1,678
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

In search of the excellent literature teacher. An inductive approach to constructing professional teaching standards

&
Pages 565-583 | Received 12 Apr 2013, Accepted 10 Feb 2014, Published online: 16 Mar 2015

References

  • Beach, R., Appleman, D., Hynds, S., & Wilhelm, J. (2011). Teaching Literature to Adolescents (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Beck, C., Hart, D., & Kosnik, C. (2002). The teaching standards movement and current teaching practice. Canadian Journal of Education, 27, 175–194.10.2307/1602219
  • Beijaard, D. (2006). Dilemmas and conflicting constraints in teachers’ development and perception of professional identity. Paper presented at the EARLI SIG Professional Learning and Development Conference, October 11–13. Heerlen, The Netherlands.
  • Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 107–128.10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
  • Bonset, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2004). Mother-tongue education (L1) in the learning-to-learn paradigm: Creative redevelopment of learning materials. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 4, 35–62.10.1023/B:ESLL.0000033848.96679.e6
  • Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81–109.10.1017/S0261444803001903
  • Broekkamp, H., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. (2007). The gap between educational research and practice: A literature review, symposium, and questionnaire. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13, 203–220.10.1080/13803610701626127
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington.
  • Day, C., & Sachs, J. (2004). Professionalism, performativity and empowerment: Discourses in the politics, policies and purposes of continuing professional development. In C. Day & J. Sachs (Eds.), International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers (pp. 3–32). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
  • Denessen, E. (1999). Opvattingen over onderwijs. Leerstof- en leerlinggerichtheid in Nederland [Views on teaching. Curriculum-based and student-based approaches in the Netherlands]. Leuven/Apeldoorn: Garant.
  • Evans, E. D., & Tribble, M. (1986). Perceived teaching problems, self-efficacy, and commitment to teaching among preservice teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 80, 81–85.
  • Frielink, S. J., Backbier, E., Simons, J., Groeneveld, M., & Franck, E. (2001). Taakbesteding en taakbelasting van leraren. Onderzoeksrapport Beleidsonderzoek Arbeidsvoorwaarden en Beroepskwaliteit Onderwijspersoneel nr 66 [Task allocation and teacher workload. Research report on working conditions and professional quality of teachers]. Zoetermeer: Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and their impact on instruction. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. J. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 51–94). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Goodlad, J., Klein, M., & Tye, K. (1979). Curriculum inquiry. The study of curriculum practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.
  • Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers. Maximizing impact on learning. London: Routledge.
  • Hilton, G., Flores, M. A., & Niklasson, L. (2013). Teacher quality, professionalism and professional development: Findings from a European project. Teacher Development: An International Journal of Teachers’ Professional Development, 17, 431–447.
  • Ingvarson, L. (1998). Teaching standards: Foundations for professional development reform. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (pp. 1006–1031). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-011-4944-0
  • Jansen, E. P. W. A., & Bruinsma, M. (2007). Duale trajecten en zijinstroom: studiemotieven en ervaringen van studenten van de lerarenopleiding in hun praktijkperiode [Dual pathways and unqualified teachers: Students’ study motives and experiences in their practical training period]. Den Haag: Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen. Beleidsonderzoek arbeidsmarkt en personeelsbeleid onderwijs (157).
  • Janssen, T., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). Approaches to the teaching of literature: A national survey of literary education in Dutch secondary schools. In R. J. Kreuz & M. S. MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical approaches to literature and aesthetics (pp. 513–536). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  • Janssen, F., Veldman, I., & van Tartwijk, J. (2008). Professionele docenten opleiden: een opleidingsvisie [Training professional teachers: A view of training]. Tijdschrift voor lerarenopleiders, 29, 5–13.
  • Kamil, M. L., Pearson, P. D., Moje, E. B., & Afflerbach, P. P. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of reading research., Vol. 4. New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Kennedy, M. (1997). The connection between research and practice. Educational Researcher, 26, 4–12.10.3102/0013189X026007004
  • Kriewaldt, J. (2012). Reorienting teaching standards: Learning from lesson study. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40, 31–41.10.1080/1359866X.2011.643761
  • Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B. P. M., & Antoniou, P. (2009). Teacher behaviour and student outcomes: Suggestions for research on teacher training and professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 12–23.10.1016/j.tate.2008.06.001
  • Langer, J. A. (2010). Envisioning literature: Literary understanding and literature instruction (2nd ed.). Language and Literacy Series. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  • Lapp, D., & Fisher, D. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Lingard, B. (2005). Socially just pedagogies in changing times. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 15, 165–186.
  • Mayer, D., Mitchell, J., Macdonald, D., & Bell, R. (2005). Professional standards for teachers: A case study of professional learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33, 159–179.10.1080/13598660500121977
  • McIntyre, D. (2005). Bridging the gap between research and practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35, 357–382.10.1080/03057640500319065
  • Meyer, H. (2004). Novice and expert teachers' conceptions of learners' prior knowledge. Science Education, 88, 970–983.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
  • Mulcahy, D. (2011). Assembling the ‘accomplished’ teacher: The performativity and politics of professional teaching standards. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43, 94–113. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2009.00617.x
  • National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. In R. J. Shavelson & L. Towne (Eds.), Center for education, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Pearson, J. E., & Goff, S. B. (1980). Achievement motivation and values. In L. J. Fyans (Ed.), Achievement motivation: Recent trends in theory and research (pp. 102–131). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
  • Sachs, J. (2003). Teacher professional standards: Controlling or developing teaching? Teachers and Teaching, 9, 175–186.10.1080/13540600309373
  • Sachs, J. (2011). Accountability, standards and teacher activism: An unholy trinity or the way for the profession to shape the future. Paper presented at the Post Primary Teachers Association (PPTA) Conference, April 18–20. Wellington, New Zealand.
  • Santoro, N., Reid, J., Mayer, D., & Singh, M. (2012). Producing ‘quality’ teachers: The role of teacher professional standards. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1), 1–3.10.1080/1359866X.2012.644508
  • Smith, K. (2005). New methods and perspectives on teacher evaluation. Who evaluates what and for which purposes? In D. Beijaard, P. C. Meijer, G. Morine-Dershimer, & H. Tillema (Eds.), Teacher professional development in changing conditions (pp. 95–114). Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-3699-X
  • Spiro, R., Feltovich, P., Jacobson, M., & Coulson, R. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology, 33, 24–33.
  • Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlaum.
  • Timmerman, G., & Van Essen, M. (2004). De mythe van het ‘vrouwengevaar’. Een historische inventarisatie van (inter)nationaal onderzoek naar de relatie tussen feminisering en ‘jongensproblemen’ in het onderwijs [The myth of the ‘women peril’. A historical inventory of national and international research into the relationship between feminization and ‘problems of boys’ in education]. Pedagogiek, 24, 57–71.
  • Van de Ven, P. H., & Doecke, B. (Eds.). (2011). Literary praxis. A conversational inquiry into the teaching of literature. Rotterdam, Boston, MA: Sense Publishers.
  • Van Essen, M. (1999). Strategies of women teachers 1860–1920: Feminization in Dutch elementary and secondary schools from a comparative perspective. History of Education, 28, 413–433.10.1080/004676099284546
  • Verloop, N., Van Driel, J., & Meijer, P. (2001). Teacher knowledge and the knowledge base of teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 441–461.10.1016/S0883-0355(02)00003-4
  • Vogels, R. (2009). Gelukkig voor de klas? Leraren voortgezet onderwijs over hun werk [Happy teaching? Secondary school teachers talk about their work]. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.
  • Witte, T. C. H., Rijlaarsdam, G. C. W., & Schram, D. H. (2012). An empirically grounded theory of literary development. Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge on literary development in upper secondary education. L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 12(1), 1–34.
  • Witte, T. C. H., & Sâmihăian, F. (2013). Is Europe open to a student-oriented framework for literature? A comparative analysis of the formal literature curriculum in six European countries. L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 13(1), 1–22.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.