014). Measuring innovation in education: Centre for educational research and innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar