Cited by 2,228Teacher Education and Leadership StudiesEvaluation of Teaching PracticesReflective Practices in Education

Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth

Clarke, David, Hollingsworth, Hilary·2002·Teaching and Teacher Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0742-051x(02)00053-7

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Clarke, David
Venue
Teaching and Teacher Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-11
Volume
18
Issue
8
Pages
947-967
ISSN
0742-051X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020746585
Cited by
2,228
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 137 · 2025: 145 · 2024: 148 · 2023: 145 · 2022: 144 · 2021: 169 · 2020: 159 · 2019: 154 · 2018: 118 · 2017: 109 · 2016: 127 · 2015: 120 · 2014: 99 · 2013: 105 · 2012: 78
FWCI
56.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Teaching and Teacher Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Social Sciences › Education › Reflective Practices in Education
Keywords
teacher professional development, teacher change

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