Professionalizing teachers through a co-design learning framework

References

• Baines, A., A. DeBarger, K. De Vivo, N. Warner, S. Santos, J. Brinkman, D. Udall, N. Zuckerbrod, K. Felson, and R. Urban. 2021. Key Principles for Project-Based Learning. CA: Lucas Education Research. https://www.lucasedresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Key-Principles-for-PBL-White-Paper-1.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Björgvinsson, E., P. Ehn, and P. Hillgren. 2010. “Participatory Design and ‘Democratizing Innovation.’” In 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, Syndey, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Boardman, A. G., A. Garcia, B. Dalton, and J. L. Polman. 2021. Compose Our World: Project-Based Learning in Secondary English Language Arts. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking. 1999. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-88415-752-6.50153-3.
   Google Scholar
• Bryk, A. S., and B. Schneider. 2002. Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for Improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E., S. Bae, and E. O. Turner. 2008. “Authority, Status, and the Dynamics of Insider-Outsider Partnerships at the District Level.” Peabody Journal of Education 83 (3): 364–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619560802222350.
   Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E., J. Toure, and M. Yamashita. 2009. “Evidence, Interpretation, and Persuasion: Instructional Decision Making at the District Central Office.” Teachers College Record 111 (4): 1115–1161. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810911100403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Condliffe, B., J. Quint, M. G. Visher, M. R. Bangser, S. Drohojowska, L. Saco, and E. Nelson. 2017. Project-Based Learning: A Literature Review. MDRC. https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/Project-Based_Learning-LitRev_Final.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Couso, D. 2016. “Participatory Approaches to Curriculum Design from a Design Research Perspective.” In Iterative Design of Teaching-Learning Sequences, edited by D. Psillos and P. Kariotoglou, 47–71. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Spring Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7808-5_4.
   Google Scholar
• Cuban, L. 2013. Inside the Black Box of Classroom Practice: Change without Reform in American Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Darling-Hammond, L., M. E. Hyler, and M. Gardner. 2017. Effective Teacher Professional Development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Desimone, L. M., T. Wolford, and K. L. Hill. 2016. “Research-Practice: A Practical Conceptual Framework.” AERA Open 2 (4): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416679599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and Power. New York: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Farrow, J. M., S. S. Kavanagh, and P. Samudra. 2022. “Exploring Relationships Between Professional Development and Teachers’ Enactments of Project-Based Learning.” Education Sciences 12 (4): 282. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman, B. J., and E. A. Davis. 2006. “Teacher Learning Research and the Learning Sciences.” In The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, edited by R. K. Sawyer, 535–550. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.033.
   Google Scholar
• Fishman, B. J., W. R. Penuel, A. R. Allen, B. H. Cheng, and N. Sabelli. 2013. “Design-Based Implementation Research: An Emerging Model for Transforming the Relationship of Research and Practice.” Teachers College Record 115 (14): 136–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311501415.
   Google Scholar
• Fishman, B. J., W. R. Penuel, S. Hegedus, and J. Roschelle. 2011. “What Happens When the Research Ends? Factors Related to the Sustainability of a Technology-Infused Mathematics Curriculum.” Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 30 (4): 329–353.
   Google Scholar
• Francisco, S., A. F. Seiser, and C. Grice. 2021. “Professional Learning That Enables the Development of Critical Praxis.” Professional Development in Education 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1879228.
   Google Scholar
• Grossman, P., C. G. P. Dean, S. S. Kavanagh, and Z. Herrmann. 2019. “Preparing Teachers for Project-Based Teaching.” Phi Delta Kappan 100 (7): 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721719841338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, A. 2014. “Forward: Six Sources of Change in Professional Development.” In Handbook of Professional Development in Education: Successful Models and Practices, PreK-12, edited by L. E. Martin, S. Kragler, D. J. Quatroche, and K. L. Bauserman, x–xix. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayakawa, M., M. E. Englund, A. Candee, E. Lease, M. Sullivan, M. Warner-Richter, and A.J. Reynolds. 2015. “Effective Partnerships in School Reform: Lessons Learned from the Midwest Child-Parent Center Expansion.” Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 20 (4): 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2015.1072469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henrick, E. C., P. Cobb, W.R. Penuel, K. Jackson, and T. Clark. 2017. Assessing Research-Practice Partnerships: Five Dimensions of Effectiveness. New York: William T. Grant Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R., S. Severance, W.R. Penuel, and H. Leary. 2016. “Teachers, Tasks, and Tensions: Lessons from a Research–Practice Partnership.” Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 19 (2–3): 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-015-9338-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juuti, K., J. Lavonen, V. Salonen, K. Salmela-Aro, B. Schneider, J. Krajcik. 2021. “A Teacher Researcher Partnership for Professional Learning: Co-Designing Project-Based Learning Units to Increase Student Engagement in Science Classes.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 32 (6): 625–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.1872207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyza, E. A., and A. Agesilaou. 2022. “Investigating the Process of Teacher and Researcher Empowerment and Learning in Co-Design Settings.” Cognition and Instruction 40 (1): 100–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2021.2010213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LearnDBIR. n.d. “Deciding a Focus for Joint Work [Online].” LearnDBIR. Accessed June 25, 2021. http://learndbir.org/principles/deciding-on-a-focus-for-joint-work.
   Google Scholar
• Lieberman, A., and L. Miller. 2014. “Teachers as Professionals: Evolving Definitions of Staff Development.” In Handbook of Professional Development in Education: Successful Models and Practices, PreK-12, edited by L. E. Martin, S. Kragler, D. J. Quatroche, and K. L. Bauserman, 3–21. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Louws, M., R. Zwart, I. Zuiker, P. Meijer, H. Oolbekkink-Marchand, H. Schaap, and A. van der Want. 2020. “Exploring School Leaders’ Dilemmas in Response to Tensions Related to Teacher Professional Agency.” Professional Development in Education 46 (4): 691–710. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1787203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, C., and K. Black-Hawkins. 2004. “A Schools-University Research Partnership: Understandings, Models and Complexities.” Journal of In-Service Education 30 (2): 265–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674580400200319.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., A. M. Huberman, and J. Saldaña. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R. 2019. “Infrastructuring as a Practice of Design-Based Research for Supporting and Studying Equitable Implementation and Sustainability of Innovations.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1552151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., C. E. Coburn, and D. J. Gallagher. 2013. “Negotiating Problems of Practice in Research – Practice Design Partnerships.” Teachers College Record 115 (14): 237–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311501404.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., and L. P. Gallagher. 2009. “Preparing Teachers to Design Instruction for Deep Understanding in Middle School Earth Science.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 18 (4): 461–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903191904.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R. and A. S. Potvin. 2021. “Design-Based Implementation Research to Support Inquiry Learning.” In International Handbook of Inquiry and Learning, edited by C. Chinn, R. Duncan, S. Goldman, and M. Kapur, 74–87. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315685779-6.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., J. Roschelle, and N. Shechtman. 2007. “Designing Formative Assessment Software with Teachers: An Analysis of the Co-Design Process.” Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 2 (1): 51–74. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793206807000300.
   Google Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., M. Sun, K. A. Frank, and H. A. Gallagher. 2012. “Using Social Network Analysis to Study How Collegial Interactions Can Augment Teacher Learning from External Professional Development.” American Journal of Education 119 (November): 103–136. https://doi.org/10.1086/667756.
   Google Scholar
• Potvin, A. S. 2021. ““Students Speaking to you”: Teachers Listen to Student Surveys to Improve Classroom Environment.” Learning Environments Research 24 (2): 239–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-020-09330-1.
   Google Scholar
• Potvin, A. S., R. G. Kaplan, A. G. Boardman, and J. L. Polman. 2018. “Configurations in Co-Design: Participant Structures in Partnership Work.” In Connecting Research and Practice for Educational Improvement, edited by B. Bevan and W. R. Penuel, 135–149. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315268309-9.
   Google Scholar
• Potvin, A. S., L. P. Teeters, and W. R. Penuel. 2021. “Designing for Compassion in Schools: A Humanizing Approach to Co-Design.” In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, edited by E. de Bries, Y. Hod, and J. Ahn, 131–138. Bochum, Germany: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Radinsky, J., L. Bouillion, E. M. Lento, and L. M. Gomez. 2001. “Mutual Benefit Partnership: A Curricular Design for Authenticity.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 33 (4): 405–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270118862.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scornavacco, K., M. R. Kelly, and A. Boardman. 2022. “Leading with Curricular Co-Design: An Exploration of Teacher Leadership Through the Co-Design Process.” Journal of Research on Leadership Education 17 (4): 333–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/19427751211017595.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparks, D., and N. Malkus. 2015. “Public School Teacher Autonomy in the Classroom Across School Years 2003-04, 2007-08, and 2011-12.” Stats in Brief. NCES 2015-089. National Center for Education Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Spillane, J. P. 1998. “State Policy and the Non-Monolithic Nature of the Local School District: Organizational and Professional Considerations.” American Educational Research Journal 35 (1): 33–63. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312035001033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Star, S. L., and J. R. Griesemer. 1989. ““Institutional Ecology, `Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals” in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology.” Social Studies of Science 19 (August): 387–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001.
   Google Scholar
• van Kraayenoord, C. E., E. Honan, and K. B. Moni. 2011. “Negotiating Knowledge in a Researcher and Teacher Collaborative Research Partnership.” Teacher Development 15 (4): 403–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2011.635267.
   Google Scholar
• Voogt, J., T. Laferriére, A. Breuleux, R. C. Itow, D. T. Hickey, and S. McKenney. 2015. “Collaborative Design as a Form of Professional Development.” Instructional Science 43 (2): 259–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9340-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh, M. E., and S. Backe. 2013. “School–University Partnerships: Reflections and Opportunities.” Peabody Journal of Education 88 (5): 594–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2013.835158.
   Google Scholar