The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature
Open accessAbstract
The growth in online professional development opportunities for teachers, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, prompts us to question what the most effective practices of facilitating professional development online are and what design elements of online professional development (OPD) programs improve teachers’ content and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) These questions are critical to the successful design and delivery of OPD for teachers To date, there is no systematic review that provides answers to these questions Hence, this review presents a synthesis of 11 studies that systematically examine experimental and observational studies that tested or evaluated formal OPD programs for teachers Eight studies were quantitative and three were mixed methods detailing evidence of teachers’ OPD program effectiveness, including design elements, that lead to teachers’ improved: content knowledge;PCK;beliefs about teaching;self-efficacy;and instructional practices Design elements identified included a focus on learner supports, further acquisition or development of PCK, engagement, flexibility, individual difference in learners and learning styles, practical learning activities, reflection, relevance and application of knowledge and skills The analysis uncovers a primary issue that few available publications of teachers’ OPD are strong methodologically This systematic review’s findings report on design elements that lead to effective OPD learning experiences for teachers
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
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006) · Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x · Cited by 12,604
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2 · Cited by 1,131
Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning
Blaschke, L. M. (2012) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1076 · Cited by 884
Şendağ, S., & Ferhan Odabaşı, H. (2009) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008 · Cited by 441
Lee, S. J., Srinivasan, S., Trail, T., Lewis, D., & Lopez, S. (2011) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.04.001 · Cited by 422
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000) · Cross Connect (Southern Cross University) · Cited by 384
Context Aware Ubiquitous Learning Environments for Peer-to-Peer Collaborative Learning
Yang, S. J. H. (2006) · Cited by 332
Cited by
Zhao, L., Wu, X., & Luo, H. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su142114549 · Cited by 239
Meyer, A., Kleinknecht, M., & Richter, D. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104805 · Cited by 76
Investigation of the Effectiveness of Hybrid Learning on Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis Study
Üniversitesi, F., Kazu, İ. Y., Ministry of Education, & Kurtoğlu Yalçın, C. (2022) · International Journal of Progressive Education · doi:10.29329/ijpe.2022.426.14 · Cited by 50
Copur-Gencturk, Y., Li, J., & Atabas, S. (2024) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312241248514 · Cited by 47
Comparing quality and engagement in face‐to‐face and online teacher professional development
Mulaimović, N., Richter, E., Lazarides, R., & Richter, D. (2025) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13480 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Bragg, L. A., Walsh, C., & Heyeres, M.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-06
- Volume
- 166
- Pages
- 104158
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3131620789
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 13.83
- 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: Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104158
- The paper
- Bragg, L. A., Walsh, C., & Heyeres, M. (2021). Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104158
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.
