CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 347Teacher Education and Leadership StudiesEvaluation of Teaching PracticesEducational Assessment and Improvement

Identifying the characteristics of effective teacher professional development: a critical review

Open access
Sims, Sam, Fletcher-Wood, Harry·2021·School Effectiveness and School Improvement
DOI 10.1080/09243453.2020.1772841
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Several influential reviews and two meta-reviews have converged on the position that teacher professional development (PD) is more effective when it is sustained, collaborative, subject specific, draws on external expertise, has buy-in from teachers, and is practice based. This consensus view has now been incorporated in government policy and official guidance in several countries. This paper reassesses the evidence underpinning the consensus, arguing that the reviews on which it is based have important methodological weaknesses, in that they employ inappropriate inclusion criteria and depend on an invalid inference method. The consensus view is therefore likely to be inaccurate. It is argued that researchers would make more progress identifying characteristics of effective professional development by looking for alignment between evidence from basic research on human skill acquisition and features of rigorously evaluated PD interventions.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This critical review argues that the influential consensus on effective teacher professional development—sustained, collaborative, subject-specific, externally led, buy-in, practice-based—is not warranted by the reviews underpinning it. The authors contend that those reviews use inappropriate inclusion criteria and an invalid inference method, and propose combining causal evidence with evidence of mechanism to identify genuinely active PD characteristics.

Key findings

  • The consensus view claims PD is more effective when it is sustained, collaborative, subject-specific, draws on external expertise, has teacher buy-in, and is practice-based; this view has influenced policy in the UK, EU, and US.
  • The authors identify methodological weaknesses in the underpinning reviews: Timperley et al. (2007), the highest-rated review in Cordingley et al. (2015), included studies that mostly could not establish baseline equivalence; by What Works Clearinghouse standards, nine of the ten studies mentioned would be graded “Does Not Meet Evidence Screens,” and the randomised study would likely be disqualified due to high attrition.
  • The inference method is flawed because recurring features in effective interventions may be causally redundant; for example, collaboration may occur because it is cheaper, and buy-in may result from noticing impact rather than cause it.
  • The claim that PD should be sustained may require revision: moderator analyses from two meta-analyses found that among interventions including repeated practice of specific skills, overall programme duration showed no relationship with impact on pupil attainment (Basma & Savage, 2017; Kraft et al., 2018).
  • Instructional coaching is used as an illustrative case: a meta-analysis identified 44 evaluations with an average impact on pupil learning of 0.15 standard deviations (Kraft et al., 2018), and the authors argue repeated practice in the target environment is a plausible mechanism.

Methods

  • Methodological review using ancestry searching: traced backwards from policy documents to meta-reviews, reviews, and original studies cited in support of the consensus, supplemented by searches using terms such as “teacher,” “professional development,” “characteristics of,” and “features of.”
  • The review focused exclusively on studies using pupil achievement as an outcome measure, justified by Guskey’s argument that PD research must focus on improvements in student learning outcomes.
  • Analysis critically examined inclusion criteria and inference methods in the consensus literature, then proposed an alternative approach combining evidence of correlation with evidence of mechanism, illustrated with instructional coaching.

Limitations

  • The paper states it focused solely on studies using student attainment as the criterion for effective PD, so an approach using intermediate, non-attainment outcomes could have reached different conclusions.
  • It states most discussed studies focus on English and maths attainment, reflecting the literature, and broader evidence in humanities and creative subjects might allow more nuanced conclusions.
  • It states the discussion focused exclusively on the evidence base underpinning the consensus view, so readers seeking a representative picture should consult other studies; the instructional coaching example is illustrative, not definitive.
  • Evident from the text: as a methodological review, it did not require exhaustive searches, so it does not claim to be a comprehensive aggregative review.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09243453.2020.1772841

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

8 of 45 cited sources checked · 4 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Evidence of a causal correlation between a professional development intervention and pupil outcomes shows that the intervention as a whole is effective.

    “Evidence of (causal) correlation between a PD intervention and pupil outcomes provides evidence that an intervention as a whole is effective.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Clarke et al., 2014 source
  • Premisecitation

    Behaviours that are repeated many times become governed by different regions of the brain, making them more resistant to change.

    “Neuroscientists have also shown how behaviours which are repeated many times become governed by different regions of the brain, making them more resistant to change (Seger & Spiering, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Seger & Spiering, 2011 source

      The review links continued practice to changes in basal-ganglia activity (Slow or incremental) and associates habitual action with different neural circuits and reduced flexibility (Conclusion; Inflexible). But the Conclusion presents a transfer of behavioral control across brain systems as one proposed account, not a demonstrated outcome for behaviours generally. The claim overstates how firmly the review establishes that repetition causes such a shift. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    Russo and Williamson (2007) and Clarke et al. (2014) have revived arguments from Bradford Hill (1965) and Mackie (1974) to show how to identify causally non-redundant characteristics by combining two kinds of evidence.

    “Russo and Williamson (2007) and Clarke et al. (2014) have revived the arguments of Bradford Hill (1965) and Mackie (1974) to show how this can be done.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Russo and Williamson (2007) source
    • cites Clarke et al. (2014) source

      Section 2.2 says that establishing a causal claim in medicine normally requires evidence of correlation and of an underlying mechanism. The discussion of medical methodology connects Bradford Hill’s criteria to that balance. Our copy does not show Clarke et al. drawing on Mackie (1974) or explaining how to identify causally non-redundant characteristics; §2.2 also distinguishes evidence of two sorts of things from two different kinds of evidence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Bradford Hill (1965) source
  • Findingreasoning

    By What Works Clearinghouse standards, nine of the ten studies in that review would fail evidence screens because they did not establish baseline equivalence between treatment and control groups.

    “By What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards, nine of the ten studies mentioned above would be graded 'Does Not Meet Evidence Screens' because they do not establish baseline equivalence of treatment and control groups.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Timperley et al., 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Findingreasoning

    There is currently no compelling evidence that collaboration or buy-in causally contributes to professional development effectiveness.

    “We do not claim here that collaboration or buy-in are undesirable features of PD; only that -contra to the consensus viewcompelling evidence of their contribution is currently lacking.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 14
  • May combine two claims. 16
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Clarke et al. (2014) argue that evidence of correlation and evidence of mechanism combine in a special way that is more than the sum of their parts.

    “Clarke et al. (2014, p. 19) argue that these two types of evidence”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Clarke et al. (2014) source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The empirical evidence for instructional coaching includes replicated randomised controlled trials and evidence from AB testing.

    “The empirical evidence for instructional coaching also includes replicated randomised controlled trials (Allen et al., 2011;Allen et al., 2015) and evidence from AB testing (Albornoz et al., 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Allen et al., 2011 source
    • cites Allen et al., 2015 source
    • cites Albornoz et al., 2017

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Teachers enrolled in the My Teaching Partner programme submit fortnightly videos of themselves practising specific skills in their own lessons, which they then review with their coach.

    “teachers enrolled in the My Teaching Partner programme submit fortnightly videos of themselves practising specific skills in their own lessons, which they then review along with their coach (Allen et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Allen et al., 2011 source

      The intervention description (section labeled Abstract; page unavailable) says teachers submitted videos of their lessons, reviewed selected clips, and discussed them with a consultant in a cycle repeated about twice a month. It does not say they filmed themselves deliberately practising specific skills; consultants selected clips illustrating interactions or areas for growth. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Coaching incorporates characteristics known to promote habit change, most notably requiring teachers to repeatedly practise new skills in their own classrooms.

    “Coaching incorporates characteristics which are known to promote habit change.”
    • Also stated in: § 5.2 Illustrative example: Instructional coaching · plain
      “Most notably, coaching programmes require teachers to repeatedly practice new skills in their own classrooms.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Allen et al., 2011 source

      The intervention description (section labeled Abstract; no page supplied) says teachers repeatedly recorded classroom lessons, reviewed their interactions with a coach, and discussed ways to improve them. The paper also reports enduring changes in teaching. It does not establish that these coaching features are known to promote habit change or explicitly require repeated practice of new skills. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The reviews supporting the consensus have major methodological flaws: they use unsuitable inclusion criteria and rely on an invalid way of drawing inferences.

    “This paper reassesses the evidence underpinning the consensus, arguing that the reviews on which it is based have important methodological weaknesses, in that they employ inappropriate inclusion criteria and depend on an invalid inference method.”
    • Also stated in: § 4.1 Appropriateness of inclusion criteria · plain
      “Thus, the most highly-rated review in Cordingley et al. (2015) uses weak inclusion criteria which admit studies employing designs unable to establish whether the PD interventions were effective or not.”
    • Also stated in: § 4.2 Validity of inference methods · plain
      “The overall inference method described in the preceding paragraph is logically flawed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    The review articles behind the consensus follow a common sequence: searching for evaluations, applying inclusion criteria, sorting studies by whether they found positive effects, and looking for programme features related to effectiveness.

    “Our literature review revealed that the review articles underpinning the consensus view follow a set of common steps:”
    • Also stated in: § 4. Results · plain
      “(4) They have looked for characteristics of PD which are (in some way) related to the effectiveness of the evaluated PD interventions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Many reviews supporting the consensus used inappropriate inclusion criteria, while reviews that used appropriate inclusion criteria generally did not support the consensus.

    “In summary, many of the reviews which espoused the consensus view did not employ appropriate inclusion criteria; while those that did employ appropriate inclusion criteria tended not to endorse the consensus view.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The review rated highest by Cordingley et al. (2015), Timperley et al. (2007), used weak inclusion criteria and accepted studies whose designs could not establish whether the professional development interventions were effective.

    “Thus, the most highly-rated review in Cordingley et al. (2015) uses weak inclusion criteria which admit studies employing designs unable to establish whether the PD interventions were effective or not.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Cordingley et al., 2015
    • cites Timperley et al., 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The one randomised study in that review might meet WWC standards without reservation, but its high attrition would likely disqualify it because attrition correlated with treatment assignment undermines the baseline equivalence created by randomisation.

    “The randomised study may qualify for WWC 'Meets Evidence Standards Without Reservation' but the high rate of attrition (missing follow up data) means it would likely be disqualified altogether, because where attrition is correlated with treatment assignment, this undermines the baseline equivalence originally established by the randomisation (Shadish, Cook & Campbell, 2002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Shadish, Cook & Campbell, 2002

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    There is a lack of studies of habit mechanisms in similar public service settings, such as among doctors or police.

    “there are a lack of studies in similar public service settings, such as among doctors or police.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Progress in identifying what makes professional development effective would be greater if researchers matched evidence from basic research on how people acquire skills with features of professional development programmes that have been rigorously evaluated.

    “It is argued that researchers would make more progress identifying characteristics of effective professional development by looking for alignment between evidence from basic research on human skill acquisition and features of rigorouslyevaluated PD interventions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Evidence of mechanism from basic research on human motivation or learning holds across diverse contexts.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Multiple influential reviews and two meta-reviews agree that teacher professional development works better when it lasts over time, involves collaboration, focuses on subject matter, uses outside experts, secures teacher buy-in, and is practice-based.

    “Several influential reviews and two meta-reviews have converged on the position that teacher professional development (PD) is more effective when it is: sustained, collaborative, subject-specific, draws on external expertise, has buy-in from teachers and is practice-based.”
    • Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · hedged
      “More recently, however, several reviews have converged on the position that PD is more likely to improve pupil attainment if it is sustained, collaborative, has teacher buyin, is subject-specific, draws on external expertise and is practice-based (Desimone, 2009;Timperley, Wilson, Barrar, & Fung, 2007;Walter, 2012;Wei et al., 2009).”
    • Also stated in: § 2. Background and motivation · plain
      “Several different literature reviews concur that PD is more effective if it incorporates six characteristics, which they conceptualise as necessary or sufficient conditions (e.g.Cordingley et al., 2015), critical features (e.g.Desimone, 2009), or simply as being important (e.g.Timperley et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Desimone, 2009 source
    • cites Timperley et al., 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Cordingley et al., 2015

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because effective professional development features always come bundled together, a different research approach may be necessary.

    “Since these characteristics will always come as part of a package, a different research approach may be needed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Characteristics of effective professional development always come bundled together in interventions, so individual characteristics cannot be isolated by simple correlation.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Such designs can account for differences between treatment and control groups that are not recorded in the data, which allows them to credibly identify the causal impact of coaching programmes on pupil learning.

    “Such designs are able to account for differences between the treatment and control groups that are not recorded in the data, which enables them to credibly identify the causal impact of the coaching programmes on pupil learning (Rosenbaum, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rosenbaum, 2017 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Evidence about a mechanism can help identify which components of a cause are non-redundant, but it cannot establish whether such a component will produce a causal effect when it is implemented as part of an intervention.

    “Conversely, evidence of mechanism can help identify nonredundant components of a cause, but cannot determine whether a component will have a causal effect when implemented as part of an intervention.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    A review's findings are undermined if it omits relevant studies or includes studies whose methods cannot answer the review's question.

    “The findings of the review will therefore be compromised if the studies included are incomplete or the methods employed in the studies are inappropriate for answering the questions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Meta-reviews, or reviews of reviews, are often employed to summarise the evidence from a field in a short space of time in order to inform policy.

    “our research highlights the dangers involved in meta-reviews (or reviews of reviews) which are often employed to summarise the evidence from a field in a short space of time, in order to inform policy (Thomas, Newman, & Oliver, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thomas, Newman, & Oliver, 2013 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A sustained professional development programme might run fortnightly sessions for two years, but if each part of the curriculum is covered only once, the intervention does not incorporate repeated practice and is less likely to change teachers' practice.

    “a sustained PD programme might provide fortnightly sessions for two years, but if each part of the curriculum is covered only once, then the intervention does not incorporate repeated practice and is less likely to change teachers' practise.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Existing research does not warrant the claim that effective professional development should be subject-specific; there is currently an absence of evidence for it.

    “Again, existing research does not warrant these claims: there is currently an absence of evidence.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Several reviews and two meta-reviews have established a consensus around the characteristics of effective professional development.

    “Several reviews and two meta-reviews have established a consensus around the characteristics of effective PD.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The authors cannot rule out that an alternative approach using intermediate, non-attainment outcomes could have reached differing conclusions.

    “we cannot rule out that an alternative approach that used intermediate, non-attainment outcomes could have come to differing conclusions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    In the United States, the Every Student Succeeds Act currently requires professional development to be both sustained and collaborative in order to qualify for federal funding.

    “In the US, the Every Student Succeeds Act currently requires PD to be both sustained and collaborative in order to qualify for federal funding.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    In England, the Standards for Teachers' Professional Development recommend that professional development should be collaborative.

    “In England, the Standards for Teachers' Professional Development also recommend that PD should be collaborative.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    This paper focused solely on studies that used student attainment as the criterion for effective professional development.

    “One such limitation is that this paper has focused solely on studies using student attainment as a criterion for effective PD.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Student attainment is an appropriate criterion for judging the effectiveness of teacher professional development.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    A broader evidence base on effective professional development in the humanities and creative subjects might allow a more nuanced set of conclusions to be reached.

    “a broader evidence base on effective PD in the humanities and creative subjects might allow a more nuanced set of conclusions to be reached.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Even if the reviews had identified effective interventions, collaboration may be causally redundant rather than an active ingredient.

    “Even if they had identified effective interventions, collaboration may be causally redundant, rather than an active ingredient.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Inappropriate inclusion criteria mean these reviews likely do not identify effective professional development interventions, let alone their common characteristics.

    “Inappropriate inclusion criteria mean these reviews likely do not identify effective PD interventions, let alone their common characteristics.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
27 of 27

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Characteristics of effective professional development always come bundled together in interventions, so individual characteristics cannot be isolated by simple correlation.

    “Since these characteristics will always come as part of a package, a different research approach may be needed.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Evidence of mechanism from basic research on human motivation or learning holds across diverse contexts.

    “In social science, evidence of mechanism might come from basic research describing fundamental characteristics of human motivation or learning, which hold across diverse contexts (see section 5.2 for an example).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Student attainment is an appropriate criterion for judging the effectiveness of teacher professional development.

    “One such limitation is that this paper has focused solely on studies using student attainment as a criterion for effective PD.While we believe this to be justified, we cannot rule out that an alternative approach that used intermediate, non-attainment outcomes could have come to differing conclusions.”
3 of 3

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Sims study is described as both in press and under review

    Minor

    The text calls the Sims et al. study "In Press," whereas its reference-list entry says "Under Review."

  • Greenleaf study has conflicting publication years

    Minor

    The text cites Greenleaf et al. as a 2010 study, but the corresponding reference gives 2011.

  • The list contains twelve studies, not eleven

    Minor

    The studies listed immediately after this statement total twelve. Two bullets each name three studies, while six other bullets name one study each.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Adey P., 1999, The science of thinking, and science for thinking: A description of Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE)
  2. Bishop R., 2005, Te Kotahitanga: Improving the educational achievement of Maori students in mainstream education
  3. Blank R. K., 2009, Effects of teacher professional development on gains in student achievement: How meta analysis provides scientific evidence useful to education leaders
  4. Caena F., 2011, Literature review: teachers’ core competences: requirements and development
  5. Combs E., 2016, Bridging the gap: Paving the pathway from current practice to exemplary professional learning
  6. Department for Education, 2016, Standard for teachers’ professional development: Implementation guidance for school leaders, teachers, and organisations that offer professional development for teachers
  7. D’Oria T., 2004, How I improved my teaching practice in Grade 9 boys’ physical education to increase students’ participation and enjoyment
  8. Garet M. S., 2011, Middle School Mathematics Professional Development Impact Study: Findings after the second year of implementation
  9. Huffman D., 2003, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 22, 151
  10. McDonagh M., 2013, Avoiding bias in selecting studies. Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews
  11. Moxon J., 2003, A study of the impact of the Restorative Thinking Programme within the context of a large multi-cultural New Zealand secondary school
  12. Nugent G., 2016, The effectiveness of technology-delivered science instructional coaching in middle and high school
  13. Sims S., Review of Education
  14. Tasker G., 2001, Students’ experience in an HIV/AIDS-sexuality education programme: What they learnt and the implications for teaching and learning in health education
  15. Timperley H., 2007, Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration (BES)
  16. Walter C., 2012, What professional development makes the most difference to teachers

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sims, S., & Fletcher-Wood, H.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • Ambition Institute, London, UK
Corresponding author
Sims, Sam
ORCID
Venue
School Effectiveness and School Improvement
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-05-28
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
47-63
ISSN
  • 0924-3453 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-5124
DOI
10.1080/09243453.2020.1772841
OpenAlex
W3030756526
Cited by
347
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 56 · 2025: 91 · 2024: 80 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 5
FWCI
46.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • School Effectiveness and School Improvement (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
Keywords
teacher professional development, professional development effectiveness, sustained professional development, collaborative professional learning, external expertise, teacher buy-in, practice-based professional development, inclusion criteria

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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