The content of electronic mentoring: A study of special educators participating in an online mentoring program
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES
................................ ................................ ................................ ..........
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
................................ ................................ ................................ .........
ix
ABSTRACT
................................ ................................ ................................ ..................
x i
1. INTRODUCTION
................................ ................................ ................................ ........
1
Conceptual Framework: How People Learn
................................ ................................ ..
6
Adaptive Expertise
................................ ................................ ................................ .
9
Statement of the Problem
................................ ................................ ..........................
10
Statement of the Purpose
................................ ................................ ..........................
12
Developmenta l Needs of Beginning Teachers
................................ .............................
15
Rationale
for the Study of the Problem
................................ ................................ ......
17
Liter ature and Research Background
................................ ................................ ..........
19
Electronic Mentoring
................................ ................................ .............................
22
Electronic Mentoring for Studen t Success Program ................................ ...........
2 3
Research Questions
................................ ................................ ................................ ....
25
Methodology
................................ ................................ ................................ .............
26
Summary
................................ ................................ ................................ ....................
27
Definition of Key Terms
................................ ................................ ..............................
27
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
................................ ................................ .........................
30
Introduction
................................ ................................ ................................ ...............
30
Needs of Beginning Special Educators
................................ ................................ ........
32
Literature Review
................................ ................................ ................................ .......
35
Face - to - Face Mentoring
................................ ................................ ........................
35
The Role of the Mentor
................................ ................................ .........................
49
Conceptual Framework: How People Learn
................................ ................................
55
Teachers Standards
................................ ................................ ...............................
60
Summary and Limitations of Literature
................................ ................................ ......
63
Electronic Mentoring (E - Mentoring)
................................ ................................ ...........
66
v
Page
Advantages of E - Mentoring
................................ ................................ ...................
67
Disadvantages of E - Mentoring
................................ ................................ ...............
70
Interactivity
................................ ................................ ................................ ...........
72
E - Mentoring With Teachers
................................ ................................ ...................
73
Studies of eMSS Program
................................ ................................ ......................
75
Summary and Limitatio ns of Existing E - Mentoring Research
................................ ......
78
The Current Study
................................ ................................ ................................ ......
80
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
................................ ................................ ....................
82
Introduction
................................ ................................ ................................ ...............
82
Context of the Study
................................ ................................ ................................ ..
82
Expected Data and Actual Data
................................ ................................ ..................
85
Research Design
................................ ................................ ................................ .........
86
Participants
................................ ................................ ................................ ................
90
Instrumentation
................................ ................................ ................................ .........
92
Survey
................................ ................................ ................................ ...................
92
Interaction Measures
................................ ................................ ............................
92
Procedures
................................ ................................ ................................ .................
93
Quantitative Research Procedures ................................ ................................ .........
93
Quantitative Data Analysis ................................ ................................ .....................
96
In - Depth Qualitative Analysis ................................ ................................ .................
97
Reflectivity
................................ ................................ ................................ ...............
104
Summary
................................ ................................ ................................ ..................
107
Limitations of Study
................................ ................................ ................................ .
108
4. FINDINGS
................................ ................................ ................................ .............
113
Survey Results
................................ ................................ ................................ ..........
11 4
Participants’ Educati on Background and Experienc e
................................ ............
115
Mentors
................................ ................................ ................................ ..........
115
Mentee Responses ................................ ................................ ..........................
115
Previous C omputer Usage and Experience
................................ ...........................
120
Perceived Outcomes
................................ ................................ ............................
123
Parti cipants Across the eMSS Site
................................ ................................ ........
128
Frequency of Interactions
................................ ................................ ....................
128
Our Place
................................ ................................ ................................ ........
130
Topic of the Month
................................ ................................ .........................
135
Cyber Café
................................ ................................ ................................ ......
137
Dilemmas
................................ ................................ ................................ ........
137
Ea rly Childhood/Elementary K - 5
................................ ................................ .....
138
Middle/High School
................................ ................................ ........................
139
vi
Page
The Content of Discourse
................................ ................................ ....................
141
Posti ngs Related to HPL Framework
................................ ................................ ....
141
Learner Centered
................................ ................................ ............................
143
Knowledge Centered ................................ ................................ .......................
145
Assessment Centere d
................................ ................................ .....................
146
Community Cent ered
................................ ................................ ......................
147
Posts Related to InTASC Standards
................................ ................................ ......
148
Learner Development
................................ ................................ .....................
149
Learner Differences ................................ ................................ .........................
151
Learning Environments
................................ ................................ ...................
151
Content Knowledge
................................ ................................ ........................
153
Application of Content
................................ ................................ ....................
154
Assessment
................................ ................................ ................................ .....
155
Plan for Instruction
................................ ................................ .........................
155
Instruc tional Strategies
................................ ................................ ...................
156
Professional Le arning and Ethical Practices
................................ .....................
158
Leadership and Collaboration
................................ ................................ .........
159
Posts Related to Beginning
Teachers Needs and Concerns
................................ ..
160
Inclusion, Collaboration,
and Interaction With Adults
................................ .....
160
Pedagogical Concerns
................................ ................................ .....................
162
Managing Roles
................................ ................................ ..............................
163
E motiona l and Psychological Concerns
................................ ...........................
163
Other Themes That Occurred
................................ ................................ ..............
164
Summary of Results
................................ ................................ ................................ .
165
5. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
................................ ................................ ................
167
Rese arch Problem and Methodology
................................ ................................ .......
167
Significance of the Study
................................ ................................ ..........................
169
Interpretation of Results
................................ ................................ ..........................
17 2
Participa nts
................................ ................................ ................................ .........
172
Perceived Out comes
................................ ................................ ............................
173
Ment ees’ End of Year Reflections ................................ ................................ ....
175
Ment ors’ End of Year Reflections
................................ ................................ ....
176
Frequency of Interactions
................................ ................................ ....................
179
Content Related to Beginning
Teachers Needs and Concerns
..............................
182
Conte nt Based on How People Learn
................................ ................................ ...
185
Learning Cen tered Environments
................................ ................................ ....
186
Knowledge
................................ ................................ ................................ ......
186
Assessment
................................ ................................ ................................ .....
187
Community - Based Environments
................................ ................................ ....
187
vii
Page
InTASC Standards
................................ ................................ ................................ .....
189
Study Limitations
................................ ................................ ................................ .....
190
Implications for Practice
................................ ................................ ...........................
194
Future Studies
................................ ................................ ................................ ..........
196
Summary
................................ ................................ ................................ ..................
198
LIST OF REFERENCES
................................ ................................ ................................
200
APPENDIXES:
A. Coding fo r How People Learn Framework
................................ ............................
264
B. Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium Model Core
Teaching Standards
................................ ................................ ..............................
268
C. eMSS Special Educatio n Mentee Presurvey 2009 - 2010
................................ ........
270
D Coding Protocol for Beginning Special Educators’ Needs and Co ncerns
.................
276
E. eMSS Home Page
................................ ................................ ................................ .
279
F. Common Threads Po sted in Our Place by Mentors
................................ ...............
284
G. Postings
Made by Mentors and Mentees
................................ .............................
289
H. Pr obes for Topics of the Month ................................ ................................ ............
294
I.
Discussion Dilemma Threads
................................ ................................ ...............
306
VITA
................................ ................................ ................................ .......................
315
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1. Summary of Data Sources and Analyses
................................ .............................
88
2. Frequency Distribution of eMSS M entors’ Preparation (N = 24)
.......................
116
3. Frequency Distribution of eMSS M entees’ Preparation (N = 45)
......................
118
4. Grade Level and Area of Exc eptionality Taught (Mentees)
...............................
119
5. Frequency Distribution of Previous O nline Experience for Mentors
.................
120
6. Reported Participation in Asynchronous and Synchronous Discussion
B oards by Mentors and Mentees
................................ ................................ ....
122
7. Mentees’ Perceptions of Qualification to Teach Students by Exception ality
....
12 4
8. Mentees’ Re ported Levels of Preparation
................................ ........................
126
9. Mentees’ R eported Levels of Experience
................................ .........................
127
10. Mentees’ Reported Gains From Pa rticipation in the eMSS Site
........................
129
11. Frequency of Posts in the eMSS Site
................................ ................................ .
13 1
12. Range b y Number of Mentees Assigned
................................ ...........................
133
13. Frequency of Mentor and Mentee Posts in Our Place
................................ ......
134
14. Total Mentor and Mentee Po stings by Topic of the Month
..............................
136
15. Frequency of Part icipant Postings in Dilemmas
................................ ................
138
16. Frequency of Participant Postings in Earl y Childhood Discussion Areas
............
140
ix
Table
Page
17. Frequency of Participant Postings in Middle/ High School Discussion Areas
......
140
18. Frequency of Postings by HPL Framework
................................ ........................
142
19. Posts by InTASC Standards
................................ ................................ ...............
149
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1. Learning in Community
................................ ................................ .....................
57
2. The HPL Dimension of Learning Environments
................................ ..................
59
3. Topical Areas Within eMSS Website ................................ ................................ ..
84
4. Mentors’ and Mentees’ Postings in Our Place
Versus All Other Sections of
the eMSS Site
................................ ................................ ................................ .
135
ABSTRACT
THE CONTENT OF ELECTRONIC MENTORING: A STUDY OF SPECIAL EDUCATORS PARTICIPATING IN AN ONLINE MENTORING PROGRAM
By Roberta Gentry, Ph.D.
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of D octor of Philosophy at Virginia Commonwealth University.
Virginia Commonwealth University, 2011
Major Director: Evelyn Reed, Ph.D., Associate Professor
Chair, Department of Special Education and Disability Policy
School of Education
The purpose of this study
was to describe the content and frequency of interactions that occurred in an electronic mentoring program involving beginning special educators and their mentors. In addition ,
the characteristics of mentors’ and mentees’ and perceived outcomes
of mentees’ were provided. This study sought to address questions about the types of support that new special educators seek and receive. A mixed method research design was utilized to explore the
archived transcripts of mentors’ and mentees’ discourse
as well as mentees’
and mentors’ post - survey s . Data were analyzed through the use of quantitative
and qualitative methods and interpreted through the use of Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium standards, How People Learn
framework, and d ocumented needs and concerns of beginning special educators based on a review of literature. Surveys responses included
descriptive information and perceptions of beginning teachers concerning their levels of preparedness at the completion of the pilot p rogram. This study provides an understanding of electronic mentoring within one program in order to inform efforts for mentoring and induction of beginning special educators.
Keywords:
mentoring, induction, electronic mentoring, special education teac hers
1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
The goal of public school systems is to provide high quality education to students ;
and
parents send their children to school fully expecting that well - trained, dedicated teacher s
will provide a quality education al experience. I n m any sectors of our society these expectations are not being met
(Rosenberg & Sindelar,
2001).
Anticipated retirements, increasing student enrollments ,
and teacher attrition have converged to create a national demand for thousands of
new s pecial educators
(Kell y, 2004). The quantity, quality, and stability of special educators are
essential t o ensure
appropriate educational services
for students with disabilities ,
but this has been a critical concern for decades (Guar ino, Santibanez, & Dal ey, 2004) .
Although there are numerous factors that contribute to this problem, a primary concern is
teacher attrition.
The Teacher Attrition and Mobility results from the 2008 - 2009 Teacher Follow - u p Study
revealed that total special educator attrition was 20.3%, with 10.5% leaving the profession altogether, while 9.8% moved to another school
or to general education (Kei gher, 2010).
To reduce attrition of all teachers, m entoring and induction programs have been implemented
and increased support is correlated with intent to stay in teaching (Gersten, Keating, Yavanoff, & Harniss, 2001) and retention (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004 ). Keigher (2010), based on the Teacher Follow - up study results from 2008 - 2009, that 74% of beginning teachers reported participating
in an induction program and 80% reported having a mentor; both figures reflect substantial incr eases from the previous year (K e i gher, 2010). Despite increased
2
induction and mentoring programs for new
t eachers, attrition con tinues at higher rates for special education teachers, which
result s in increased numbers of first - year special education teachers (Carroll & F oster, 2010; Goldrick, 2011). A contributing factor may be that m entorin g and induction programs
vary widely (In gersoll & Kralik, 2004 )
“ from no support to access to well - developed mentoring and induction programs” (Bay & Parker - Katz, 2009, p. 22). To address this critical need, factors that reduce attrition and contribute to special educator retention need to be e xamined.
Within the field of special education, teacher attrition is the major contributing factor to the inadequate supply of special education teachers with estimates of 30% leaving within their first 3
y ears and 50% leaving within 5
ye ars ( Brill & McC artney, 2008; Darlin g - Hammond, 1997; Ingersoll, 2001 ; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003). Butler (2008) report ed
that special education teachers were
two and a half times more likely to leave their positions than teachers in other disciplines. Retaining a stable special education teaching force is critical to the quality of student learning, espec ially in light of persistent
achievement gap s
between
st udents with
disabilities and their peers (Pugach, Blanton, Correa, McLeskey ,
& Langley, 2009).
Boe, Cook, and Su nderland (2008) concluded that
teacher
retention is unlikely to increase without dramatic improvements in the organization and management of public schools ; until this occur s , an increased supply of qualified teachers is needed to reduce teacher shortages.
In addition, the quality of our nation’s schools depends on the quality of the nation’s teachers. Darling - Hammond (1995) declare d
that the knowledge, skills, abilities, and commitments of teachers today will shape and inform what is possible for the fut ure generation of students. Riv i kin, Hanushek, and Kain (2005) state d
that the most important
3
school - based factor determining how much a child learns is based on the quality of the teacher ,
and Saunders and Rivers (1996) provide d
convincing evidence that students taught by effective teachers perform significantly better than those assigned to ineffective teachers.
“Assisting beginning teachers in their development towards becoming competent professionals is critically important” to strengthen the education al system (Reynolds, 1990 ,
p. ii ). Darling - Hammond states , “I f there is anything that we could do and should do to improve the quality of teaching and ensure the stability of the workforce, it is to provide better, more substantive support for our newest teachers ” ( Darling - Hammond, Berry, Haselkorn, & Fideler,
1999, p.
185 ). Providing responsive support systems during the
beginning years will not only reduce teacher attrition, but also support
the quality of services that students
receive (Athanases et al.,
2008; Billingsley, Carlson, & Klein, 2004).
New teacher support is a critical component of a comprehensive solution to achieving excellence in teaching quality, but there is variability in the focus of support programs for beginning teachers. Curre ntly, they range from buddy systems which provide social support to comprehensive, systematic induction programs with trained mentors providing structured support focused on improving new teachers’ instructional skills (New Teacher Center *NTC+, 2007). Ma ny induction programs are based on improvised models of support focused on psychological well - being and providing district and school level information to beginning teachers. However increased emphasis on student achievement requires induction programs th at focus on improving teaching practice and raising student achievement.
Strong and colleagues conducted two studies to examine student achievement gains in classrooms where teachers had participated in a comprehensive induction and mentoring
4
program
foc used on standards - based formative asses sments during novice’s first 2
years of teaching . In the first study, Strong (2006) found that students of beginning teachers who received comprehensive, multiyear induction support achieved reading gains at rates no t significantly different than those of more experienced teachers in the same district. In the second study, Villar and Strong (2007) demonstrated induction’s potential for improving student learning , and
“performed a cost - benefit analysis to determine wh ether comprehensive mentoring for beginning teachers makes financial sense” (p. 1) . Using reading achieve ment data collected over a 4 - year period, benefits were estimated by measuring teacher effectiveness in terms of the gains their student s
ma d e in annu al achievement tests scores as a class. Aggregated class achievement of new teachers in the mentoring program was
compared to students ’ achievement
of more experienced teachers.
Classes taught by the new teachers in the comprehensive mentoring program re alized reading ga i ns that were equivalent to the gains of classes taught by more experience d
teachers despite being assigned to classrooms that had lower initial achievement and higher representation of English Language learners ( Villar & Strong, 2007, p. 10).
The first year of teaching influences teachers’ development and their decision s about
continuing to
teach (Borko, 1996; McDonald, 1980; Nemser, 1983). The transition from the familiar and comfortable role as a student and learner to a teacher worki ng in a classroom can result in a re - evaluation of expectations, changes in belief systems, and disillusionment about teaching (Blasé, 1985; Lortie, 1975; Vee man, 1984). Beginning teachers need support if they are to become competent professionals (Reynol ds, 1990); however ,
working conditions are frequently not conducive to their professional development or success. Promoting the
5
continuity of the learning process and the developmental stages in becoming a professional teacher ,
induction programs are the critical link between theory learned at the university and application of theory in the school setting. Transition into teaching has been described as sudden , particularly without systematic induction programs . While b eginning teachers are still learning
to teach, they are also expected to fulfill the roles for which they were hired
(Wildman, Niles, Magliaro, & McLaughlin, 1989). The beginning teacher, with limited practical knowledge and experience (Feiman - Nemser, Schwille, Carver, Yusko, 1999) ,
must de monstrate skills and abilities that
are still
develop ing
(Schon, 1987). Wildman et al .
(1989) point ed
out
that,
“W e often ignore the fact that beginners have much to learn about teaching and little knowledge related to this new role” (p. 472). This trans ition is difficult for beginning teacher s
because much of what they need to know is
learned in their current positions, however, their
co workers and administrat ors
may expect that new teachers are already knowledge able .
N ew teachers may be
afraid to ask substantive questions about pedagogy, and often rely on their mentor s
for emotional support and district level information
(Feiman - Nemser, 2001 a ) .
Research on teacher development and induction purports
that beginning teachers need frequent opportunities t o share their pedagogical concerns and solve problems wi th experienced
teachers
( Hammerness et al., 2005) .
The primary purpose of this study was
to examine a pilot mentoring project which links novice and experienced special educators through an electroni c platform.
Although this approach may have obvious limitations (e.g., lack of onsite observation and feedback
which is a key component in systematic mentoring programs ), it is being tested as a method to increase support for new special educators who lack access to experienced teachers in their specific
6
discipline s .
Computer mediated communication (CMC), offers a unique advantage for studying the actual content of the dialogues between new special educators and their mentors,
because it provides a written record of their communications. Specifically, these electronic transcripts can be analyzed to examine the nature of the issues which dyads address, including new special educators’ concerns, professional competencies, and ke y factors identified in teacher development and special educator development research.
Conceptual Framework: How People Learn
Effective t eaching requires specialized knowledge of the learners , the learning
process , curriculum, and pedagogy. The goal of effective teacher development and mentoring is the
improve ment of teachers’ knowledge and skills to ultimately impact student achievement (Garet, Porter, Desimore, Biram, & Yoon, 2001; Weiss & Weiss, 1999). One of t he great est challenge s
for new
teachers is the need to be proficient from the moment they enter the classroom (Kealy, 2010) ;
however, they need
ongoing developmental support to build their knowledge, skills, and dispositions for teaching . From a social constructivist perspective, knowledge is generated by groups and is based on shared perceptions and understandings mediated by social tools ,
such as language, social protocols, and cultural practices (Vygotsky, 1978). With an emphasis on teacher development within a professional community, t he L earning to Teach in Community
framework
provides a “set of lenses on any teaching situation that teachers can use to reflect on and improve their practice” (Darling - Hammond, 2005, p. 10) .
Darling - Hammond (1995) declare d
that transforming teaching and lear ning is based on
an understanding of students –
not only what they know, but also how they think. In order to build these understandings , teachers must develop tools for assessing students ’
thinking,
7
understanding
students’ prior knowledge, and connecting with students ’
families and communities because these
connection s
are
central to
the learning process . S tudents construct knowledge based on their previous understandings and experiences (Brown, Collins & Duguid,
1989; Resnick, 1987) and learning is best facilitated through a strengths - based approach; thus
teachers must understand how students think as well as what they know (Gardner & Hatch, 1989; Kornhaber &
Gardner, 1993). This requires knowledge of subject matter and a repertoire of teaching strategies, but Darling - Hammond (1995) states that teachers need to learn these skills on the job. “Like students, teachers must construct their own understandings by
doing, by collaborating, by inquiring into problems, trying and testing ideas, evaluating and reflecting on the outcomes of their work” (Darling - Hammond, 1995, p. 24).
Schlechty (1985 ) recommended that beginn ing teachers have
opportunit ies to meet
to de velop the sense of being members of a
group that share an ordeal and to understand that others are experiencing the same stre ss. E lectronic mentoring
(e - mentoring)
might
provide this opportunity while
reduc ing isolation and fostering professional growth.
Carter and Richardson (1988) suggested that networking among beginning teachers would allow begi nning teachers to develop un derstandings of teaching.
E - mentoring provides an ideal format for bringing together groups of
teachers from multiple schools,
the reby reducing isolation that
leads to attrition.
Gar eis and Nussbaum - Beach (2007 ) found that e - mentoring allowed novices to (a) interact with mentors by asking questions on pertinent issues, (b) seek others who are experiencing similar problems, and (c) s imply vent.
Strong professional communities are built on teachers who regularly engage in discussions with colleagues about their work. By engaging in extended conversations that
8
scrutinize beliefs about teaching, learning, and instructional practice, t eachers can examine the assumptions b asic to quality practice (Newma n, 1992 ). Reflection upon practice leads to deepened understandings of the process of instruction and of the products created within the teaching and learning process. The opening up of one’s practice to scrutiny also encourages teachers to ask questions about their practice and to view it in
a more analytical fashion. In this way, teachers also come to know each other’s strengths and can therefore more easily find “expert advice” from c olleagues. Researchers speculate that responses may be more reflective in online discourse due to having time to think about and reflect on the response prior to sending it (Gar ei s
&
N us s baum - Beach, 2007 ; Single & Single, 2005).
Discourse is a tool to s ocially construct knowledge because it enables the expression of ideas; individual understanding de rived from collective knowledge;
and is dependent on the identity of the community t hat practices it (Grimberg, 2006 ). Discursive practices, which are a com bination of language , actions and culture (Gee, 1996 ), are associated with the process of knowledge construction and constitute a link between collective and indi vidual knowledge (Grimberg, 2006 ). Reflective communication has been shown to have positive effects on the g rowth of teacher practice (Raize n, Huntley, & Britton, 2003; Stansbury & Zimmerman, 2000) and the professional development literature frequently recommends the use of reflection to fill the gap between professional knowledge and the changin g situations of practice in which professions find themselves. Zeichner (1992) explains that reflection is considered one of the primary tools for facilitating the development of competence and ultimately expertise in novice teachers. However, Hussein (2 006) cautions that it is inappropriate to expect beginning teachers to be reflective simply because they have been asked to reflect on a topic; rather
9
beginning teachers need to be provided a support structure in which a variety of formats and opportunitie s for reflection are made available. CMC provides the opportunity to
understand communication patterns, forms, functions, conventions, and subtexts, which can in turn engender an understanding of how people derive meaning within such contexts (Naidu & Jar vela, 2006).
An e - mentoring environment may be the support structure needed to assist beginning teachers with the use of reflective practices.
Adaptive Expertise
To be effective teachers, Darling - Hammond,
Bransford , and LePage
(2005)
argue that teachers must be adaptive experts, modifying and adjusting instructional strategies and methods ,
and continually innovating to meet the needs of diverse student populations. Adaptive expertise entails developing decision making and problem - solving strategies while
simultaneously acquiring a
solid foundation in content knowledge that
they teach .
This combination of knowledge and abilities promotes effective innovation
when teachers encounter dilemmas and new situation s
in their teaching practice
( Bransford, Darling - Hammond, & LePage, 2005). Adaptive experts possess metacognitive strategies to recognize
the limitations of their current knowledge as well as
the ability to apply knowledge effectively to novel problems. This flexible application of knowledge underlies adaptive experts’ greater tendency to enrich and refine their knowledge structures on the basis of continuing experience or to learn from probl em solving (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Ha tano & I nagaki, 1986 ). While
routine experts typically assume that their current knowledge is correct, adaptive experts draw on their knowledge in light of situational factors to formulate possible explanations , so that
t heir knowledge is expanded through problem solving.
10
Bransford , Derry, Berliner, Hammerness, and
Beckett (2005)
state that “adaptive experts are able to approach a new situation with flexibility and learn throug hout their lifetimes” ( p . 48). These skills can be fostered by mentors who view mentoring as a teacher development process rather than a process focused on providing district and school procedural information and emotional support.
Bereiter and Scardama lia (1993) state that the processes of adaptive expertise can be used in all learning experiences through examining practice and progressive problem solving. Research has sh own that instructional decision making, lesson planning, and other aspects of teac hers’ everyday practice can be important loci for the development of expertise (B all & Cohen, 1999; Shulman, 1987 ).
