The DOI matches its Crossref record; 144 of the 144 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessment of teacher knowledge across countries: a review of the state of research
Open accessAbstract
This review presents an overview of research on the assessment of mathematics teachers’ knowledge as one of the most important parameters of the quality of mathematics teaching in school. Its focus is on comparative and international studies that allow for analyzing the cultural dimensions of teacher knowledge. First, important conceptual frameworks underlying comparative studies of mathematics teachers’ knowledge are summarized. Then, key instruments designed to assess the content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge of future and practicing mathematics teachers in different countries are described. Core results from comparative and international studies are documented, including what we know about factors influencing the development of teacher knowledge and how the knowledge is related to teacher performance and student achievement. Finally, we discuss the challenges connected to cross-country assessments of teacher knowledge and we point to future research prospects.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1989.10488618 · Cited by 99,167
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,395
The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action
Checkoway, B., & Schon, D. A. (1985) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.2307/3324262 · Cited by 21,268
The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action
Stewart, C. J. (1984) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/0738-3991(84)90022-3 · Cited by 19,752
Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching
SHULMAN, L. S. (1986) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x015002004 · Cited by 18,546
Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.
Triandis, H. C., & Hofstede, G. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393257 · Cited by 17,696
Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform
Shulman, L. (1987) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 · Cited by 16,787
Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values.
Sorge, A., & Hofstede, G. (1983) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393017 · Cited by 15,062
Handbook of research on teaching
Wittrock, M. C. (1986) · Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (Québec government) · Cited by 10,626
Cited by
Schmid, M., Brianza, E., & Petko, D. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106586 · Cited by 312
Aslam, R., Khan, N., & Ahmed, U. (2020) · Journal of Education and Educational Development · doi:10.22555/joeed.v7i2.31 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Blömeke, S., & Delaney, S.
- Venue
- ZDM
- Published
- 2012-05-25
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 223-247
- ISSN
- 1615-679X (ISSN-L)
- 1863-9690
- 1863-9704
- OpenAlex
- W1970592940
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 144
- FWCI
- 58.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessment of teacher knowledge across countries: a review of the state of research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11858-012-0429-7
- The paper
- Blömeke, S., & Delaney, S. (2012). Assessment of teacher knowledge across countries: a review of the state of research. ZDM. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0429-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
