Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Efficacy drivers that aid teacher professional development transfer
(USC Thesis Other)
Efficacy drivers that aid teacher professional development transfer
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
1
Efficacy Drivers That Aid Teacher Professional Development Transfer
by
Troy Moore
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2024
2
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to my Savior, Jesus Christ, my soulmate, Jennifer Moore,
and my amazing children, Caeden, Maryn, and Brennan.
Jesus Christ, thank you for laying down everything for me on the cross and for the life I
enjoy in relationship with you. Thank you for all of the doors you have opened for me to be in
service to you within education and for the blessing of provision to pursue personal dreams. You
are my Savior and I live in service to you.
Jennifer, ever since the very first day of my professional career as an educator, you have
been there encouraging, partnering, and sacrificing alongside me in every educational venture or
vision that I have. It is special that we have the same professional passions and find so much joy
in bringing amazing learning experiences to students. You are the most amazing wife, mother,
and music teacher and I stand in awe of the love and care you show to all of us in your orbit
everyday. The last four years have been filled with the sacrifice of quality time, connection, and
attention. While this has been difficult, you have remained the lead cheerleader and truly kept
me moving forward. Thank you so much for continuing to invest in the gift of us and I look
forward to this next chapter of life with you. I love you.
Caeden, Maryn, and Brennan, you continue to be my inspiration for everything I do in
my career as an educator. The experiences and conversations that I have with you have always
informed vision and decision making within the schools I have led. What a blessing it is that you
three truly enjoy learning and pursue passions with vigor. I am so proud of each of you. While
the last four years has also resulted in the sacrifice of quality time with you as well, I am hopeful
that my pursuit of this EdD and the perseverance you observed, is an inspiration to each of you.
3
Acknowledgements
It is with deep gratitude that I acknowledge my dissertation committee chair, Dr. Cathy
Krop. The dissertation has been a long journey for me and you were exactly the right person to
give me critical feedback while being a constant cheerleader. Thank you so much for the long
hours reviewing my writing and spending time discussing how to navigate the study. I
appreciate you so much. In addition, I am so grateful to Dr. Paula Carbone and Dr. Allison
Plunkett for serving on my dissertation committee and challenging me within this study. Thank
you both for your gift of time as well.
The participants in this study represent the field of education as experts. Their
experiences, service to students, and leadership are inspirational. Thank you all for giving of
your time and lending you voice in effort to expand the conversation about quality teacher
professional development.
Over my career I have had the blessing of working with amazing colleagues who have
invested in me and have served as inspiration. Thank you Rob Gasparello and Dr. Chris
Vecchionne for believing in me and steering me toward educational leadership. As a leader, the
success I have enjoyed and the enjoyment I have had is only because of the amazing colleagues
who are on the front lines with the students each day. I acknowledge the dedicated staffs of
Hawk Ridge Elementary, Mariners Christian School, Starmount Academy of Excellence, and
Calvary Christian Academy for their acceptance of me as their leader and the great work on
behalf of students that we accomplished together.
Thank you Phillip and Shirley Moore for being outstanding parents who provided me
with a stable home, caring parenting, and spiritual development. I love you both. Thank you
Roger Moore for being a constant cheerleader in my life.
4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 6
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study 7
Background of the Problem 8
Organization Context and Mission 11
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions 12
Importance of the Study 13
Overview of the Theoretical Framework and Methodology 13
Definitions 15
Organization of the Dissertation 16
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 17
Current State of Teacher Professional Development (PD) 17
Current Teacher Professional Development Modalities, Time, and Funding 18
Teacher Professional Development Reform 22
Lack of Evidence of the Impact of Teacher Professional Development 28
The Role of Leadership in Teacher Efficacy 32
Social Cognitive Theory- A Theoretical Framework 34
Chapter Three: Methodology 37
Overview of Design 37
Research Setting 38
Method: Interviews 39
Credibility and Trustworthiness 43
Ethics 44
The Researcher 45
Chapter Four: Findings 46
Overview of Participants 46
Research Question 1: How Do Teacher Leaders Perceive PD Building Self-Efficacy to
Aid Their Current Opportunities to Transfer Learning Across the Teachers They
Support 52
Finding 1: Ability to Engage in Hard Conversations 53
Finding 2: Ability to Engage in Reflection 56
Summary of Findings for Research Question 1 57
Research Question 2: How Do Teacher Leaders Perceive PD Building Collective
Efficacy to Aid the Transfer of Learning Into the Classrooms They Support? 58
Finding 1: Intentional Relationship Building 59
Finding 2: Safe Environment 62
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2 65
Findings That Collectively Impact Both Research Question 1 and Research
Question 2 66
Finding 1: Instructional Coaching as Best Practice 66
Finding 2: Significance of Practice 71
Summary of Findings that Collectively Impact Research Questions 1 and 2 75
Conclusion 76
Chapter 5: Discussion of Findings and Recommendations for Practice 77
5
Discussion of Findings 78
Research Question 1 Discussion of Findings 79
Research Question 2 Discussion of Findings 81
Combined Research Question 1 and 2 Discussion of Findings 82
Recommendations for Practice 84
Recommendation 1: Embed Intentional Opportunities for Relationship Building
and Training Regarding Having Difficult Conversations Within a Safe
Environment in PD 86
Recommendation 2: Embed Reflection and Practice Consistently Within PD 87
Recommendation 3: Make Instructional Coaching for All Staff Members the
Organizational PD Priority 88
Limitations and Delimitations….90
Recommendations for Future Research 91
Conclusion 91
References 93
Appendix A: Protocol Crosswalk – Interview 113
Appendix B: Information Sheet for Exempt Research 118
6
List of Tables
Table 1: Demographic Information of Nine Teacher Leader Participants from School
District A 49
Table 2: Highest Frequency of Professional Development Completed Among Participants 50
Table 3:Key Findings 51
Table 4: Summary of Key Findings 74
Table 5: Key Findings and Recommendations 83
7
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
A significant level of resources are invested in K-12 teacher professional development
(PD) with little positive impact on teaching and learning. Empirical evidence suggests that PD
does not improve instructional practice or increase student achievement (Glazerman et al., 2008;
Quint, 2011; Desimone et al., 2013; The New Teacher Project, 2015). This problem is important
to address because teachers report feeling underprepared, overwhelmed, and are exiting the
profession ( Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014; Ingersoll, 2014; Sutcher, et. al, 2016,
Ramos & Hughes, 2020, Franco & Patrick, 2023), and national assessment scores show virtually
no change in the percentage of students deemed below basic proficiency in reading over the past
15 years (National Association of Educational Progress, 2019).
Research on the impact of teacher professional development on instructional practice and
students outcomes is limited due to the expansive nature of PD implementation (DarlingHammond, 2005) as well as the lack of universally adopted benchmarks for teacher PD (DarlingHammond et al., 2017; Wei, et al., 2009). Research has sought to sort empirical data based on
visible features, content, and design (Kennedy, 2016). Sher and O’Reilly (2009), for example,
compared research on subject matter PD with PD focused on teacher pedagogy, while Blank and
de la Alas (2009) categorized empirical research by PD design features such as follow-up steps,
active learning methods, and collective participation. A two-year study by the United States
Department of Education (USDE) and the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation
(MDRC) on PD yielded the recommendation that the criteria for best practices in professional
development need to continually evolve and be more closely designed for the specific curricular
and classroom needs of the teachers (Quint, 2011). The purpose of this study is to better
8
understand how teacher professional development can build teacher self and collective efficacy
to aid in the transfer of learning into their classrooms.
Background of the Problem
Leaders in the field of education suggest that teacher PD has enormous potential to meet
the needs of its many diverse learners (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Yoon et al., 2007),
however, exploration of empirical studies yield two general challenges relevant to teacher PD.
These challenges include: supporting teachers to be effective and confident instructors who
choose to stay in the profession and the linkage of teacher PD to student achievement.
Supporting Teachers to be Effective Instructors
Teachers are widely regarded as the most important investment in the educational system
(Adnot et al., 2017; Darling-Hammond, 2017; Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), 2014). While significant financial investments are made in teacher
professional growth, these investments are often not contributing to teachers choosing to remain
in the profession and the level of teacher retention needed to sustain student achievement growth
(Ingersol, 2014; Allen & Sims, 2017; Horn & Goldstein, 2018; Garcia & Weiss, 2019).
School systems today spend more time and money on the PD of teachers than in any
other time period in history (Horn & Goldstein, 2018). Empirical evidence from over 10,000
teachers in four public school districts in the United States showed time investments of up to 19
days per school year for teacher PD (The New Teacher Project, 2015). Another empirical study
of over 1,300 teachers revealed an average of 68 hours per year was spent on professional
development (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014). Local and federal professional
development funding research estimates that an average of $18 billion dollars is spent each year
on teacher training in the United States (Horn & Goldstein, 2018; Bill and Melinda Gates
9
Foundation, 2014). Investments of this magnitude are presumed to produce effective
professionals who are committed, resilient, and facilitate instructional achievement gains that can
be quantified over time (Gu & Day, 2013), although the evidence is not clear this is the case.
Currently, teachers are leaving the profession at significant rates and indications point to
a lack of ongoing and quality PD as one of a few root causes (Allen & Sims, 2017; See et al.,
2020). Nearly 44 percent of teachers leave the profession within the first five years of entering
the profession (Ingersoll et al., 2018). During the 2022-2023 school year, 4% of all US public
school teaching jobs were vacant (Learning Policy Institute, 2022). That equates to a shortage of
approximately 60,000 teachers. Contributing to the teacher shortage, from 2010 through 2018,
there was a 28 percent decline in students completing teacher preparation programs (Partelow,
2019). Without qualified teachers in the classroom, student achievement and overall teacher
effectiveness is at risk (Henry & Redding, 2018; Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Sorensen & Ladd,
2020). Further impacting school district budgets, it is estimated that the replacement cost of
hiring a new teacher is $21,000 (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). An empirical
study conducted over three years looked at working conditions through surveys and retention
data of 1,400 teachers within 37 Arizona schools. The study found that teachers who were more
satisfied with their schools’ mentoring opportunities, PD, and use of time were more likely to
remain in the profession and at the school they currently served (Geiger & Pivovarova, 2018).
Teachers who leave the profession after a short duration in the field ignite the potential to further
disrupt the cycle of PD in schools which can impact vertical instructional methods, curriculum
alignment, and ultimately, student achievement (Ronfeldt et. al, 2013).
Linkage Between Teacher Professional Development and Student Achievement
10
Despite awareness, funding, and time for teacher PD, student achievement has not shown
improvement commensurate with time and dollars spent on teacher PD. Jacob and McGovern’s
The New Teacher Project (2015) empirical study, called the Mirage Study, with a sample size of
10,507 students and 566 teachers across four school districts, revealed that there is no single
development experience or activity that will facilitate student achievement results for every
teacher. The study identified teachers whose performance had improved and retraced
environments, experiences, and mindsets that produced commonality as compared with those
teachers who had not shown performance improvement. In its findings, the study concluded that
school districts do not have a clear understanding of how to assist teachers in improving their
practice and typically teachers have no connection or motivation within the PD they are
participating in (The New Teacher Project, 2015). While looking at the effectiveness of new
teacher induction programming, an empirical study with 1,009 beginning teachers across 418
schools in 17 districts revealed the studied induction model had no statistical impact on
classroom practices or student achievement in years one and two (Glazerman et. al, 2008).
Additionally, Dessimone’s (2013) empirical study with 457 teachers and 4,803 students among
71 high poverty schools over four years within 3rd-5th grade math did not offer support for
traditional scope and sequence of teacher PD. Often, professional development focuses on
strategies targeted to average students and baseline assessments for all techniques. Within this
study, notable student achievement gains were only found within teachers engaged in training on
advanced topics or novel problem solving (Desimone et al., 2013).
Existing research suggests the need for PD that is content focused, active learning
oriented, collaborative, uses modeling, incorporates coaching, includes feedback and reflection
and is sustained over time (Darling-Hammond et. al, 2022) This study seeks to understand and
11
further identify specific processes and procedures within these areas that foster self and
collective efficacy within teachers and transfer into classroom instruction.
Organization Context and Mission
Given that teachers are widely regarded as a significant leverage point for educational
organization success and student achievement, it is prudent to gain understanding directly from
these stakeholders regarding PD supports and practices that build their self and collective
efficacy. Acknowledging the spectrum of teacher experience, talent, motivation, and local PD
experiences that exist in United States schools, this study sought to narrow the field of study to
identify kindergarten through fifth grade Teacher Leaders (TL) within one large school
district. These TL’s are selected by the school district based on student achievement data and a
TL application and interview.
School District A is a large southeastern public school district that serves around 150,000
students according to 2022-2023 data. School District A features over 150 schools and employs
around 9,000 certified teachers. In 2013-2014, School District A developed a partnership with
Opportunity Culture, an organization whose goal is to inspire school districts and individual
schools to transform their staffing processes to expand the reach of their excellent teachers to
more students in addition to collaborative leadership with other teachers (Opportunity Culture,
2021). To date, Opportunity Culture has partnerships with 48 districts nationwide (Opportunity
Culture, 2021). School District A currently has approximately 50% of its schools participating in
the Opportunity Culture framework. Participating districts within the Opportunity Culture
consortium sign on to adhere to basic tenants within the framework. It is the responsibility of the
school district to take those basic frameworks and develop human resources management
systems, hiring processes, job descriptions, and training to adapt the methodology into the
12
district ethos. Within the School District A framework, district teachers apply to a district
application and review process that features a preliminary review of data-supported impact on
student achievement provided by the candidate, an interview process, and the possibility of
micro-credential completion to gain access to talent pools for five levels of leadership and
increased compensation. Once eligibility is reached, TL’s qualify for PD opportunities on
various topics that include coaching, effective feedback, data processes, and other leadership
frameworks. These identified Teacher Leaders meet specific criteria and are able to apply for
specialized teaching roles within a school. Selected teachers receive additional compensation
between $2,500 and $18,000 for their additional responsibilities and expertise. As of the fall of
2021, approximately 8% of School District A teachers had received entrance into the TL hiring
eligibility pool.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to identify efficacy drivers within teacher PD that support
educator confidence and foster gains in student achievement. By exploring the perceived best
practices within educator PD from teachers identified as Teacher Leaders and understanding
training barriers, successes, and needs associated with professional development, educator
efficacy can be attained. The following research questions, informed by Social Cognitive Theory
(SCT), guided this study:
1. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building self-efficacy to aid their current
opportunities to transfer learning across the teachers they support.
2. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building collective efficacy to aid the transfer of
learning into the classrooms they support?
Importance of the Study
13
It is important to solve the problem of large-scale investment of resources on professional
development not having direct measurable impacts on teaching and learning outcomes because
the next generation’s ability to be productive within society, provide sustainable economic and
health progress, and inspire the next generation beyond them depends on the excellence of K-12
education. Virtually no progress in US math and reading proficiency data over the last 15 years
(NAEP, 2019) and an approximate yearly investment of $18 billion on PD (Horn & Goldstein,
2018; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014) possess an accountability question for society.
Global research indicates, “An abundance of well-educated workers is accompanied by higher
levels of labor productivity and returns to capital, and it also implies greater ability to facilitate
technological innovation and adoption” (Barro & Yi, 2015, p.124). In an era where
approximately 44 percent of teachers leave the profession within the first five years (Ingersoll et
al., 2018), teachers need the support of quality PD to ensure they have self and collective self
efficacy to improve instructional practices and retain their capacity of resiliency which will
impact the retention of teachers who are willing and capable of making a positive impact in
student achievement (Gu & Day, 2013).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Social Cognitive Theory applies an appropriate lens to examine the effectiveness of PD
on a systemic, district, and school site level. SCT seeks to reveal the way people acquire and
maintain behavior. It promotes that individuals are not just products of circumstances but
contributors to them (Bandura, 2000). The theory’s focus on agency distinguishes among three
forms: personal, proxy, and collective (Bandura, 2000). While personal is unique to the person,
proxy and collective rely on others for inputs to result in behavioral change (Bandura, 2001).
These forms can be discussed within the lenses of self-efficacy and collective efficacy.
14
Self-efficacy beliefs influence how well people motivate themselves and persevere in the
face of difficulties through the goals they have set for themselves, outcome expectations they
anticipate, and causal attributions for their successes and failures (Bandura, 2012). Levels of
teacher self-efficacy have been empirically linked with positive perceptions regarding PD and
higher student achievement. Significant empirical research demonstrates that teachers who
exhibit high self-efficacy within instructional practice and content knowledge are more likely to
have positive perceptions of education and are more amenable to a change of practice (Donnell
& Gettinger, 2015; Guo, et al., 2011). Self-efficacious teachers are also found to be closely
linked with higher levels of student achievement (Malmberg et al., 2014; Fackler & Malmberg,
2016).
Collective efficacy is best described as a group of people coordinating work on a shared
belief (Bandura, 2000). Researchers have highlighted the importance of embedding collaboration
within teacher professional development (Darling-Hammond, 2017; Goddard et al., 2007) to
build collective efficacy. Furthermore, Moolenaar et al. (2012) found strong support for social
networks among teachers that featured interdependency on advice exchange to build collective
efficacy.
A theory of change, defined as a belief about how a situation can be adjusted or improved
(Tuck & Yang, 2012), guided this research. This theory of change called for exploration of
teacher leaders who both lead and receive teacher PD. This exploration sought to reveal
components of PD that build individual and collective efficacy that contribute to PD transfer and
positive student outcomes. Understanding practices related to building teacher self and collective
efficacy within teacher PD from teachers identified as elementary Teacher Leaders in a large
urban school district led to understanding of barriers, successes, and needs associated with
15
professional development for teachers. Participants for this qualitative research study were
solicited from School District A using a purposeful (Patton, 2015), criterion-based (LeCompte &
Schensul, 2010), and network sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) approach. Serving around
150,000 students, employing nearly 8,500 certified teachers, and having more than 650 teachers
identified as Teacher Leaders according to 2023 data, School District A served as a reputable
district to acquire a purposeful sample. While any category of Teacher Leader yields a certain
level of impact on educators and students, this study further narrowed the criterion to gather
feedback from educators charged with making the most impact within a School District A
school. The participants in this study were the highest level of Teacher Leader and most
successful educators in School District A, identified as Multi-Classroom Leaders or MCLs.
Definitions
Teacher Professional Development: structured professional learning that encourages change in
teacher practices and improvements in student learning outcomes (Darling-Hammond, 2017).
Social Cognitive Theory: a theory that seeks to reveal the way people acquire and maintain
behavior (Bandura, 2000).
Self-Efficacy: one’s own perception of personal capability to achieve a given level of
performance (Bandura, 2000).
Collective Efficacy: a group of people coordinating work on a shared belief (Bandura, 2000).
Opportunity Culture: a program of the Public Impact organization whose goal is to inspire
school districts and individual schools to transform their staffing processes to expand the reach
of their excellent teachers to more students and collaborative leadership with other teachers
(Opportunity Culture, 2021).
16
Teacher Leader: a teacher who has been vetted by a school district or organization and deemed
an exceptional educator with leadership potential.
Multi-Classroom Leader: the highest level of Teacher Leader in an Opportunity Culture
organization who coaches six to eight teachers and continues to teach a small percentage of the
instructional time (Opportunity Culture, 2021).
Organization of the Dissertation
Five chapters organized this study. This chapter provided the reader with an introduction
to the problem of practice identified as the significant level of resources invested in K-12 teacher
professional development with little evidence of positive outcome or impact on teaching and
learning, and how a model of Teacher Leaders could build teacher self efficacy and collective
efficacy. The chapter also introduced the research questions guiding the study and the
theoretical and methodological frameworks. Chapter two will examine literature in relation to the
history and characteristics of teacher PD, the impact of PD on teaching and learning, the role of
leadership in teacher PD, and self-efficacy and collective efficacy within a Social Cognitive
theoretical lens. Chapter 3 will provide a discussion of the study methodology, including the
participants, data collection and data analysis procedures. Chapter 4 will present the findings of
the study. Chapter 5 will provide recommendations for practice and further research before
concluding the study.
17
Chapter Two: Review of Literature
The definition of teacher professional development (PD) can be broad and all
encompassing. Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) define effective PD as structured professional
learning that results in changes in teacher practices and improvements in student learning
outcomes. While PD has enormous potential to meet the needs of its many diverse learners
(Blank et al., 2008; Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Yoon et al., 2007), PD often fails to meet its
intended outcomes. This chapter explores the current state of teacher professional development,
modalities and resources related to PD, reform efforts, impacts of PD, and the role of leadership
in teacher PD. In order to process opportunities for improvement, a Social Cognitive theoretical
framework was used as a lens to understand how PD can build self and collective efficacy among
teachers to aid in the transfer of PD learning into their classrooms.
Current State of Teacher Professional Development
Teachers are widely regarded as the most important investment in the educational system,
with the art of teaching as one of the most important school-related factors impacting student
achievement (OECD, 2014). Nations that have a strong professional affinity for teaching,
deliberately celebrate teachers, and treat teaching as an esteemed occupation with acquired
knowledge that must be mastered are the nations that will offer the next generation equitable
opportunities for learning (Darling-Hammond, 2017). Given that an effective teacher can
dramatically alter students’ educational and economic outcomes (Adnot et al., 2017), investment
in the development of effective teachers is critical.
Author and educationalist Sir Ken Robinson famously laid out this rallying cry for
education transformation during a February, 2010 TED Talk.
We have to go from what is essentially an industrial model of education, a manufacturing
model, which is based on linearity and conformity and batching people. We have to move
18
to a model that is based more on principles of agriculture. We have to recognize that
human flourishing is not a mechanical process; it’s an organic process. And you cannot
predict the outcome of human development. All you can do, like a farmer, is create the
conditions under which they will begin to flourish.
While most notably his writings and speeches focused on student learning, Robinson consistently
maintained,“The most powerful method of improving education is to invest in the improvement
of teaching and the status of great teachers” (Robinson & Aronica, 2009, p. 238).
Teachers, whose life work is learning, often engage in professional learning that is in
direct contradiction to what they know are best practices in teaching and learning. Diane
Sweeney (2003) stated, “We know learning takes time; it isn’t neat and tidy. So why do we
believe it should be that way for teachers?” (p. 3). Educators are used to taking into account the
diverse needs of children, but the needs of adult learners are often quickly forgotten and reduced
to pulling together hundreds of teachers to listen to an expert pontificate on a given subject
(Sweeney, 2003). Given that the expectation of teacher PD is that teachers will learn new
knowledge and skills, know how to implement what they have learned, and, subsequently,
student outcomes will improve (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Opfer, 2016), when one of the
first two, or both, is absent or not developed well, student outcomes will not improve (Yoon et
al., 2007).
Current Teacher Professional Development Modalities, Time, and Funding
Teacher PD involves the career-long processes of related systems and policies designed
to enable educators at all levels to acquire, broaden, and deepen their knowledge, skill, and
commitment in order to effectively perform their roles (Schwille & Dembélé, 2007). The process
should start at the moment of credentialing in the form of induction programs and continue on
through each successive career phase, deepening a teacher’s engagement and capacity over time
(Ginsburg, 2011). Within the modern era of teaching and learning, PD reform efforts have
19
spanned the dimensions of modality, time, and funding with limited success (Glazerman et. al,
2010, Desimone et al., 2013, The New Teacher Project, 2015).
Common Modalities
Despite progress, ineffective seminars and workshops still prevail as the most common
forms of teacher professional development (OECD 2011; The New Teacher Project, 2015; Opfer
2016; Kirsten 2020). These types of seminars and workshops are generic, lecture based, and
generally a sit and listen format (Darling Hammond et al., 2017) over a one or two day period.
Workshops in this format result in passive learning which has been proven deficient in initiating
changes in teaching practices (Smith, 2010; Wei, et al., 2009; Joyce & Showers, 2002; Borko,
2004). In an effort to mitigate the passivity, district or school leadership have often prioritized
conference attendance and forums for active participation. For example, the “train the trainer”
model has been a common PD format (Darling Hammond, 2017). Within this model, a school
team or team member redelivers the material presented at an auditorium style meeting to
colleagues within another sit and get style presentation (Darling Hammond, 2017).
On the rise in advance of and expedited by the COVID-19 pandemic, online PD has
become commonplace and mainstream within all professional sectors. Individual schools and
districts have relied on online PD given its flexibility, its cost effective nature (DarlingHammond et al., 2017; Lay et al., 2020, Hertz et al., 2022), and its ability to provide rural or
specialized educators access to experts (Stevens et al., 2016, Hertz et al., 2022; Callard et al.,
2022). At the same time, research studies have generally not found a statistical difference in the
teacher outcomes within the modalities of face-to-face PD versus online learning (Chen et al.,
2023, Fishman et al., 2013; Fisher et al., 2010).
20
In contrast, a few recent studies have found better outcomes for online professional
development within highly technical and advanced areas (Frumin et al., 2018; Callard et al.,
2022). A mixed methods study of high school Advanced Placement (AP) science teachers
(Frumin et al., 2018) found that the students of teachers who used the online science AP Teacher
Community modules scored incrementally higher on the AP exam than those teachers who did
not participate in that form of PD. Within this study, the researchers identified access whenever
needed to a continuous context where teachers could collectively unlearn skills and support each
other emotionally in re-learning new practices within their respective environments. Another key
finding was that the PD was more responsive and personalized to teacher needs in the moment
during the school year contributing to better transfer into instruction (Frumin et al., 2018). In
addition, Callard et al. (2022) found more positive outcomes and higher levels of teacher
implementation with the same coaching model facilitated online than in person. Teachers
reported that in the online format they had more time for processing, reflection, and
technological opportunities to review video footage to understand coaching points given by the
coach.
Time Investments
Given an educational climate of accountability, it is imperative for schools and education
systems to invest time and funding in professional development strategies that lead to
measurable and meaningful improvements in teaching and learning (Guskey, 2000; Shaha et al.,
2004; Hochberg and Desimone, 2010; King, 2014; Darling Hammond et al., 2017). Empirical
studies have quantified the significant investments of time classroom teachers spend on PD. The
Mirage Study of 2015 found time investments of up to 19 days per school year for teacher PD
with total teacher time devotion averaging 150 hours per school year (The New Teacher Project,
21
2015). A more recent study, Kirsten (2020), of the Teaching and Learning International Study
(TALIS) data showed educators, on average, spent 6-9 days per year on PD.
Fiscal Investments
The monetary investment in teacher PD has grown significantly in the last 75 years (Horn
& Goldstein, 2018; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014). The Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 mandated under-performing schools deemed Title I, generally
defined as serving a large population of socio-economically disadvantaged students, utilize 10%
of their annual budgets specifically for PD. ESEA transitioned to the Every Student Succeeds
Act (ESSA) of 2015 under President Obama and PD allocations from the Federal Government
only were diversified into a new segment called Title II funding with all schools now mandated
to spend 10% of their budgets on PD. Since 2015, Title II funding of approximately $2 billion
dollars per year has been allotted to states to support effective instruction through the preparation
and training of educators (ED.Gov). This is only the Federal Government’s financial
commitment to teacher PD. States, school districts, and schools use many other sources of
funding to provide PD.
In one of the the most thorough and seminal studies on fiscal costs of teacher PD, within
the Mirage Study of 2015, researchers quantified the total investment of PD funds per teacher by
calculating the time and money spent on school-site training, coaching, evaluation of teacher
performance by administrators, and school district-provided workshops. Furthermore, it included
salary increases for PD that met requirements. The calculations yielded an average of $18,000
per teacher per year (The New Teacher Project, 2015). Funding research estimates that an
average of $18 billion dollars is spent each year on teacher PD in the United States (Horn &
Goldstein, 2018; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014). This research indicates that multiple
22
sources such as Title II, Title I, state funds, local school district funds and even Parent Teacher
Fellowship funds contribute to this spending.
Teacher Professional Development Reform
Efforts to reform teacher PD have been a priority for policy makers, systemic education
leaders, school districts, and teachers themselves. John Dewey (1938) referred to progressive
education as placing the free thinking of the learner at its center. Reform has encouraged a shift
away from considering PD in terms of activities and, instead, towards conceptualizing teacher
professional learning and development in terms of internal teacher growth or change
(McChesney & Aldridge, 2018). The development of the professional should be the new
realization of the process (Bubb & Earley 2008; Evans 2011, 2014; Fraser et al. 2007; King
2014). Intentionally, some researchers in the field have proposed the deliberate shift in language
from professional development to professional learning (Lieberman & Miller 2014; Boylan et al.
2017). When engaged in PD, teachers are learners and should experience a delivery method
consistent with the instructional delivery they are expected to provide their students. Professional
learning should be customized to the needs of the students, teachers, and school. It should model
best practices in pedagogy, include follow-up support, and have continuity (Torlakson, 2012). In
an extensive meta-analysis of 35 empirical studies, Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) found
student achievement outcome support for PD that included identifiable and equal representation
of these seven elements: content focused, incorporation of active learning, collaboration, models
of effective practice, coaching and expert support, feedback and reflection, and sustained
duration.
Content Focused
23
While the role of teaching the whole child expands to instruction of soft skills and
essential interpersonal skills needed for successful navigation into college and career readiness,
the main job description of a teacher is delivering content instruction. Therefore, PD should
focus on enhancing teacher content knowledge with flexibility to apply new learning to their
classroom environment (Garet et al., 2001; Guskey & Yoon, 2009). Content focused PD is most
often job embedded, shifting the learning environment from a lecture room to being situated in
teachers’ classrooms with their students (Darling Hammond et al., 2017). Common focus for this
type of PD provides teachers the opportunity to study their students’ work (Heller et al., 2012;
Greenleaf et al., 2017), test out new curriculum with their students (Penuel et al., 2011), or study
a particular element of pedagogy or student engagement in a content area (Polly et al., 2015;
May et al., 2016). Roth et al. (2011) studied 48 science teachers who participated in a special
training program that was content focused and job embedded with lesson analysis included. The
findings between the control group who participated in baseline training and the group who
participated in the full training was significant. Students who had teachers participating in the
full training scored significantly higher on science exams than those whose teachers only
completed the baseline training (Roth et al., 2011). The Swackhamer et al. (2009) study of
middle grade math teachers further revealed that increased content knowledge of math through
PD resulted in improved self-efficacy within the subject area. As self-efficacy grows within a
content area, studies show that teachers will be more likely to participate in further content
focused PD (Richter et al., 2021; Watt et al., 2014).
Active Learning and Choice
The foundational theorists of experiential education John Dewey, Paulo Freire, Kurt
Lewin, Carl Rogers, and William James, placed intentional action based on subjective
24
experience at the center of the learning process (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). Within teacher
professional development, Darling Hammond et al. (2017) described active learning as engaging
teachers directly in the practices they are learning and noted that it should be connected to
teachers’ classrooms and students. In addition, it engages educators using authentic artifacts,
interactive activities, and other strategies to provide deeply embedded, highly contextualized
professional learning. Active learning also incorporates the elements of collaboration, coaching,
feedback, reflection, and modeling (Darling Hammond et al., 2017). In a 500 participant
qualitative analysis, Copur-Gencurk et al. (2019) revealed statistically significant gains in the
participants' math content knowledge when activities were focused on active learning
experiences. Active learning opportunities within professional development are important
because they allow teachers to transform their teaching and not simply layer on new strategies on
top of old strategies (Trotter, 2006).
Strong connections between educator interest value and choice within professional
interests and passions have also been linked with student achievement gains. Schiefele et al.
(2013) found significant correlation between educational interest, referring to general pedagogy
and best practices, and high achieving elementary teachers. This research also found support for
the connection of subject interest, referring to the subject matter taught, and secondary teachers
deemed as high achieving (Schiefele et al., 2013). In addition, empirical research addressing
student achievement has found support for individual teachers and instructional teams who were
given ownership to engage in choice-based methods of collaboration and professional learning
(Horn & Goldstein, 2018; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014; Ronfelt et al., 2015).
Klassen and Chiu (2010) found that with more personalized and differentiated PD, teachers are
more likely to develop self-efficacy and have increased confidence. Furthermore, according to
25
Ingersoll et al. (2018), the more teachers participate in decision-making processes, the more they
seem to internalize school goals into personal goals, resulting in student achievement increases.
Collaboration
Eaker and DuFour (2009) described the traditional school as functioning as a collection
of independent contractors united by a common parking lot. In stark contrast, research on
collaboration within professional development has found that teachers themselves report
unforced collaboration with other teachers as the most influential type of professional learning
on their self efficacy and subsequent motivation (Beauchamp et al., 2014; Durksen et al. 2017;
Hargraves & Fullan, 2012).
Researchers have found that linkage between teacher collaboration and student
achievement is causal (Mora-Ruano et al., 2019; Ronfelt et al., 2015; Goddard et al., 2007).
Early research suggested the relationship between teacher collaboration and student achievement
is likely indirect as findings indicate that collaborative networks were associated with strong
collective efficacy, which then in turn supported student achievement (Moolenaar et al., 2012;
Goddard et al. 2007). More recently, Ronfelt et al. (2015) found evidence among 9,000 teachers
that student achievement gains were greater in schools with identified strong collaborative
environments. Darling Hammond et al. (2017) meta analysis of 35 research studies similarly
found that when PD utilizes effective collaborative structures for teachers to problem-solve and
learn together, it positively contributes to increased student achievement.
Coaching
Research suggests that effective PD requires more than one time participation (Patfield et
al., 2023; Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). Coaching, which has multiple touch points, has gained
increased attention (Kraft et al., 2018). As defined, “Coaching is characterized by an observation
26
and feedback cycle in an ongoing instructional or clinical situation” (Joyce & Showers, 1981, p.
170). Instructional coaching can be facilitated in diverse formats. In one model, “responsive”
coaching aims to help teachers reflect on their practice, while “directive” coaching is oriented
around the direct feedback coaches provide to strengthen teachers’ instructional practices
(Ippolito, 2010). Kraft et al. (2018) characterizes the coaching process as experts working with
teachers to discuss classroom practice in a way that is: (a) individualized—coaching sessions are
one-on-one; (b) intensive—coaches and teachers interact at least every couple of weeks; (c)
sustained—teachers receive coaching over an extended period of time; (d) context specific—
teachers are coached on their practices within the context of their own classroom; and (e)
focused—coaches work with teachers to engage in deliberate practice of specific skills. Through
meta-analysis across 60 causal studies of teacher coaching programs, Kraft et al. (2018) found
large positive effects on instruction and smaller positive effects on achievement.
Empirical research has formed connections between effective educator coaching
structures, teacher self-efficacy, and student achievement. Structured follow up coaching
sessions have contributed to stronger self-efficacy beliefs and have shown stronger student
achievement gains (Tschannen-Moran & McMaster, 2009; von Suchodoletz et al., 2018). In
addition, coaching strategies that place a significant focus on collegial feedback and data driven
practices within content areas have shown the most progression of student achievement (Glover
et al., 2015; Kraft et al., 2018). Furthermore, instructional coaching has been found to be of
significant impact in the transfer of new teaching skills from a workshop to the classroom
(Cornett & Knight, 2009; Neuman & Wright, 2010; Teemant et al., 2011; Kraft et al., 2018). To
accomplish this transfer, teachers must engage in long term professional dialogue with coaches
focused on developing specific skills to enhance their teaching (Lofthouse et al., 2010). In
27
addition, long term dialogue within a trusted professional relationship where constructive
feedback is received and implemented also contributes to significant PD transfer ((Kraft et al.,
2018).
Feedback and Reflection
The capacity to provide and receive critical and constructive feedback is fundamental to
improvement within the teaching profession (Burgess et al., 2020). The Runhaar et al. (2010)
study of 456 teachers found that the more teachers can cope with difficulties, which relates to
self-efficacy, the more they reflect and ask colleagues and administration for feedback. In a
study of pre-service teachers, Graham et al. (2013) found that engagement with collaborative
feedback and reflection, within a program of developing core practices of teaching, facilitated an
environment where teachers were able to focus on the development of their knowledge and skills
of teaching.
Popularized by the book, Instructional Rounds in Education (Elmore et al., 2010),
versions of classroom instructional walkthroughs modeled after the medical practice of
observing professional practice in collaborative groups, reflecting collectively, and improving
capacity as a result of the process have become a practice in schools across the nation. Research
suggests that the most impactful part of the process is the observation debrief or reflection and
the next steps protocol or feedback, of which the observed teacher and the rounds team
participate (Teitel, 2009; Elmore et al. 2010). Feedback and reflection are generally incorporated
into coaching models and are components to the research-based successes of coaching and
mentorship (Darling Hammond et al., 2017; Kraft et al., 2018).
Sustained Duration
28
Research to identify the impact of sustained duration within teacher PD has mixed results
(Lindvall et al., 2023). Sustained duration is described as the duration of time that teachers would
be engaged and offers multiple opportunities for them to engage in learning around a single set
of concepts or practices (Darling Hammond et al., 2017). While Basma and Savage (2018) and
Garrett et al. (2019) find no significant effect duration had on instructional quality, strong
support can be found for durations of PD lasting more than one day (Guskey & Yoon, 2009;
Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Kennedy, 2016). Guskey and Yoon (2009) found training that
included 30 or more hours provided the most significant effects on student achievement,
however, training that included less than 14 hours showed no significant effects. The importance
of sustained duration can be quantified within connection to elements of PD that require
sustained efforts such as practice and coaching (Darling Hammond et al., 2017). It is important
to note that the impact of sustained duration in PD is likely contingent on the quality of the PD
itself.
Lack of Evidence of the Impact of Teacher Professional Development
Educators possess accrued skills that facilitate outcomes among students. Empirical
evidence has shown the relationship between teachers’ skills and student performance and has
highlighted the importance of teacher quality to explain variation in student achievement across
the world (Keller et al., 2017; Meroni et al., 2015). Teachers who possess strong pedagogical
knowledge are more effective than those who demonstrate content knowledge only, with most
students gaining a year or more of learning with the latter as compared to a high content
knowledge only teacher (Baumert et al., 2010). At the same time, empirical research suggests
that common forms of teacher professional development generally fail to embed key elements
that foster the positive outcomes desired, in part due a failure to build teacher self-efficacy and
29
collective efficacy (Glazerman et. al, 2010; Desimone et al. 2013; The New Teacher Project,
2015).
The Glazerman Study
During the years of 2006-2009, an empirical study with 1,009 beginning teachers across
418 schools in 17 districts studied a beginning teacher induction model to measure impact on
classroom practices and student achievement (Glazerman et. al., 2010). The study focused on
beginning teachers in treatment schools who were assigned to a full-time mentor from one of two
professional companies at a 12 to 1 ratio. Mentors received ongoing training and a curriculum of
materials to support the teachers’ development. In addition, beginning teachers were offered
monthly professional development sessions, opportunities to observe veteran teachers, and an
end-of-year seminar. The research questions guiding this study were: What is the effect of
comprehensive teacher induction on the types and intensity of induction services teachers
receive, relative to the types and intensity of services they receive from districts’ current
induction programs?; What impacts do comprehensive induction have in the classroom?
Specifically, what are the impacts on: teachers’ classroom practices and student achievement?;
and What impacts do comprehensive induction have on the teaching workforce?
The findings in the Glazerman et al. (2010) study assert that comprehensive induction did
not make teachers feel more satisfied or prepared over any of the three year period the
participants were surveyed. Specifically, teachers from the treatment and control groups (no
induction) reported feelings of satisfaction and preparedness that differed by 0.1 or less on the
four-point scales at all points in time at which we measured these attitudes. In addition, the
induction PD had no impact on teacher retention or mobility patterns. With regard to student
achievement outcomes, the findings recorded no statistical difference in student achievement
30
among the treatment and control groups over the first two years of the comprehensive induction
program. In year three, some evidence to support a minor student achievement impact was noted
in the data (Glazerman et al., 2010). Given that the induction programming studied yielded no
impact on teacher attitudes, satisfaction, or feeling of preparedness (Glazerman et al., 2010), all
elements which impact self-efficacy, a connection that the induction program failed to promote
teacher efficacy can be made.
Desimone Study
After reviewing the Glazerman et al. (2008) study, Desimone et al. (2013) launched an
empirical study with 457 teachers and 4,803 students among 71 high poverty schools over three
years within 3rd-5th grade math to explore student achievement growth and change in teacher
practices. Desimone et al., (2013) used software to facilitate a quasi-experimental longitudinal
analysis on data points, time plots, and professional development attendance for the exploration.
The research questions guiding the study were: (1) To what extent do teachers’ topic coverage,
emphasis on memorization and solving novel problems, and time spent on mathematics
instruction, predict student mathematics achievement growth? and (2) To what extent does
teacher participation in content-focused professional development predict the aspects of
instruction found in our first analysis to be related to increases in student mathematics
achievement growth?
While being one of the first research studies to link PD to teaching practice and then to
student achievement, the findings presented in Desimone et al. (2013) only offered modest
support for content-focused professional development as a way to foster teaching practice that
boosts student achievement. Furthermore, small positive correlations were found for teaching
practice that uses more advanced topics and emphasizes solving novel problems (Desimone et
al., 2013). This growth in student achievement was substantiated when teachers got training on
31
“advanced math” concepts. These teachers were more likely to teach the way they had been
trained and the students involved with “advanced math” recorded achievement growth more
quickly (Desimone et al., 2013). This research connects to the potential of PD that is content
focused and increases confidence within novel problem solving, relating back to teacher self
efficacy.
The Mirage Study
In 2015, the educational non-profit organization, The New Teacher Project (TNTP),
conducted a comprehensive study of the relationship between school districts’ expenditures for
professional development and outcomes. The project, called the Mirage Study, included a sample
size of 10,507 students and 566 teachers across three public school districts and one charter
school network during the years of 2013-2015. The empirical research included quantitative
surveys with all participants and further qualitative interviews with 127 district staff members
and school leaders, in addition to focus groups with small groups of teachers (The New Teacher
Project, 2015). Contrary to most research on professional development, the method employed
was to identify teachers whose performance appeared to improve substantially and work
backward to find any experiences, mindsets, or environments they had in common. In addition,
the study sought out those teachers whose performance did not improve substantially and
followed the same process. To further enhance the scope and comparative nature of the study,
data on professional development budgets, professional development attendance records, and
coaching data were also analyzed. The research questions guiding the study were: How much is
invested in teacher professional development?; Is there a relationship between teacher
professional development and teacher improvement?; and Can this relationship be applied to all
school districts? (The New Teacher Project, 2015).
32
The New Teacher Project (2015) findings related to PD processes revealed that the
decades-old approach to teacher development is built upon good intentions and false assumptions
and will not help teachers reach their full potential. Teachers understand this as only 42% of the
teacher participants shared affirmation that any training they had had that year was a good use of
their time. In individual cases where very significant teacher improvement was found, success
could not be linked to professional development. Even when The New Teacher Project (2015)
drilled down into data for teachers who received what many would consider the most support
districts can offer such as extended professional development opportunities, formal
collaboration, coaching, and feedback, teachers showing improvement were no more likely than
other teachers to be part of the group that had access to those supports. The New Teacher Project
(2015) study implored the educational community to redefine what it means to help teachers
improve, reevaluate existing professional learning supports and programs, and reinvent how to
support effective teaching at scale as a path forward to improving education's most precious
commodity. In addition, the study pointed out that most professional development is evaluated
on the basis of teacher satisfaction surveys that asked teachers for feedback immediately after the
professional development session, prompting questions regarding effective evaluation processes.
The Role of Leadership in Teacher Efficacy
Leadership has a key role in the efficacy perception of teachers. The instructional
leadership of the school principal impacts the level of both self-efficacy and collective efficacy
of teachers (Calik et al., 2012). Hipp (1996) found that principals who model behaviors of risk
taking, cooperation, and inspire group purpose contribute to higher levels of efficacy among
teachers. In addition, Ma and Marion (2021) found that when teachers identify a leader as
trustworthy, it promotes a significant sense of efficacy among the teaching staff. In a study of
33
456 educators at a secondary Vocational Education and Training College, Runhaar et al. (2010)
found that the more teachers perceive their leaders as transformational, described as having a
clear vision for the future, inspiring them, and giving their work a greater sense of meaning, the
more they collaborated and asked one another for feedback.
Principals who have been given instructional and resource autonomy are recognized to
have positively impacted efficacy and, in turn, increases in student achievement (Fackler &
Malmberg, 2016; Holzberger et al. 2014). Principals who garner certain autonomies from their
superiors have the freedom to make decisions based on the efficacy levels observed in their
buildings. For example, within the TALIS data of 2,891 teachers, Gumus (2013) found a
positive connection between teachers who worked for more educated principals or principals
employing an accountable management style (as opposed to a bureaucratic style) and
professional development attendance. In addition, Wan and Lam (2010) found that if
administrators were accommodating in reducing the workload, teachers were more likely to
attend professional development opportunities.
Strong instructional leadership is also characterized by the ability to promote
collaboration among the school staff. The degree to which a culture of collaboration is embedded
in a school has been found to be dependent on the level of instructional leadership from the
school leader (Goddard et al., 2015; Walshrom & Louis, 2008) Furthermore, schools in which
principals maintained frequent visibility in the classrooms and provided strong instructional
guidance were characterized by high collective work among staff, according to the Goddard et al.
(2015) study of 93 elementary schools. Principals are leaders in schools, however, with the
organizational demands of the principal position, other administrators and teacher leadership
34
positions assume instructional leadership and provide contributions to fostering teacher self and
collective efficacy.
Social Cognitive Theory- A Theoretical Framework
Social Cognitive Theory, developed by psychologist Albert Bandura, seeks to reveal the
way people acquire and maintain behavior and views people as active agents who can both
influence and be influenced by the environment around them (Bandura, 2000). Social Cognitive
Theory emphasizes a model of emergent interactive agency (Bandura, 1986). Human agency is
the concept that learners make an intentional decision to invest in learning and then enact
behavioral change (Bandura, 2001). The theory’s focus on agency distinguishes among three
forms: personal, proxy, and collective (Bandura, 2000). While personal is unique to the person,
proxy and collective rely on others for inputs to result in behavioral change (Bandura, 2001).
These forms can be discussed within the lenses of self-efficacy and collective efficacy.
Efficacy
Social Cognitive Theory asserts that agency is functionally dependent on events
(Bandura, 1986). The model emphasizes that humans make a causal contribution to their own
motivation and action within a system of triadic reciprocal causation. Within reciprocal
causation, personal, behavior, and environmental events all operate as interacting determinants
(Bandura, 1986). While heavily rooted in the behavior construct, efficacy, defined as the
capacity for producing a desired effect (Dictionary.com, 2024), heavily influences all three areas
of causation (Bandura, 1977). Generally, efficacy is viewed in two ways, self-efficacy and
collective efficacy (Bandura 2000). Self-efficacy beliefs influence how well people motivate
themselves and persevere in the face of difficulties through the goals they have set for
themselves, outcome expectations they anticipate, and causal attributions for their successes and
35
failures (Bandura, 2012). Collective efficacy is best described as a group of people coordinating
work on a shared belief (Bandura, 2000). Bandura (1986) introduced the thinking that four
sources of past experiences shape self-efficacy beliefs. The inputs include mastery experiences,
vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and affective states. In the research to develop
frameworks for collective teacher efficacy (CTE), Goddard et al. (2000) asserted that as the four
sources of past experiences are critical for individuals, they are also fundamental in the
development of collective teacher efficacy.
Educator Self-Efficacy
People who exhibit high levels of self-efficacy have stronger motivation, persist among
numerous obstacles, and are more apt to accept innovative ideas (Bandura, 1997). Levels of
teacher self-efficacy have been empirically linked with positive perceptions regarding PD and
higher student achievement. Significant empirical research demonstrates that teachers who
exhibit high self-efficacy within instructional practice and content knowledge are more likely to
have positive perceptions of education and are more amenable to a change of practice (Donnell
& Gettinger, 2015; Guo, et al., 2011). Self-efficacious teachers are also found to be closely
linked with higher levels of student achievement (Malmberg et al., 2014; Fackler & Malmberg,
2016). Important connections between self-efficacy and collective efficacy were found in a study
by Calik et al. (2012), which revealed when the number of teachers who have high self-efficacy
increased, collective efficacy showed marked growth as well.
Educator Collective Efficacy
Many researchers have highlighted the importance of embedding collaboration within
teacher professional development (Darling-Hammond, 2017; Goddard et al., 2007) to build
collective efficacy. Respected educational researcher John Hattie (2016) ranked collective
36
efficacy as the number one influence of all the factors related to student achievement based on
his findings and on Eells’ (2011) meta-analysis which reported an effect size of 1.57,
synthesizing correlational evidence for CTE and student achievement. Eells (2011) findings
affirmed CTE is positively associated with student achievement.
In a study that included 775 teachers, Moolenaar et al. (2012) found strong support for
social networks among teachers that featured interdependency on advice exchange. The research
concluded that “by exchanging knowledge, sharing experiences, and collectively searching for
solutions to problems of practice, teachers may build confidence in their team’s collective
capability to motivate students, offer a targeted instructional program in support of student
learning, and handle difficult situations” (p. 253). More recent studies emphasize the significance
of collective efficacy among teachers teaching within the same content area. Within mathematics
instruction, Berebitsky and Salloum (2017) and Goddard and Salloum (2017) found collective
efficacy beliefs are positively related to mathematics instructional quality and increases in
student achievement.
For the purposes of this study, Social Cognitive Theory applies an appropriate lens to
examine the effectiveness of PD on a systemic, district, and school site level. SCT seeks to
reveal the way people acquire and maintain behavior. It promotes that individuals are not just
products of circumstances but contributors to them (Bandura, 2000). The theory’s focus on
agency distinguishes among three forms: personal, proxy, and collective (Bandura, 2000). This
study will be embedded within Social Cognitive Theory to understand how Teacher Leaders
perceive PD builds self-efficacy and collective efficacy related to one's ability to transfer teacher
PD learning into the classroom.
37
Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to identify best practices within teacher professional
development (PD), as perceived by elementary school Teacher Leaders, that fostered self- and
collective-efficacy to aid in the transfer of learning into their classroom instruction and improve
student outcomes. Understanding practices related to building teacher self and collective efficacy
within teacher PD from teachers identified as elementary Teacher Leaders in a large urban
school district that serves around 150,000 students led to further understanding of barriers,
successes, and needs associated with professional development for teachers more broadly. This
chapter outlines the research design, research setting, and my background as a researcher. In
addition, participants, instrumentation, data collection, data analysis, credibility, and ethics are
reviewed. The research questions that guided this study were:
1. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building self-efficacy to aid their current
opportunities to transfer learning across the teachers they support.
2. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building collective efficacy to aid the transfer of
learning into the classrooms they support?
Overview of Design
This qualitative research study utilized a semi-structured interview approach as discussed
by Merriam and Tisdell (2016) to explore educators' perceptions (Patton, 2015). The semistructured approach was chosen to allow for fully open-ended questions and the opportunity to
respond to the situation and scenarios presented during the interviews (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
The research was conducted within the theoretical framework of Social Cognitive
Theory, which seeks to reveal the way people acquire and maintain behavior (Bandura, 2000),
38
supported by the more detailed elements of self and collective efficacy. Within this research, I
explored the transfer of professional development methods from Teacher Leaders to instruction
in their classrooms, as well as their colleagues’ classrooms.
Research Setting
School District A is a large, urban, Southeastern public school district that maintains
about 180 schools, serves around 150,000 students, and employs nearly 8,500 certified teachers,
according to 2023 data. School District A has participated in Opportunity Culture, an initiative of
Public Impact, for 10 years (Opportunity Culture, 2023). The Opportunity Culture program
provides a framework to analyze human capital spending to redistribute funds, increase pay for
the most successful teachers, and give students more access to the best teachers. To date,
Opportunity Culture has been implemented in around 800 schools across the United States and
has awarded $57.9M in additional pay to nearly 5,400 teachers across the United States
(Opportunity Culture, 2023). Through the Opportunity Culture program, Public Impact seeks to
expand the reach of excellent educators to more students, enable identified educators to coach
more colleagues, increase pay for outstanding educators, and create career paths that provide
educators opportunities to advance without leaving the classroom (Opportunity Culture, 2023).
In School District A, interested educators are invited to apply for teacher leadership talent
pool admission. The five roles of Teacher Leaders in order of least to greatest impact are:
Expanded Impact Teacher 1, Expanded Impact Teacher 2, Expanded Impact Teacher 3, MultiClassroom Leader (MCL) 1, and Multi-Classroom Leader (MCL) 2. The advertised minimum
criterion for entrance into the talent pool is a bachelor's degree, three years of prior teaching
experience with demonstrated evidence of high progress student outcomes, and evidence of
initiative and leadership among adults. School District A leadership uses a rubric for
39
standardizing applicant data, as well as the incorporation of interviews for candidate admission
to the MCL talent pool. Teacher Leaders who meet the specific criterion within the rubric are
admitted into the specific talent pool associated with the five roles. During the 2021-2022 school
year, approximately 8% or 650 educators within District A received entry to the talent pool
within the five roles of Teacher Leaders. Sixty four percent of schools in School District A
employ Teacher Leaders on the advanced pay scale. Educators selected for a position within a
school receive additional compensation between $2,500 and $18,250 for their additional
responsibilities and expanded impact. Teacher Leaders receive professional development to
support their success as prospective leaders. Additionally, candidates hired into Teacher Leader
roles must participate in micro-credentialing courses scaffolded for each role, receive jobembedded coaching, and participate in opportunities to job-shadow other successful staff in their
same role.
Method: Interviews
The following section highlights the specifics of the data collection for this qualitative
study, including the participants and recruitment strategies, the instrumentation and protocol, as
well as the data collection procedures and analysis that were used. The selection of participants
was important to ensure I engaged the appropriate target population. In addition, semi-structured
interviews served as the instrument for the study. Data collection procedures are outlined and
facilitated a well-supported data analysis approach.
Participants
Participants for this qualitative research study were solicited from School District A using
a purposeful (Patton, 2015), criterion-based (LeCompte & Schensul, 2010), and network
sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) approach. Serving around 150,000 students, employing
40
nearly 8,500 certified teachers, and having more than 650 teachers identified as Teacher Leaders
according to 2023 data, School District A serves as a reputable district to acquire a purposeful
sample. Purposeful sampling was used as a means to discover, understand, and gain insight from
a sample developed through criterion-based attributes from which the most can be learned
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
While any category of Teacher Leader yields a certain level of impact on educators and
students, for this study I further narrowed the criterion to gather feedback from educators
charged with making the most impact within a School District A school. The highest level of
Teacher Leader and most successful educators in School District A are identified as a MultiClassroom Leader or MCL. According to 2023 data, 1.5% of teachers, or approximately 125
teachers, in School District A have been placed in the talent pool for the role. The job description
of an MCL states in summary,
The Multi-Classroom Leader (MCL) is expected to intensively coach 3-10 teachers on
his/her caseload and teach students through various models. The MCL is also responsible
for leading a team of teachers and other support staff responsible for multiple classrooms
as well as teaching students within the team to meet the principal’s standards of
excellence. (S)he establishes each team member’s roles and goals at least annually,
determines how students spend time and organizes teaching roles to fit each teacher’s
strengths, content knowledge and professional development goals. The MCL organizes
the team to review student progress and change instruction to ensure high-progress
learning for every child. The MCL works collaboratively with the team, using the team’s
new ideas and innovations that the MCL agrees may improve learning. The MCL is
accountable for learning and development of all the teachers and students on his/her
41
caseload and team. The MCL must be given a healthy balance of teaching/coaching time
so (s)he is able to perform all instructional responsibilities that are expected. (S)he also
provides feedback to the principal in choosing, evaluating and developing the team.
(School District A MCL Job Description, 2023)
Due to my past employment in School District A and knowledge of teachers serving in a
MCL role, a network or snowball sampling method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) was utilized to
obtain participants. Central to the sampling strategy is a ‘referral’ model of “using one contact to
help you recruit another contact, who in turn can put you in touch with someone else”
(Valentine, 2005, p. 117). To begin the study, a network sample of four first round participants
were selected by me based on my knowledge of the MCL, and the additional criterion of current
employment in a School District A elementary school as an MCL for two or more years. Of the
approximately 100 elementary schools in School District A, 70 of those schools participate in the
Opportunity Culture program. Because schools are staffed differently according to size and
socio-economic demographics, participating elementary schools may have as few as 0 to as
many as 3 MCLs. Given the participants were asked to refer me to other possible participants in
School District A who met the same criteria and whom they respect as professionals in the same
role, the remaining five participants were solicited after being identified by an MCL participant
in the first or second round of interviews. In total, nine MCL elementary teachers participated in
the study across five schools in the district.
Instrumentation
Qualitative interviews followed a semi-structured approach (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016)
and allowed for open ended questioning. Thirteen primary interview questions and five probing
questions, as needed, allowed for conversational flexibility. Questions were embedded with a
42
Social Cognitive Theory connection to gather information regarding perceptions of how PD
builds self-efficacy and collective efficacy related to one's ability to implement teacher PD
learning into the classroom. Specifically, four questions related directly to self-efficacy, one
questions related to collective efficacy, six related to both self-efficacy and collective efficacy,
one was introductory, and one was network gathering. Probing questions were designed to dig
deeper, ensuring specific examples were shared. The interview protocol is provided in Appendix
A.
Data Collection Procedures
The initial potential interviewees were contacted via email during the month of April,
2024. In the email, potential interviewees were informed of the purpose of the study, the criterion
established for participants, the voluntary nature of the study and their protection, and the
compensation of a $25 Amazon Gift Card for participants. Potential participants were informed
that the interviews would be between 45 and 60 minutes in length and conducted via Zoom.
Recording permission was obtained and utilized to aid in the transcription of data and to review
non-verbal communications as suggested by multiple researchers (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007;
Burkholder et al., 2019; Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). During the
interview, participants were given time to reflect on the questions and their answers in an effort
for the participants to not feel rushed through the interview. The desire was for reflection time to
yield rich and meaningful answers to the questions (Burkholder et al., 2019; Patton, 2002). I
conducted interviews until data saturation was achieved (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Data Analysis
Data analysis began during data collection. Analytic memos (Gibbs, 2018) were written
after each interview. Within these memos, I documented my thoughts, concerns, and initial
43
conclusions about the data in relation to the conceptual framework and research questions. Once
interviews were complete, I transcribed and coded them within a codebook (Gibbs, 2018).
During the first phase of analysis, I utilized open coding as described by Merriam and Tisdell
(2016). I then looked for empirical codes and applied a priori codes from my conceptual
framework. In the second phase of analysis, I aggregated empirical and a priori codes into
analytic/axial codes (Charmaz, 2014; Corbin & Strauss, 2015). During the third phase of data
analysis, I identified pattern codes and themes that emerged related to the conceptual framework
and the research questions constructed.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
My credibility and trustworthiness regarding my own positionality and biases was
essential to this study as I served as the primary agent of data collection (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). In this study, two primary strategies for ensuring credibility and trustworthiness were
utilized. Interview data collected from different people with different perspectives and various
experience levels within the role of MCL in School District A provided multiple sources of data.
The strategy of member checks as defined by Merriam and Tisdell (2016) were also utilized for
reliability of the findings. Member checking took place with each interviewee as transcripts were
presented to them in draft form.
Interviews were conducted at a mutually agreed upon comfortable and quiet location
during a time that promoted convenience and focus for each participant. All interviews took
place via Zoom meeting where both video and audio were available. Interview questions were
the same for all participants to ensure the reliability of their responses.
Ethics
44
This study was submitted to the University of Southern California Institutional Review
Board (IRB), and I followed the board’s rules and guidelines regarding the protection of the
rights and welfare of the participants in this study. The protection of human participants who
take part in scientific research is a basic responsibility of any investigator (Marshall, 2003).
Confidentiality of all participants’ information was held throughout the study. Information forms
were electronically distributed and reviewed with all participants prior to interviews (Appendix
B). In addition, participants were informed that they could withdraw from the study at any time
for any reason. Participants were asked to give oral consent to be recorded. Furthermore,
participants were informed that the information collected through the interviews will be
deidentified and kept on a password protected computer for a term of one year or less and then
deleted once the study is completed.
The study took place within the context of a district in which I was formerly employed.
Given that I have worked in School District A for several years and am employing a network
sampling, some of the participants I worked with in some capacity or have awareness of my
work inside or outside of the school district. This may have caused some participants to reflect
on known philosophies or implementations that I have worked within. To ensure that participants
focused on their own reflections, mindset, and preferences, I opened the interview with an
encouragement to view me as a doctoral researcher who is unaffiliated and unfamiliar with the
daily work they engage in. To protect the participants, no identifying information about
participating Teacher Leaders were provided in any reporting. De-identifying pseudonyms were
created for each Teacher Leader to accomplish this directive.
The Researcher
45
As a thoroughly educated, English speaking, white male who has always been privileged,
I have taken advantage of experiences that have helped me acquire the skills to be a personable
and talented communicator. These skills have opened doors to teaching, educational leadership,
and international consultation experiences that have enhanced personal marketability and have
provided my family unit with the ability to operate within a middle to upper income socioeconomic ecosystem. Having worked in both affluent and underserved types of schools, I am a
self-identified insider to the complexities and the disparities that exist among these
populations. My work within schools, districts, and international educational enterprises have
yielded significant biases toward instructional approaches, the degree in which autonomy should
be given to school leaders, and the importance of distributive leadership among a school staff.
As a former employee of School District A, I have deep respect for the systems,
professionals, and the institutional learning that have led to its growing reputation among large
urban school districts. I personally have experienced quality professional development provided
by the district and have grown in my leadership skills because of the 11 years I spent serving
students, families, and other educators there. In addition, I affirm School District A’s drive to
expand the impact of great teachers by providing the Opportunity Culture program to provide a
career progression that keeps teachers working instructionally with students and other teachers.
As a seasoned educator of 24 years, I have experienced varying quality of professional
development and have an awareness of the impact a willing and well trained teacher can have on
a group of students.
46
Chapter 4: Findings
The purpose of this study was to identify efficacy drivers within teacher professional
development (PD) that support educator self and collective confidence to improve learning
outcomes in their classrooms. By exploring the perceived best practices within educator PD from
teachers identified as Teacher Leaders and understanding training barriers, successes, and needs
associated with professional development, key findings regarding educator efficacy were sought.
Nine individual semi-structured interviews with Teacher Leaders from School District A, a
pseudonym, were conducted to gain insight on the following research questions informed by
Social Cognitive Theory:
1.) How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building self-efficacy to aid their current
opportunities to transfer learning across the teachers they support?
2.) How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building collective efficacy to aid the transfer of
learning into the classrooms they support?
This chapter provides an overview of the study’s participants, including a description of their
background and regional context, followed by a detailed presentation of key findings for each
research question.
Overview of Participants
A total of nine interviews were conducted with Teacher Leaders across five schools from
School District A. School District A is a large, urban, Southeastern public school district that
maintains about 180 schools, serves around 150,000 students, and employs nearly 8,500 certified
teachers according to 2023 data. School District A has participated in Opportunity Culture, an
initiative of Public Impact, for 10 years (Opportunity Culture, 2023). The Opportunity Culture
program provides a framework to analyze human capital spending to redistribute funds, increase
47
pay for the most successful teachers, and give students more access to the best teachers. In
School District A, interested educators are invited to apply for teacher leadership talent pool
admission. The five roles of Teacher Leaders in order of least to greatest impact are: Expanded
Impact Teacher 1, Expanded Impact Teacher 2, Expanded Impact Teacher 3, Multi-Classroom
Leader (MCL) 1, and Multi-Classroom Leader (MCL) 2. Teacher Leaders who meet the specific
criterion within the rubric are admitted into the specific talent pool associated with the five roles.
During the 2021-2022 school year, approximately 8%, or 650, educators within District A
received entry to the talent pool within the five roles of Teacher Leaders. Educators selected for
a teacher leader position within a school receive additional compensation between $2,500 and
$18,250 for their additional responsibilities and expanded impact. Teacher Leaders receive
professional development to support their success as prospective leaders.
Within this study, the participant criterion was further narrowed to gather insights from
educators charged with making the most impact within a School District A school. The highest
level of Teacher Leader and most successful educators in School District A are identified as a
Multi-Classroom Leader or MCL. According to 2023 data, 1.5% of teachers, or approximately
125 teachers, in School District A have been placed in the talent pool for the role. The job
description of an MCL states in summary,
The Multi-Classroom Leader (MCL) is expected to intensively coach 3-10 teachers on
his/her caseload and teach students through various models. The MCL is also responsible
for leading a team of teachers and other support staff responsible for multiple classrooms
as well as teaching students within the team to meet the principal’s standards of
excellence. (S)he establishes each team member’s roles and goals at least annually,
determines how students spend time and organizes teaching roles to fit each teacher’s
48
strengths, content knowledge and professional development goals. The MCL organizes
the team to review student progress and change instruction to ensure high-progress
learning for every child. The MCL works collaboratively with the team, using the team’s
new ideas and innovations that the MCL agrees may improve learning. The MCL is
accountable for learning and development of all the teachers and students on his/her
caseload and team. The MCL must be given a healthy balance of teaching/coaching time
so (s)he is able to perform all instructional responsibilities that are expected. (S)he also
provides feedback to the principal in choosing, evaluating, and developing the team.
(School District A MCL Job Description, 2023)
Participants in the study met the criterion of employment within School District A and
had served two or more years as an MCL in an elementary school. One exception to this criterion
was one participant who stated at the beginning of the interview that her tenure as an MCL was
one year. I continued the interview and, upon analysis, found her responses to be valuable to the
study’s research questions. Four participants were specifically solicited for the study, and the
remaining five became involved in the study through network or snowball sampling (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016.)
Participants in the study exhibited significant experience in education, ranging from 10
years to 30 years. The participants’ years of experience as an MCL varied from 1 year to 10
years. Five elementary schools from School District A were represented in the study and were
identified by a pseudonym that contains a letter (S) and a numeral. Participants in the study
served at three different classifications of schools based on socio-economic demographics. Title
1 schools receive additional federal funds due to enrolled student populations of 75% or above
who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. For this research, I deemed schools with an enrolled
49
population of between 40% and 74% qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch as a middleincome school. I assigned the designation of upper income to schools with an enrolled student
population of between 0% and 39% qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch. The study
included eight female MCLs and one male MCL. A pseudonym was given to each participant
that contains an acronym for Teacher Leader (TL) and a numeral. Table 1 provides detailed
information on the participants.
Table 1
Demographic Information of Nine Teacher Leader Participants from School District A
Participant
Name
Total Years of
Educator
Experience
Years of
Experience as a
TL (MCL)
School
Designator
Demographic of School
Currently Serving
TL1 ≤ 20 6 S1 Title 1
TL2 ≤ 25 6 S1 Title 1
TL3 ≤ 25 7 S2 Title 1
TL4 ≤ 25 5 S2 Title 1
TL5 ≤ 25 10 S3 Middle Income
TL6 ≤ 20 7 S3 Middle Income
TL7 ≤ 20 6 S3 Middle Income
TL8 ≤ 20 1 S4 Upper Income
TL9 ≤ 25 10 S5 Upper Income
Interview questions were structured to encourage participants to reflect on professional
development training and experiences that they viewed as having built their self-efficacy and the
50
collective efficacy of the groups of teachers they led. Professional development opportunities
identified by the participants within their responses provide connection points to self and
collective efficacy drivers with the PDs. Table 2 lists the highest frequency of PDs identified by
the Teacher Leaders.
Table 2
Highest Frequency of Professional Development Completed Among Participants
Highest Frequency of Professional Development Completed Among Participants
Crucial Conversations Series 9
Get Better Faster Coaching Training Series 7
Data Driven Instruction (DDI) Training 5
Science of Reading/Orton Gillingham Training 5
Reading And Writing Institute for Coaching Literacy 4
District Peer to Peer Sessions 3
Presentation of Findings
This qualitative research study with nine Teacher Leader participants produced six key
findings. These key findings expand on the available research of self and collective efficacy
drivers that aid in the transfer of PD to instructional practice within the classroom setting. The
key findings fell into one of three categories. The first category relating to research question one
and self-efficacy included two key findings. The second category relating to research question 2
and collective efficacy included two key findings. Furthermore, the third category related to both
research questions one and two, with two key findings bridging across both research questions.
All six key findings are found in Table 3 and discussed below.
51
Table 3
Key Findings
Key Findings
RQ1: How do Teacher Leaders perceive
PD building self-efficacy to aid their
current opportunities to transfer learning
across the teachers they support.
RQ2: How do Teacher Leaders
perceive PD building collective
efficacy to aid the transfer of learning
into the classrooms they support?
Finding 1 Ability to Engage in Hard Conversations –
Finding 2 Reflection –
Finding 3 – Intentional Relationship Building
Finding 4 – Safe Environment
Finding 5 Instructional Coaching as Best Practice
Finding 6 Significance of Practice
Research Question 1: How Do Teacher Leaders Perceive PD Building Self-Efficacy to Aid
Their Current Opportunities to Transfer Learning Across the Teachers They Support
The purpose of this research question was to understand the components of professional
development that positively impacted self-efficacy growth among both Teacher Leaders and the
teachers they support. Questions such as, “What do you think are the characteristics of a
confident teacher?,” “Tell me about a time in which you felt highly confident in your ability to
teach a subject area to the students you currently serve,” and “What specifically in the PD aided
your confidence in your ability to transfer the learning into your classroom instruction?” were
constructed to gather responses. Two key findings emerged through data analysis.
1. Ability to engage in hard conversations
52
2. Ability to engage in reflection
The following discussions provide context and evidence related to the findings.
Finding 1: Ability to Engage in Hard Conversations
The ability of Teacher Leaders to engage in hard conversations was significant within the
findings. TL1 shared, “Being able to learn how to have conversations with people that can be
harder conversations to have has been really, really helpful in my specific role.” The Teacher
Leaders discussed the significance of this within their own training opportunities and within the
support that they provide to teachers.
Teacher Leaders
As noted in Table 2, all nine participants referred to the training within the Crucial
Conversations Series in their interviews. This series contains three books by Grenny, et al.
entitled, Crucial Conversations (2002), Crucial Accountability (2013), and Influencer (2013).
Eight participants spoke directly about how this training had positively impacted their own
confidence when engaging in difficult conversations with teachers they supported. When
discussing Crucial Conversations training, TL4 said, “It helped me find my leader voice.”
Further adding to the discussion of growth in confidence through Crucial Conversations training
TL7 noted,
It was helpful because I am not a confrontational person. I used to feel like having a
conversation with a teacher about how they taught was awkward. Who am I to criticize
what they are doing? I was afraid they were going to take what I said personally.
Participating in Crucial Conversations taught me that it's not. It's not anything on a
personal level. If we just talk about things that I observe, or data that is concrete, then I
am able to have a conversation with that teacher about it. It taught me some strategies
53
that were helpful when I was thinking through what I am going to say to this teacher so
that they're not offended or so they don't take it personally and aren’t in tears the next day
because of something that I said.
Teacher Leaders consistently emphasized the importance of PD that gives them confidence to
engage in hard conversations.
While the content of the books and training were identified as helpful in establishing
protocols, the eight participants indicated that the primary driver within the training that aided
their confidence to transfer the learning to the teachers they supported was practice. When
speaking of Crucial Conversations training, TL8 said,
It was a two-day training that I went to, and I sat at a table with someone. I had no one
from a previous school, so it was a safe place, you know, where we work together and got
to rehearse some of the really hard conversations that were our goals when we got back to
school.
Building upon importance of practice increasing the self-efficacy of a Teacher Leader to engage
in hard conversations, TL1 said this of her Crucial Conversations training,
They're (the trainers) very much like, you've had a time of chunking the work, now let's
go ahead and try it. Get with a partner and someone will come around and coach in. Now
come back together and talk through it. All right, let's try it again. Then you learn a little
bit more information, and then you try practicing that next thing again.
The participants identified an active learning component as being highly effective within training
to bolster their confidence in having hard conversations. The significance of the active learning
element of practice within PD is further explored in later findings.
Teachers
54
As part of participant responses to how PD built their self-efficacy, in asking them What
do you think are the characteristics of a confident teacher, most teachers emphasized the ability
to have difficult conversations. Five participants shared their perspective on teachers’ ability to
engage in hard conversations contributing to positive self-efficacy. This was discussed as an
essential element of success as teachers navigate meetings such as data review sessions and
parent conferences.
Some participants referenced grade level data sessions as an environment where hard
conversations are routine, and the ability to engage in them as characteristics of a confident
teacher. The nature of a data session is for everyone to see how all the students performed after
instruction. When speaking about confident teachers, TL6 said, “They're not afraid to talk about
their data with others…A confident teacher is able to say, you know what, I didn't teach that
appropriately. I need to go back, and I need to use manipulatives or whatever it might be.” TL1
discussed her desire to help teachers be ready for these hard conversations,
We’ve had several beginning teachers that have come through the most recent school that
I worked at, so I have been able to help prepare them for those (data) meetings which can
sometimes feel intense or intimidating for them. It's a lot of people in one room, and
you're the one with the voice of the students. So that's always been a really big
opportunity.
The ability for teachers to have hard conversations with student parents was also
suggested as an identifier of a confident teacher. Communicating with parents is an essential
responsibility of a teacher. While discussing confident teachers, TL6 said,
They're not afraid to have difficult conversations with parents. That’s a big one. They're
not afraid to call parents and have a heart to heart, and really tell them what's going on,
55
and seek guidance from their parents, too, because sometimes you don't know what's
going on at home.
Adding to the importance of this finding, TL5 said, “A confident teacher isn't intimidated by
parents. I always say, as a parent myself, I want people to be honest with me. I want it to land
well and be kind, and just know that it comes from a good place.” As suggested by the Teacher
Leaders, teachers who can talk about sensitive topics with parents in a caring way are better able
to establish partnerships for the benefit of the student.
In summary, all nine Teacher Leaders discussed the importance of having the ability to
engage in hard conversations as significant to building their own self-efficacy to accomplish the
goals of their role. Eight participants identified the Crucial Conversations Series training as
being impactful to their leadership growth and ability to engage teachers in difficult
conversations. Furthermore, five Teacher Leaders discussed their observations of teachers with
high levels of self-efficacy displaying the ability to openly discuss mistakes, low performance
student data, and parent concerns.
Finding 2: Ability to Engage in Reflection
Five participants discussed their PD building their self-efficacy to transfer learning across
the teachers they support through purposeful reflection. Teacher Leaders discussed Get Better
Faster and Data Driven Instruction trainings as being contributors to the development of their
personal reflection techniques and ones they encouraged in the teachers they support. Reflection
defined is, “serious thought or consideration” (Webster, 2024). Within the education
environment, engaging in reflection can help one think about an experience and determine what
parts of the experience went well and what parts need to be improved. TL1 identified teachers
who engage in reflection as having high levels of self-efficacy. She said,
56
When you can reflect on what you've done, and if you can be willing to, for lack of a
better word, fail and make mistakes…But you can reflect on that and move forward. To
me when I think about all the teachers I've worked with over all my years, this stands out
as the qualities of confident teachers.
Teachers who can reflectively identify mistakes in their instruction, fix them quickly, and not
dwell on them, position themselves for success in the field.
Within the analysis of reflection, some participants shared that the willingness to ask for
help or ask questions further contributes to self-efficacy. Because they know this to be true for
themselves, they work to promote safety to ask for help or ask questions within PD they lead.
TL6 said a confident teacher is, “Someone who is basically reflective, who can say, I need to do
better. How can I do better? And when they cannot, they will ask for help if they are struggling.”
Further affirmation of this perspective was found within the response of TL5 who stated, “The
confident teacher isn't afraid to ask questions when they don't know and also reflecting on what
you know did not go so great. So, reflecting and then asking for help.” Teachers who feel safe to
ask for help exhibit more confidence, according to these Teacher Leaders, and the environment
must be conducive to asking for help for this confidence to be fostered.
Summary of Findings for Research Question 1
The purpose of the first research question was to understand the components of
professional development that positively impacted Teacher Leaders’ self-efficacy growth that
allowed them to transfer their learning to the teachers they supported. Analysis of the
participants’ responses led to the first finding, PD that successfully facilitated Teacher Leaders’
abilities to engage in hard conversations built self-efficacy for this transfer of learning. All nine
participants affirmed Crucial Conversations training content and training elements significantly
57
impacted their self-efficacy and ability to engage in difficult coaching conversations with
teachers. In addition, some Teacher Leaders communicated the necessity to embed training for
engaging in data conversations and parent conversations within the coaching plan to build selfefficacy within the teachers they coached.
Analysis of responses also led to a second finding that PD that successfully grows
teachers’ ability to effectively engage in reflection builds self-efficacy and the ability to transfer
learning. Five of the nine participants discussed reflection as a contributor to growing their own
self-efficacy, and through that, among teachers they coached. The Teacher Leaders who
identified reflection skills as a key characteristic of a confident teacher sought to embed
reflection in the PD they provided in coaching format to the teachers they served
Research Question 2: How Do Teacher Leaders Perceive PD Building Collective Efficacy to
Aid the Transfer of Learning Into the Classrooms They Support?
The purpose of this research question was to understand the components of teacher leader
professional development that they perceived positively impacting collective efficacy growth
across the classrooms in the schools they supported. Questions such as, “To what extent have you
engaged in PD to build your ability to work collectively with other teachers to improve
practice?,” “How do you perceive the PD you have received as aiding the transfer of learning
to others to improve their classroom instruction?,” and “How could PD better build your
confidence to work with other teachers to transfer learning into their classroom instruction?”
were constructed to gather responses. Two key findings emerged through data analysis:
1. Intentional Relationship Building
2. Safe Environments
The following discussions provide context and evidence to the findings.
58
Finding 1: Intentional Relationship Building
Six Teacher Leaders shared their passion around relationship building, how they
perceived their PD building it, and its connection to collective efficacy. Five participants
attributed their drive to build quality relationships with their colleagues as part of their leadership
style. When discussing coaching, TL9 discussed the approach this way, “I have a very different
style than a lot of people. My coaching is more about building relationships and getting them for
the long term and not just trying to fix things in the moment.”
Connecting relationship building to their personal development, five participants affirmed
the PDs they engaged in as Teacher Leaders as helping them learn strategies for growing
relationships. When discussing training sessions attended to improve reading instruction,
specifically Orton Gillingham Training, TL8 discussed how the PD built collective efficacy
around intentional relationship building by observing how the trainer modeled and engaged the
attending teachers in the modeled lessons and helped them feel like experts after. TL8 said, “I
think you don't have anything until you have a relationship… I'm going to help train these
teachers to become experts, and to feel really good about what they are doing.” Further analysis
of the relationship building finding yielded discussion of relationship building through personal
connection and partnership in the work.
Relationship Through Personal Connection
Of the six participants who identified intentional relationship building as essential to
building collective efficacy, TL9 encouraged leaders to do this with teachers, “Get to know
them. Get to know their families just to make sure they're happy here at school…You have to
make sure they can trust you. And they're willing to work with you.”
59
When reflecting on PD that had helped build collective efficacy, five Teacher Leaders
discussed elements of various training they had attended that helped them foster relationship
building among their teams or staff. Four participants connected the Crucial Conversations
Series training as a help in building relationships with teachers through the tools for engaging in
difficult conversations. Three participants mentioned the protocols learned from Get Better
Faster coaching training as impacting for clear communication and action steps to build
relationships with teachers. In discussing a book study training of The Five Languages of
Appreciation in the Workplace (2012), TL1 shared this regarding learning about how to
understand and utilize motivations of teachers to build collective efficacy,
I'm very relationship oriented. I really try to kind of get to know people like what
motivates them. Why are they here? Why are they doing the work? Starting with that
relationship piece before I dive into anything instructionally is where I begin my work.
TL8 also shared a specific technique gained in PD that had permeated the culture of their school.
This relationship building icebreaker technique was first observed at a training she attended in
which she learned about a technique to value others and their stories. TL8 said,
We had to bring something that was special to us, and in small groups we had to share
why it was special. Rarely as teachers do we ever sit down and talk about us. I learned
about someone's ring, and now every time I see her, I see her ring that's her
grandmother's, and that's special to her. Now every staff meeting we start with good
things, which was something we learned at that training.
As discussed by the Teacher Leaders related to their PD, intentional relationship building leading
to collective efficacy is essentially about pursuit of people and showing that they are valued.
Relationship Through Partnership in the Work
60
Within the responses of the six Teacher Leaders who identified relationship building as
having an impact on collective efficacy, four discussed Data Driven Instruction as building
collective efficacy of a team or group of teachers. While TL7 noted that the protocols learned in
Data Driven Instruction significantly helped her lead data meetings with her teachers, another
type of data PD made an even greater impact on her ability to lead in this area. TL7 requested a
data session on 5th grade science with a member of the School District A Data Support Team.
TL7 shared that from this PD she was able to develop a protocol for science data meetings that
resulted in “higher end of year proficiency scores.” The success then led to scheduling more PDs
with the School District A Data Support Team in other subject areas during the next year.
Reflecting on how these PDs have now spread to other schools, TL7 shared, “It was rewarding to
see how what we started two years ago is continuing this year, but on the district level, not just
individual schools.” Teacher Leaders who advocated for specific PD based on their needs within
leading others had better opportunities to build collective efficacy among the teams they led.
The six participants shared the importance of partnership in their work with teachers. TL1
described learning the importance of teachers they worked with feeling like they were part of a
partnership together. As an example, they shared,
If the teachers see (me) making all the anchor charts, too, (me) making all the copies,
(me) doing all the games for her specific students that I’m working with. I think in some
form or fashion doing that work too really makes a difference to the teachers.
TL1 discussed how this type of service leadership shows teachers that there is no task that the
Teacher Leader is not willing to do to help. In addition, it promotes a sense from teachers that the
Teacher Leader truly understands all that is going on in the life of a teacher, which in most cases
elevates collective efficacy.
61
TL5 further shared the experience of having to be the lead teacher in a classroom for an
extended period of time during a year due to a vacancy. Reflecting on the whole Teacher Leader
program, and the multiple forms of PD associated with the program, TL5 discussed how the
team of teachers she was supposed to be coaching stepped up into leadership. In a unique
discussion moment, TL5 shared the perceived goal of partnership as it relates to the Teacher
Leader program,
I'm seeing teachers take on those leadership roles which is the ultimate goal of the whole
teacher leader program, to grow more leaders actually feel like there are candidates now
within (this) grade team who are ready for the Teacher Leader program because we did a
lot of coaching work together.
These types of distributive leadership opportunities further increased collective efficacy, and the
sustainability of a PD program aimed to build capacity and confidence among a cadre of teachers
and Teacher Leaders.
Finding 2: Safe Environment
To build their ability to work collectively with other teachers to improve collective
efficacy and, as a result, improve practice, all participants discussed engaging in PD to learn how
to create environments that are safe. The participants describe a safe environment as one where
making mistakes is acceptable, taking risks is celebrated, and asking for help is a normal
procedure. In reflecting upon a positive PD experience, TL8 shared, “It was a safe place, where
we worked together and got to rehearse some of the really hard conversations that were our goals
when we got back to school. That helped a lot.” Further analysis of this finding suggested the
need to discuss safe environments with known colleagues and unknown colleagues.
Known Colleagues
62
Teacher Leaders have opportunities to attend PD within the school they work, within the
district they work, and outside of the district in which they work. Professional Development with
known colleagues would be training that takes place in their school and some that takes place in
the district. Participants shared strong affirmation for collective efficacy as a result of engaging
with known colleagues. TL3 discussed PD that happens within the structure of a Professional
Learning Community (PLC). A PLC is most commonly identified as a grade level team, subject
area specialists, or a department that routinely plans together. TL3 said,
To support teachers and their collective efficacy is just making sure that they really
believe in the professional learning community. In all the teams that I've supported in
PLCs, PLC is an option…If you're getting enough out of it, then you want to come.
In addition, data conversations were widely embraced as essential to a thriving PLC. While
discussing Data Driven Instruction PD and protocols learned during the training, TL7 shared this
perspective about data conversations impacting collective efficacy within the team,
I think having that ability to have your teachers feel comfortable and confident with their
data helps build their capacity. They feel safe to say that students did terrible on
something and what they can do better in order to help kids grow.
Meaningful conversations such as this impacting collective efficacy to improve instruction were
described as occurring in safe environment among known colleagues. Further building on the
importance of data conversations and the role Data Driven Instruction and PLCs play as actual
PD, TL5 shared,
Last year we had a teacher who is a first-year teacher, and her letter sound data was
through the roof. It was so amazing. She was with all experienced teachers, and we were
all said, what are you doing?...That is the power of collaborative conversation and helps
63
new teachers by having them see that they bring value to the table and others can learn
from them, and celebrate that too.
Often the importance of a safe environment is referenced because of the need for hard or difficult
conversations, but as TL5 shared, it is equally important to foster a safe environment for
celebrations and recognition.
Unknown Colleagues
Unknown colleagues are colleagues at district and outside of district PD sessions that the
Teacher Leaders did not have a prior relationship with. When discussing collective efficacy as it
relates to confidence building within PD, participants shared affirmation for engaging with
unknown colleagues as well. When discussing Get Better Faster training and the successful
elements within that PD, TL6 shared the importance of gaining outside opinions this way,
It's nice to have the opinion of others who aren't in my position. Maybe they're a principal
at a different school, and it might not be an elementary school, it might be in middle
school. So, it's a really neat way to learn from others, because what they see might be
totally different from what you're seeing.
Reflecting on district Peer-to-Peer training and another training called Multi-Classroom Leader
(MCL) Preseason which prepares Teacher Leaders to carry out district instructional initiatives,
TL1 shared the importance of collaborating with colleagues you do not know and who are in
other types of school and contexts. She shared,
Something that's always included is time to collaborate with others, because again, even
though I've worked at several schools within my district, every school is really different. I
think it's really great to be able to learn from others that are in a like level, like position,
to see how they do things at their school, and to get new ideas from them.
64
TL7 also discussed the district Peer to Peer training as building collective efficacy with unknown
colleagues by saying, “They (other Teacher Leaders) share their problem of practice and bring it
to us (group of Teacher Leaders.) They say what they need help with and how can I tackle this
problem? Then we all brainstorm together. That's been really helpful.” Engaging in active
learning with unknown colleagues in a PD environment built for safety encouraged further
vulnerability and risk taking among educators truly desiring of improving their practice.
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2
The purpose of research question two was to understand the components of professional
development that positively impact collective efficacy growth among Teacher Leaders and the
teachers they support. Analysis of the participants’ responses led to the first finding which was
intentional relationship building is a significant driver within PD to support collective efficacy to
aid the transfer of learning from the PD to implementation in a classroom. Further analysis
within the responses of six participants showed two primary areas of intentional relationship
building. The first was the importance of incorporating opportunities for personal connection
within all types of PD programming, and the second area relayed the importance of Teacher
Leaders growing relationships through partnership in the work alongside of teachers.
The participants’ responses also led to a second finding which was how safe
environments for Teacher Leaders to make mistakes and take risks significantly contributed to
collective efficacy within PD and school culture as a whole. All nine participants indicated the
importance of a safe environment for Teacher Leaders and the teachers they supported for
collective efficacy to be built and effective transfer of learning into classrooms to be achieved.
The responses clearly drew attention to the importance of a safe environment to collaborate
65
among both known and unknown colleagues for professional growth. The design of PD sessions
played a key role in establishing safe environments for maximum collective efficacy benefit.
Findings That Collectively Impact Both Research Question 1 and Research Question 2
Analysis of Teacher Leader interview data revealed two key findings that bridge across
and impact both self and collective efficacy. There is an interconnected nature of the ability to
transfer one’s self-efficacy to further positively impact the collective efficacy of a group. The
following discussions provide context and evidence to the findings.
Finding 1: Instructional Coaching as Best Practice
All nine Teacher Leaders spoke in depth to the importance of coaching as part of their
professional development, and its impact on self and collective efficacy within their school
environment, and the transfer of learning strategies into the classrooms they supported. TL3
explained, “I function my entire life on the philosophy that everyone needs a coach because I see
the role of coach as another set of eyes, another set of ears, another set of hands to look
objectively at the situation and help.” Further analysis of coaching discussions yielded a high
frequency of affirmation in the subcategories of timely feedback, modeling, and the concept that
even coaches need coaches.
Timely Feedback
All participants discussed the importance of coaching related to feedback and,
specifically, feedback that is timely. TL7 shared, “I think the teachers crave feedback. I think the
nature of a teacher is that they want to know what they can do better.” Adding to the discussion,
Teacher Leaders affirmed that feedback received in a short period of time after a lesson
positively contributes to efficacy and the transfer of learning in the classroom. When reflecting
66
on her PD as a Teacher Leader and what she has transferred into her coaching practice, TL5
stated,
A big piece that I think was always helpful for me when I was being coached is the
debrief was done right after. So, it's fresh in your mind. One of the things I really tried to
do when I'm coaching people is provide coverage for their class (for immediate debrief).
Analysis within the interviews revealed that both in the moment feedback and protocol-driven
coaching feedback within approximately 24 hours further contributed to their own self and
collective efficacy to aid the transfer of learning into the classrooms they supported.
While there is little research related to in the moment coaching and voicing over,
participants shared their development of these practices in their PD, and the impact on self- and
collective efficacy. In the moment coaching is a format in which the coach and the teacher have
established trust and agreement that it is appropriate for the coach to mention teaching moves the
teacher could make in the moment to improve transfer to the students. This can take many forms,
such as whispering to the teacher with or without earpiece technology, pausing the instruction to
have a quick conversation, or using device technology to give cues on teaching moves to make in
the moment. TL6 shared her perception of PD she was giving her teachers in the form of in the
moment coaching and its impact on the transfer into classroom instruction by saying, “I think
that in the moment coaching, that’s where the transfer is happening. It's happening right away.
I'm able to fix anything.” TL9 added her use of in the moment coaching and the ability to
“correct things in the moment,” and suggested, “I don't need to go in and observe them and then
tell them to work on circulating around while the kids are working, because I'm there already.”
Another popular form feedback discussed was voice over coaching. Three participants
discussed this as a technique learned at The Reading and Writing Project Coaching Institute.
67
This process features setting up the structure of the class so that the students will know that there
will be several pauses in the instruction where the adults in the room will have open
conversations about the status of the learning taking place. TL5 spoke of her success with the
voicing over coaching protocol by sharing,
If I am in their classroom then I am voicing over. That was something I learned..was how
to voice over what you are doing…So I just set the kids up with me and the teacher. I just
say (to the students), sometimes in this lesson, I'm going to be talking to you, and
sometimes I'm going to be talking to your teacher. The kids just know, and they think it's
the greatest thing ever.
Voiceover coaching was shared as contributing to both self and collective efficacy depending on
the PD environments in which it was used. When used with only one teacher and the coach, the
self-efficacy of the teacher was seen as positively impacted. When used with a group of teachers
observing in the room benefitting from the coach’s wonderings or coaching tips discussed in real
time, collective efficacy among the group of teachers was increased. In either opportunity, the
feedback was instant.
Modeling
Seven participants shared how modeling within PD had impacted their self-efficacy and
the collective impact they had with the transfer of learning to the teachers and classrooms they
supported. Modeling is when someone with an advanced knowledge of a technique or skill
demonstrates while others watch. TL1 described the importance of modeling by sharing, “As
humans, we learn by getting to watch someone do something or by getting someone to do that
work alongside of us.” When discussing self-efficacy as it related to modeling within PD, TL9
68
shared a professional learning experience that helped her transfer the learning to her teaching and
others’ classrooms,
I like where we actually did things in the classroom, and people came in to demonstrate
lessons. Those were more helpful to me to transfer to the learning to see what needed to
be done and be able to mimic what was going on in real time.
While reflecting on her work as a coach, TL5 expressed her views on successful transfer of
professional development by noting, “I've always felt like you have to be in the classroom doing
the work with the teachers. You have to model. You need to see it in real time, with real kids.”
TL4 similarly discussed her practice gained from PD of giving coaching tips or other feedback in
the form of modeling, “When I suggest something and I model it for them, I show them that I am
side by side with them. I can come in and do it for them and let them see it, and then they
practice it.” TL6 expanded the modeling conversation beyond one’s own classroom and shared
how she models at the planning table and encourages learning walks in other classrooms,
Sometimes I just do it (model) around the planning table. Sometimes I do it in person,
and they are able to see it either in action from me or from others, will go on learning
walks sometimes, and they'll get to see it from their other peers. They're able to do it in
the moment and re-enact exactly what we just taught them. That helps my teachers
improve their practice.
Within the discussion of instructional coaching, modeling in Teacher Leader PD was perceived
as building their self-efficacy that was able to be transferred to building collective efficacy
among others.
Coaches Need Coaches
69
Teacher leaders emphasized that even coaches need coaches, with six participants
discussing the positive impact a coaching relationship as a part of their Teacher Leader PD had
on them. TL5 stated, “Being coached by other coaches has helped me be a better coach.” TL3
similarly shared, “The most impactful professional development was actually having a coach
myself and being able to see with different coaches what works and what doesn't work.” TL3
further discussed why this opportunity to have a coach herself was so impactful, stating, “Having
someone sit and not participate in, but coach me through my coaching conversations. I'm
coaching a teacher, but my shadow coach is sitting behind me providing that feedback so that I'm
growing in increments. That was really impactful.” TL1 also detailed her experience having a
coach to improve her self-efficacy within the practice. She explained the value of a coach with
an outside perspective this way,
I actually was lucky enough to have my own coach assigned to me. So I did coaching that
way, which again was really neat, because they're (my coach) not familiar. They have the
familiarity with the district as far as what they've learned about or read about or been told
about, but they don't have that bias. They just have a very open mind because they see
things from all over the country, small districts and large districts.
Three of the six participants who noted that having their own coach built their self-efficacy and,
through that, collective efficacy also mentioned the benefit of their coach being from outside of
their school or district. The opportunity to engage with a coach that was non-evaluative and had
varied experiences from outside the district was valued.
Coaching as PD had a significant impact on the self and collective efficacy of educators
as evidenced by all nine participants having discussed coaching as a best practice within PD.
Further analysis noted the importance of timely feedback and modeling within coaching as part
70
of PD. The Teacher Leaders shared that while they have training in coaching protocols and feel
confident in this area, even they need PD that facilitates someone who can coach them to build
their self-efficacy to be able to aid the transfer to collective efficacy.
Finding 2: Significance of Practice
All nine participants identified the significance of practice as a means of active
participation in professional development to build self and collective efficacy to transfer learning
strategies into the classroom. Active participation within PD referred to interactive activities,
collaboration, and learning aid creation. While discussing PD that had a significant impact on
self-efficacy as a Teacher Leader, TL8 shared Orton Gillingham Training and the elements of
delivery the trainer used. TL8 said, (Orton Gillingham Training) “was probably one of the
best…it was teach a little bit, practice it, teach it, practice it. I felt like that was the gift of that
training.” Adding to this discussion, TL9 shared her self-efficacy growth from being able to
practice with students by saying, “I think learning in real time has been the best PD. When it is
with students and being able to practice the strategy.”
All participants translated this self-efficacy to how it aided collective efficacy building as
a result of practice. TL4 described an effective professional development this way,
It was not just sitting and getting, we actually practiced. We actually have materials in
front of us. We actually go in. We work in partnerships so that I could become proficient
at them before trying to support others in that work...So I think anything that gets you in
the seat of the learner, and practicing is going to make you use that PD. It is going to be
more effective and build your ability to work collectively with other teachers to improve
practice.
71
When describing what made a coaching training successful, TL6 talked extensively about group
practice and its collective impact,
They have us watch (a video) a teacher teaching a class, and they ask, what do you think
the highest leverage action step would be to support this teacher. We'd have a discussion
at our table and then we'd have a discussion as a whole group. We'd all agree on what we
thought was the highest leverage action and then they have you practice sharing it.
This group practice built self-efficacy in a group environment that then led to collective efficacy.
Interestingly, TL6 also mentioned that this practice that happens around people who they do not
know helped build their confidence. Having these technical practice conversations with unknown
colleagues provided an environment to make mistakes and then walk away knowing that the
vulnerability displayed would not be a part of assessing whether the Teacher Leader was
effective or not. This connects to the finding around the importance of a safe environment with
unknown colleagues, as well as known colleagues, where taking risks is encouraged.
Given the significant amount of participant conversation regarding the importance of
practice in building self and collective efficacy, within the analysis of the significance of
practice, two subcategories of merit emerged. These subcategories were the use of role play and
tool kits to aid the transfer of learning.
Leveraging Role Play
Five Teacher Leaders noted the leverage role play can have for self and collective
efficacy within the structure of practice. Role play within an educational PD session was
discussed as including two or more people acting out a scenario or prompt related to new
learning that had been presented. These types of simulations were affirmed to be helpful in
providing an opportunity to make mistakes and build confidence before having a conversation in
72
a real situation with another teacher or parent. When discussing PD that has helped increase selfefficacy as a coach and build collective efficacy among teachers, TL2 shared this about the
transfer of learning,
Within the transfer of learning, specifically it's been able to role play with my
administrators or my peers that are also in this role. We routinely speak about our
teachers we support. How would we move forward with this? How are we going to
support them? What's that going to look like when we ask them these questions? From
there comes the next step and then we role play coaching.
Similarly, TL7 discussed how impactful role play was in a coaching training where scenarios are
given for practice. She stated,
We've done a lot of role playing of what we would say or how we would interact with a
teacher in certain situations. They'll give us a scenario, and then we'll have a partner that
we meet with, and it just creates good safe practice…Role playing has been a really
helpful strategy.
Creation of Tool Kits
Six Teacher Leaders described the creation of tool kits within professional development
as being important in building self and collective efficacy and the transfer of learning. Toolkits
were described as learning aids that an educator can make and take during the training and then
use when back in their normal learning environment. When discussing the importance of creating
tool kits during PD, participants referenced tangible items such as songs and jingles,
manipulatives, planning documents, reference cards, and scripted protocols.
When speaking of how confidence was grown during a PD, TL6 stated, “It's going to be
more of an impact for me if I'm able to make something tangible that I can bring back to my
73
building and show my teachers.” Continuing, TL6 further explained the importance of not just
talking about what can be done to help students learn, but actually investing time in making it
during the PD if it is important enough to address. She said, “If it's a strategy on how to teach
fractions, give them manipulatives, give them whatever. Let the teachers create it in the
moment.” Further emphasizing the effectiveness of toolkits, TL3 reflected on a PD that she had
done more than ten years before that built her self-efficacy and still influences her practice and
building collective efficacy. She said, “That is a professional development that still sticks with
me. I can still remember sitting in that room and the presenter, and how we left with our little
tool kits. Practices that I still use today.” Providing the opportunity within a PD session to create
a toolkit or learning aid increased the self-efficacy of the Teacher Leader and further grew the
collective efficacy of the teachers they led while utilizing the toolkit or learning aid in their PD.
Summary of Findings that Collectively Impact Research Questions 1 and 2
Teacher Leader responses led to two findings in which they described how they
perceived PD that closely intertwined the building of self and collective efficacy. The first
finding was that coaching within PD has a significant impact on the self and collective efficacy
of educators. All nine participants discussed coaching as a best practice within PD. Further
analysis noted the importance of timely feedback and modeling within coaching as a PD. In
addition, Teacher Leaders asserted that while they are considered advanced in coaching
protocols, even they need PD that facilitates someone who can coach them to build their selfefficacy to be able to aid the transfer to collective efficacy. The second finding noted the element
of practice within PD as a driver for increasing self and collective efficacy. The Teacher Leaders
discussed the importance of practicing learning with adults and with students as a feature of
active participation within PD. Significant participant discussions of active participation within
74
PD noted the leveraging of role play and the creation of toolkits as effectively building into the
self and collective efficacy of educators.
Conclusion
Chapter 4 provided an overview of findings connected to the following two research
questions:
1.) How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building self-efficacy to aid their current
opportunities to transfer learning across the teachers they support.
2.) How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building collective efficacy to aid the transfer of
learning into the classrooms they support?
This qualitative research study produced six key findings within research questions one and two.
These key findings expand on the available research of self and collective efficacy drivers that
aid in the transfer of PD to instructional practice within the classroom setting. A summary of all
six key findings are found in Table 4 below.
Table 4
Summary of Key Findings
Summary of Key Findings
RQ1: How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD
building self-efficacy to aid their current
opportunities to transfer learning across the
teachers they support.
RQ2: How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD
building collective efficacy to aid the transfer
of learning into the classrooms they support?
Finding 1 Ability to Engage in Hard Conversations
• All nine participants as they affirmed
Crucial Conversations training content
and training elements significantly
impacted their self-efficacy and ability
to engage in difficult coaching
conversations with teachers.
• Teacher Leaders communicated the
necessity to embed training for engaging
in data conversations and parent
conversations within the coaching plan
–
75
to build self-efficacy within the teachers
they coach.
Finding 2 Reflection
• Five of nine participants discussed
reflection as a contributor to growing
self-efficacy among teachers they coach.
–
Finding 3 – Intentional Relationship Building
• Six participants indicated the
importance of intentional
relationship building for
professional learning to take place.
• Two areas for intentional
relationship building were widely
discussed, they were: opportunities
for personal connection within all
types of PD programming and
leaders growing relationship through
partnership in the work alongside of
teachers.
Finding 4 – Safe Environment
• All nine participants indicated the
importance of a safe environment
for teachers and Teacher Leader
collective efficacy to be fostered and
professional learning to take place.
• With the goal of increasing
collective efficacy, the responses
clearly drew attention to the
importance of a safe environment to
collaborate among both known and
unknown colleagues for professional
growth.
Finding 5 Instructional Coaching as Best Practice
• All nine participants spoke in abundance regarding the importance of coaching as a
foundational PD for building self and collective efficacy.
• Further analysis of the responses yielded the importance of timely feedback and
modeling within coaching as a PD.
• Six Teacher Leaders asserted that while they are considered advanced in coaching
protocols, even they need PD that facilitates someone who can coach them to further
build their self-efficacy.
Finding 6 Significance of Practice
• All nine participants discussed the importance of practicing learning with adults and/or
with students as a feature of active participation within training.
• Discussion within active participation noted the leveraging of role play and the creation
of toolkits as effectively building into the self and collective efficacy of educators.
The six key findings offer significant discussion to the existing research on self and
collective efficacy related PD drivers that aid in the transfer of professional learning into
76
classroom instruction. Chapter Five will further discuss the findings in relation to existing
literature and provide recommendations for practice and areas for future research.
77
Chapter 5: Discussion of Findings and Recommendations for Practice
The purpose of this study was to identify self and collective efficacy drivers within
teacher professional development (PD) that supported educators bringing their learning to
improve outcomes in their classrooms. While significant research on teacher PD exists, the
uniqueness of this study was found within the participants. All participants were Teacher Leaders
as identified by School District A. School District A is a large, urban, Southeastern public school
district that maintains about 180 schools, serves around 150,000 students, and employs nearly
8,500 certified teachers, according to 2023 data. School District A had participated in
Opportunity Culture, an initiative of Public Impact, for 10 years (Opportunity Culture, 2023) to
expand the reach of excellent educators to more students, enable identified educators to coach
more colleagues, increase pay for outstanding educators, and create career paths that provide
educators opportunities to advance without leaving the classroom (Opportunity Culture, 2023.)
Within the Opportunity Culture framework and School District A, any category of Teacher
Leader yields a certain level of impact on educators and students, however, this study further
narrowed the criterion to gather feedback from educators charged with making the most impact
within a School District A school. The highest level of Teacher Leader in School District A are
identified as a Multi-Classroom Leader or MCL. According to 2023 data, 1.5% of teachers, or
approximately 125 teachers, in School District A have been placed in the talent pool for the role.
Nine individual semi-structured interviews with these top Teacher Leaders from School
District A were conducted. By exploring the perceived best practices within educator PD from
teachers identified as Teacher Leaders and understanding training barriers, successes, and needs
associated with professional development, key findings regarding educator self and collective
78
efficacy were found. The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the study’s findings in relationship
to prior research and Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 2000).
Discussion of Findings
This section discusses the findings in connection with existing research literature and a
Social Cognitive Theory conceptual framework. The research questions that guided this study
were:
1. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building self-efficacy to aid their current
opportunities to transfer learning across the teachers they support.
2. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building collective efficacy to aid the transfer of
learning into the classrooms they support?
Research Question 1 Discussion of Findings
Research question one explored the components of professional development that teacher
leaders perceived positively impacted self-efficacy growth among both Teacher Leaders and the
teachers they supported. The interviews suggested that PD that successfully facilitates teachers’
ability to engage in hard conversations builds self-efficacy. This finding was supported by all
nine participants as they affirmed Crucial Conversations training content and training elements
significantly impacted their self-efficacy and ability to engage in difficult coaching conversations
with teachers. Self-efficacy beliefs influence how well people motivate themselves and persevere
in the face of difficulties through the goals they have set for themselves, outcome expectations
they anticipate, and causal attributions for their successes and failures (Bandura, 2012). Crucial
Conversations authors Grenny, et al. (2002), point to active listening as a cornerstone of crucial
conversation success. Individuals who are listened to well feel that they are connected with their
listeners and have a partner in the conversation (Itzchakov et al., 2021; Weinstein et al., 2021.)
79
Research studies have found high-quality listening promotes intimacy (Kluger et al., 2022), trust
(Ramsey & Sohi, 1997), and liking or acceptance (Huang et al., 2017.) Participants in the study
spoke frequently to listening to their teachers and developing a path to action (Grenny, et al.,
2002). In addition, some Teacher Leaders communicated the necessity to embed this type of
training for engaging in data conversations and parent conversations within the coaching plan to
build self-efficacy within the teachers they coached.
Analysis of responses also led to a second key finding that PD that successfully grows
teachers’ ability to effectively engage in reflection builds self-efficacy. Five of nine participants
discussed reflection as a contributor to growing their own self-efficacy and self-efficacy among
teachers they coached. This is consistent with the research of Naidoo and Kirch (2016) and
Naidoo and Naidoo (2023) which has found action reflection cycles to be significant to
increasing self-efficacy and aiding PD transfer. Tay et al. (2023) also suggested a focus on a
transformative mindset based on intentional reflection as a powerful catalyst for change and
growth in professional practice. Teachers need to possess a transformative mindset when they are
reflecting on their teaching for any possible change in practice to take place. A few Teacher
Leaders also mentioned the use of reflection journals and other reflection aids. The Teacher
Leaders who identified reflection skills as a quantifier of a confident teacher sought to embed
reflection in the PD they provide in coaching format to the teachers they serve.
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) helped to examine the compenents of PD Teacher
Leaders identified as successful. SCT seeks to reveal the way people acquire and maintain
behavior and promotes that individuals are not just products of circumstances, but contributors to
them (Bandura, 2000). The Teacher Leaders in this study had high levels of self-efficacy as
evidenced by their career record, the level of expertise relayed in the interviews, and the
80
significant levels of confidence with which they spoke. These observations are in alignment to
empirical research that demonstrates that teachers who exhibit high self-efficacy within
instructional practice and content knowledge are more likely to have positive perceptions of
education and are more amenable to a change of practice (Donnell & Gettinger, 2015; Guo, et
al., 2011). Important connections between self-efficacy and collective efficacy have been found
within the study of Calik et al. (2012), which revealed when the number of teachers who have
high self-efficacy increased, collective efficacy showed marked growth as well. Collective
efficacy is explored within research question two.
Research Question 2 Discussion of Findings
Research question two sought to explore the components of professional development
that Teacher Leaders perceived positively impacted collective efficacy growth among teachers
they support. Based on Eells (2011) and his own research findings, Hattie (2016) ranked
collective efficacy as the number one influence of all the factors related to PD and student
achievement. The third key finding in this study identified intentional relationship building as a
significant collective efficacy driver within PD to aid the transfer of learning from training to
implementation in a classroom. Further analysis into the responses of six participants showed
two primary areas of intentional relationship building. The first area featured the importance of
incorporating opportunities for personal connection within all types of PD programming, and the
second area relayed the importance of leaders growing relationships through partnership in the
work alongside of teachers. The Social Cognitive Theory underpinning of collective efficacy
provided a framework for exploring how relationship building in PD was deemed to reach far
beyond a single teacher and foster collective efficacy. Significant research by several scholars
81
(Parker et al., 2006; Klassen et al., 2008; Goddard et al., 2015; Goddard et al., 2017) indicate
collective efficacy as a critical driver to a school culture impacting student achievement.
Fostering a safe environment for educators to make mistakes and take risks was the
fourth key finding. All nine participants indicated the importance of a safe environment for
teachers and Teacher Leader learning to take place and effective transfer to be achieved. This
aligns with research indicating thriving school cultures have leaders who empower the teaching
staff and encourage professional learning risk-taking for instructional improvement (Goddard et
al., 2017). With the goal of increasing collective efficacy, the responses in this study drew
attention to the importance of a safe environment to collaborate among both known and
unknown colleagues for professional growth. Those in leadership of PD sessions play a key role
in establishing safe environments for maximum collective efficacy benefit.
Combined Research Question 1 and 2 Discussion of Findings
In one of the most significant findings of the study, the fifth key finding was coaching is
a PD that has a significant impact on self and collective efficacy of educators. All nine
participants spoke in abundance regarding the importance of coaching as a foundational PD. This
significant finding builds upon existing instructional coaching research (Teemant et al. 2011;
Kraft et al., 2018; von Suchodoletz et al., 2018, Cilliers et al., 2022) adding confirmation that
instructional coaching positively contributes to effective transfer of PD to classroom instruction
and builds positive self and collective efficacy of educators. Further, Teacher Leaders asserted
that while they are considered advanced in coaching protocols, even they need PD that facilitates
someone who can coach them to further build their self efficacy. Further analysis of the
responses yielded the importance of timely feedback and modeling within coaching as a PD.
82
Research supports that educators must engage in long term professional dialogue with
coaches focused on developing specific skills to enhance their teaching (Lofthouse et al., 2010).
The Teacher Leaders in this study discussed the importance of being employed in the same
building as the team members they are coaching and noted the opportunities they have for
continual feedback dialogue. The successes shared are in alignment with studies (TNTP, 2015;
Gibbons & Cobb, 2016; Kraft et al. 2018) which have found that coaching within a trusted
professional relationship that places a significant focus on collegial feedback and data driven
practices within content areas has shown the most progression of student achievement.
Seven participants shared how modeling within PD had impacted their self-efficacy and
the collective impact they had with the transfer of learning to the teachers and classrooms they
supported. This aligns with the Goddard et al. (2017) study that found PD opportunities that
allowed teachers to view other teachers instructing actual students was much more impactful
than traditional approaches to PD that do not involve direct observation of teaching and learning
in classrooms.
The final key finding of incorporating practice within PD was also significant due to all
nine participants discussing this element and the frequency with which it was referenced.
Existing research shows positive impacts on professional learning transfer when it involves
opportunities to use, practice, or apply what is being learned within the learning process
(Cordingley et al., 2015; Dunst et al., 2015; Popova et al., 2022.) The study participants
discussed the importance of practicing learning with adults and with students as a feature of
active participation within trainings. Significant participant discussion within active participation
noted the leveraging of role play and the creation of toolkits as effectively building into the self
and collective efficacy of educators. This finding is supported by the research of Cilliers et al.
83
(2019) and Eble et al. (2020) showing the impact of active participation and learning aids within
teacher PD.
Recommendations for Practice
The purpose of this study was to identify efficacy drivers within teacher professional
development that support educator self and collective confidence to improve learning outcomes
in their classrooms. Based on the interview data and related findings that were identified within
Chapter Four and discussed in this chapter, three recommendations for practice are proposed.
Table 5
Key Findings and Recommendations
Summary of Key Findings
RQ1: How do Teacher Leaders perceive
PD building self-efficacy to aid their
current opportunities to transfer learning
across the teachers they support.
RQ2: How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD
building collective efficacy to aid the transfer
of learning into the classrooms they support?
Finding 1 Ability to Engage in Hard Conversations
• All nine participants as they
affirmed Crucial Conversations
training content and training
elements significantly impacted
their self-efficacy and ability to
engage in difficult coaching
conversations with teachers.
• Teacher Leaders communicated
the necessity to embed training
for engaging in data
conversations and parent
conversations within the coaching
plan to build self-efficacy within
the teachers they coach.
–
Finding 2 Reflection
• Five of nine participants
discussed reflection as a
contributor to growing selfefficacy among teachers they
coach.
–
Finding 3 – Intentional Relationship Building
• Six participants indicated the
84
importance of relationship building
for professional learning to take
place.
• Two areas for intentional
relationship building were widely
discussed, they were: opportunities
for personal connection within all
types of PD programming and
leaders growing relationship through
partnership in the work alongside of
teachers.
Finding 4 – Safe Environment
• All nine participants indicated the
importance of a safe environment
for teachers and Teacher Leader
collective efficacy to be fostered and
professional learning to take place.
• With the goal of increasing
collective efficacy, the responses
clearly drew attention to the
importance of a safe environment to
collaborate among both known and
unknown colleagues for professional
growth.
Finding 5 Instructional Coaching as Best Practice
• All nine participants spoke in abundance regarding the importance of coaching as
a foundational PD for building self and collective efficacy.
• Further analysis of the responses yielded the importance of timely feedback and
modeling within coaching as a PD.
• Six Teacher Leaders asserted that while they are considered advanced in coaching
protocols, even they need PD that facilitates someone who can coach them to
further build their self-efficacy.
Finding 6 Significance of Practice
• All nine participants discussed the importance of practicing learning with adults
and/or with students as a feature of active participation within training.
• Discussion within active participation noted the leveraging of role play and the
creation of toolkits as effectively building into the self and collective efficacy of
educators.
Recommendation 1 Embed intentional opportunities for relationship building and training regarding having
difficult conversations within a safe environment in PD.
Recommendation 2 Embed reflection and practice consistently within PD.
Recommendation 3 Make instructional coaching for all staff members the organizational PD priority.
This section offers three recommendations for incorporating identified efficacy drivers
within teacher professional development to support educator self and collective confidence to
85
improve learning outcomes in their classrooms. Table 5 summarizes the three recommendations
for practice connected to the study findings. The first is to embed intentional opportunities for
relationship building and training regarding having difficult conversations within a safe
environment in PD. The second is to embed reflection and practice consistently within PD.
Finally, given the significant findings among the participants related to coaching, the final
recommendation is to make instructional coaching for all staff members the organizational PD
priority.
Recommendation 1: Embed Intentional Opportunities for Relationship Building and
Training Regarding Having Difficult Conversations Within a Safe Environment in PD
Based on the findings in Chapter Four, providing institutional PD for having hard
conversations is mission critical for an education organization. All nine participants referred to
the training within the Crucial Conversations series in their interviews. This series contains three
books by Grenny, et al. entitled, Crucial Conversations (2002), Crucial Accountability (2013),
and Influencer (2013). Eight participants spoke directly about how this training had positively
impacted their own confidence when engaging in difficult conversations with teachers they
supported. In addition, three Teacher Leaders also described how PD within this series or a
similar topic would be beneficial for teachers when working collectively with colleagues or
parents. It is recommended that schools and districts embark on PD pathways that develop
teachers and Teacher Leaders skills to engage in difficult conversations.
Among the six Teacher Leaders who identified relationship building as having an impact
on collective efficacy, four discussed Data Driven Instruction as building collective efficacy of a
team or group of teachers. Other Teacher Leaders mentioned Get Better Faster, District Peer-toPeer, and school-based Professional Learning Communities (PLC) as PDs in which a safe
86
environment to discuss failures, make mistakes, and take risks was prominent. While some
Teacher Leaders preferred this safe environment among unknown colleagues, others shared their
preference for vulnerability among known colleagues. It is recommended that within PD
structures, strategy consideration is given to PD planning regarding interaction of known and
unknown colleagues when building in active participation element of practice and other
collaboration-oriented components, including the ability to engage in difficult conversations with
colleagues, parents, and others in their educational settings.
Recommendation 2: Embed Reflection and Practice Consistently Within PD
Building upon the research of Darling Hammond et al. (2017) and Copur-Gencurk et al.
(2019), the Teacher Leaders in this study identified active reflection and participation with others
within PD as significant for building self-efficacy among teachers. Schools and school districts
must resist the tendency to cater to financial and operational efficiencies by packing large
auditoriums to provide sit and get trainings where engagement is low. Following the findings
that all nine participants identified the active participation element of practice and seven
participants identified the element of reflection within PD as highly supportive to facilitating self
efficacy, it is recommended that both elements be a regular protocol within teacher PD.
Five study participants discussed role play and the creation of toolkits as examples of
effective practice within PDs they had attended, building upon exisitng research (Dunst et al.,
2015; Popova et al., 2022). In addition, these Teacher Leaders identified how they have seen
these examples of practice impact the teachers they supported as they led grade level and
department PD. Opportunities for role play within PD is low stakes and provides processing
time. It can promote a sense of confidence as each occurrence develops further transfer of the PD
goal. Likewise, the creation of toolkits within PD holds promise for transfer into instructional
87
practice. Six Teacher Leaders described their affinity for attending PDs that provided time to
create toolkits to take back and share with teachers. In addition, they shared that the positive
impacts PD meetings they lead have on the teachers they serve when they include toolkit
creation. It is recommended that schools, school districts, and PD trainers consistently include
the practice elements of role play and toolkit creation in PD.
Analysis of study findings show PD that successfully grows teachers’ ability to
effectively engage in reflection builds self-efficacy and the ability to transfer learning.
Participants referred to trainings such as Get Better Faster and Data Driven Instruction as
providing effective protocols for reflection. Consistent with the research of Naidoo and Kirch
(2016) and Naidoo and Naidoo (2023), five of the nine participants discussed reflection as a
contributor to growing their own self-efficacy, and through that, among teachers they coached.
The Teacher Leaders who identified reflection skills as a key characteristic of a confident teacher
sought to embed reflection in the PD they provided in coaching format to the teachers they
served. Three Teacher Leaders who identified reflection as significant to building self-efficacy
additionally noted that reflection with the willingness to then ask questions or ask for help
further aids the transfer of professional learning. Protocols for reflection should be built into PD
structures for successful transfer and self and collective efficacy growth.
Recommendation 3: Make Instructional Coaching for All Staff Members the
Organizational PD Priority
Based on the findings in Chapter Four, all teachers and Teacher Leaders should have the
opportunity to receive instructional coaching support as all nine participants spoke to the
importance of coaching as a foundational PD practice that fosters self and collective efficacy.
According to the Teacher Leaders, teachers who have consistent access to a coach within the
88
building are likely to feel more confident, experience more connection to their grade level teams,
and transfer professional learning into practice. In addition, six Teacher Leaders identified the
significance of their experience in receiving coaching as they worked to be better coaches to the
teachers they supported.
This recommendation of extensive access to coaching support has a significant impact on
human capital and may demand additional school or district financial resources. In addition,
efficiency efforts present a challenge for schools and districts because recent research suggests in
person coaching is notably more effective than virtual coaching (Cilliers et al., 2022). In-person
coaching models are often deemed inaccessible because such models are resource and timeintensive (Carter et al., 2017; Morgan & Bates, 2018). Programs such as Opportunity Culture,
which was identified in this study and used by School District A to creatively fund the Teacher
Leaders participating in this study, hold promise in helping expand coaching opportunities to the
majority of teachers within existing budgets. In addition, for PD to be successful, PD for
coaches must be focused on coaching protocols and navigating difficult conversations (Kraft et
al., 2018; Kraft & Hill, 2020). Within this study, Get Better Faster training and Crucial
Conversations Series trainings were identified as highly effective in these areas.
Best practices within coaching protocols were identified by the participants within the
study. All participants discussed the importance of timely feedback, and seven participants
shared the significance of modeling to build self and collective efficacy aligning with the
research of (TNTP, 2015; Gibbons & Cobb, 2016; Kraft et al., 2018). Coaches must create
structures of timely feedback in order for transfer of professional learning to take place.
Participants shared the techniques learned from PDs such as Get Better Faster, The Reading and
Writing Project Coaching Institute, and School District A Peer-to-Peer Sessions. These
89
techniques included coaching in the moment, voicing over, and providing immediate classroom
coverage for coaching dialogue to ensure immediate feedback was accomplished. The Teacher
Leaders who identified modeling as important to the coaching process suggested that a
significant amount of coaching time be devoted to actual modeling of techniques and teacher
moves within instruction. This requires coaches to have advanced knowledge of the techniques
and a willingness to be vulnerable and model in front of students and teachers.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are the influences on the qualitative study that I as the researcher cannot fully
control (Creswell, 2014). Waters (2015) identifies limitations that exist when employing network
sampling in qualitative research. Identified limitations include, but are not limited to, participant
risk perception regarding assurances of anonymity and confidentiality, the positionality of the
researcher maintaining trust and difficulty converting referrals to participants, and the strength of
the connections in the network producing the desired depth of knowledge desired within
participants (Waters, 2015).One limitation I observed regarded whether the participant knew me
or not before the interview. I perceived that the particpants who knew me were more relaxed and
open with their responses, whereas those participants whom I did not know before seemed more
reserved with their responses. In some cases, the reserved nature of the responses did not allow
self and collective efficacy drivers to be fully explored.
Delimitations are influences that the researcher can control through a carefully-designed
study (Creswell, 2014). One delimitation of this study is rooted in the sample selection. Within
School District A, there are approximately 75 Multi-Classroom Leaders who would qualify as a
Teacher Leader for this research study. While satuaration was achieved, the nine interviewees
provided only a restricted basis for full exploration of efficacy drivers within PD. Another
90
delimitation can potentially be found within the analysis of the data. My work within schools,
districts, and international educational enterprises has generated biases toward particular
instructional approaches, the degree to which autonomy should be given to school leaders, and
the importance of distributive leadership among a school staff. While I recognized and took
appraoches to limit these biases in the data analysis, they may not have been fully addressed.
Recommendations for Future Research
Additional research on collective efficacy building within school environments for risk
taking and collaborative teacher development would be beneficial to school leaders. This study
identified safe environments as an efficacy driver but did not contribute to specifying the
essential elements that teachers attribute to a safe environment for risk taking and effective
collaboration. Research to understand specific elements or action steps to promote a safe
environment for risk taking would be helpful to school leaders who desire to develop this type of
educational environment.
In addition, practice was identified within the study as impacting PD transfer. Future
research to further identify specific elements of practice to include in PD would also benefit
education stakeholders. While some examples of effective practice were identified in this study,
there is an emerging opportunity for practice utilizing digital and AI driven tools. Research on
the effectiveness of these tools could help with creating efficiencies during PD sessions and
provide a safe environment for practice.
A key finding in this study was the significance of coaching to develop self and collective
efficacy for effective transfer of teacher professional development. While there is existing
research on the effectiveness of coaching (Kraft et al., 2018; von Suchodoletz et al., 2018,
Cilliers et al., 2022), future research that focuses less on protocols and more on relationship
91
elements within the coaching dynamic would be helpful in establishing effective coaching
partnerships within a school or district. Exploration into communication, executive functioning,
and personality traits of educators could yield essential findings to promote further transfer of
teacher professional development through coaching into classroom instruction.
Conclusion
This study investigated the professional development experiences and perceptions of
Teacher Leaders within School District A, a large, urban, Southeastern public school district that
maintains 181 schools, serves approximately 150,000 students, and employs nearly 8,500
certified teachers according to 2023 data. The uniqueness of this study was found within the
participants. All participants in the study can be identified as an educator in the top 1.5% in the
district given he/she achieved the title of Multi-Classroom Leader (MCL) within a rigorous talent
pool application process, receives specialized PD from the district, and delivers PD to other
educators. Through nine one-on-one semi-structured interviews the study identified six key
findings of PD elements that contribute to positive self and collective efficacy of educators and
Teacher Leaders. Understanding elements of PD that are drivers for efficacy among educators
will give direction to school and school district leadership regarding elements that must be
consistent in PD to aid the transfer of learning from PD opportunity to the classroom.
The purpose of this study was to identify efficacy drivers within teacher PD that support
educator self and collective efficacy to improve learning outcomes in their classrooms. Based on
the interview data and related findings three recommendations were presented. The first
recommendation was to embed intentional opportunities for relationship building and training
regarding having difficult conversations within a safe environment in PD. The second was to
embed reflection and practice consistently within PD. Finally, given the significant findings
92
among the participants related to coaching, the final recommendation was to make instructional
coaching for all staff members the organizational PD priority.
With the mounting pressures on teachers to ensure students meet achievement
benchmarks, close achievement gaps, meet Social Emotional Learning (SEL) needs, and be a
contributor to colleguial culture goals within a school, their time cannot be wasted with
inneffective PD that is not constructed based on positive research findings or is offered as a
means to check a completion box for another organizational purpose. Given the significant
importance to the US and greater global community that students be prepared to be contributing
members of society upon graduating, it is a moral imperitve that people on the front lines of this
effort, teachers, be trained well throughout their career.
93
References
Adnot, M., Dee, T., Katz, V., & Wyckoff, J. (2017). Teacher Turnover, Teacher Quality, and
Student Achievement in DCPS. American Educational Research Association.
10.3102/0162373716663646
Allen, R., & Sims, S. (2017). Improving Science Teacher Retention: do National STEM
Learning Network professional development courses keep science teachers in the classroom.
Wellcome Trust: London, UK,
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2)10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of
Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359-373.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy : the exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of Human Agency through Collective Efficacy. Current Directions
in Psychological Science : A Journal of the American Psychological Society, 9(3), 75-78.
10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 1-26. 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2012). On the Functional Properties of Perceived Self-Efficacy Revisited. Journal
of Management, 38(1), 9-44. 10.1177/0149206311410606
Barro, R. J., & Yi, C. (2015). Education matters : global schooling gains from the 19th to the
21st century. Oxford University Press.
94
Basma, B., & Savage, R. (2018). Teacher Professional Development and Student Literacy
Growth: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2),
457-481. 10.1007/s10648-017-9416-4
Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S.,
Neubrand, M., & Tsai, Y. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation
in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1),
133-180.
Beauchamp, L., Durksen, T., Parsons, J., Taylor, L., & Klassen, R. (2015). Exploring the
development of teacher efficacy through professional learning experiences. desLibris.
Berebitsky, D., & Salloum, S. J. (2017). The Relationship Between Collective Efficacy and
Teachers’ Social Networks in Urban Middle Schools. AERA Open, 3(4), 233285841774392.
10.1177/2332858417743927
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014). Teachers know best: Teachers' views on professional
development. ERIC Clearinghouse.
Blank, R. K., & De las Alas, N. (2009). The Effects of Teacher Professional Development on
Gains in Student Achievement: How Meta Analysis Provides Scientific Evidence Useful to
Education Leaders. ERIC.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education : an introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Pearson A & B.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
95
Boylan, M., Coldwell, M., Maxwell, B., & Jordan, J. (2018). Rethinking models of professional
learning as tools: a conceptual analysis to inform research and practice. Professional
Development in Education, 44(1), 120-139.
Brooks, C., & Gibson, S. (2012). Professional Learning in a Digital Age/L’apprentissage
professionnel à l’ère numérique. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La Revue
Canadienne De L’apprentissage Et De La Technologie, 38(2)
Bubb, S., & Earley, P. (2008). From self-evaluation to school improvement: The importance of
effective staff development. CfBT Education Trust Reading.
Burgess, A., van Diggele, C., Roberts, C., & Mellis, C. (2020). Introduction to the Peer Teacher
Training in health professional education supplement series. BMC Medical Education, 20,
454. 10.1186/s12909-020-02279-y
Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., Crawford, L. M., & Hitchcock, J. H. (2019). Research design and
methods: An applied guide for the scholar-practitioner. Sage Publications.
Callard, C., Kruger, J., Gillespie, R., & Foster, E. (2022). Coaching Mathematics Teachers InPerson and Online: A Content-Focused Coaching Model.
Calik, T., Sezgin, F., Kavgaci, H., & Cagatay Kilinc, A. (2012). Examination of Relationships
between Instructional Leadership of School Principals and Self-Efficacy of Teachers and
Collective Teacher Efficacy. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(4), 2498-2504.
Carter, A., Blackman, A., Hicks, B., Williams, M., & Hay, R. (2017). Perspectives on effective
coaching by those who have been coached. International Journal of Training and
Development, 21(2), 73–91.
Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher turnover: Why it matters and what
we can do about it. Learning Policy Institute,
96
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. SAGE Publications.
The Components of Effective Professional Development Activities in Terms of Teachers'
Perspective (2014). publisher not identified.
Chen, M., Liu, Y., Yang, H. H., Li, Y., & Zhou, C. (2023). Investigating teachers’ participation
patterns in online teacher professional development: what is the relationship between
participation frequency and participation quality? Education and Information Technologies,
28(11), 15011-15030. 10.1007/s10639-023-11829-y
Cilliers, J., Fleisch, B., Kotze, J., Mohohlwane, N., Taylor, S., & Thulare, T. (2022). Can virtual
replace in-person coaching? Experimental evidence on teacher professional development
and student learning. Journal of Development Economics, 155, 102815.
10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102815
Copur-Gencturk, Y., Plowman, D., & Bai, H. (2019). Mathematics teachers’ learning:
Identifying key learning opportunities linked to teachers’ knowledge growth. American
Educational Research Journal, 56(5), 1590-1628.
Cordingley, P., Higgins, S., Greany, T., Buckler, N., Coles-Jordan, D., Crisp, B., Saunders, L., &
Coe, R. (2015). Developing great teaching: Lessons from the international reviews into
effective professional development.
Cornett, J., & Knight, J. (2009). Research on coaching. Coaching: Approaches and Perspectives,
, 192-216.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.
97
Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). Teaching as a profession: Lessons in teacher preparation and
professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(3), 237-240.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from
international practice?. Carfax International Publishers. 10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Schachner, A., & Wojcikiewicz, S. (2022). Educator Learning
to Enact the Science of Learning and Development. Learning Policy Institute,
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional
development.
Day, C., & Gu, Q. (2013). Resilient teachers, resilient schools: Building and sustaining quality
in testing times. Routledge.
Desimone, L., Smith, T. M., & Phillips, K. J. R. (2013). Linking Student Achievement Growth to
Professional Development Participation and Changes in Instruction: A Longitudinal Study
of Elementary Students and Teachers in Title I Schools
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
Dictionary.com (n.d.-b). efficacy. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/efficacy
Donnell, L. A., & Gettinger, M. (2015). Elementary school teachers' acceptability of school
reform: Contribution of belief congruence, self-efficacy, and professional development.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 47-57. 10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.003
Dunst, C. J., Bruder, M. B., & Hamby, D. W. (2015). Metasynthesis of in-service professional
development research: Features associated with positive educator and student outcomes.
Educational Research and Reviews, 10(12), 1731–1744.
98
Durksen, T. L., Klassen, R. M., & Daniels, L. M. (2017). Motivation and collaboration: The keys
to a developmental framework for teachers’ professional learning. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 67, 53-66.
Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (2009). Getting started: Reculturing schools to become professional
learning communities. Solution Tree Press.
Eble, A., Frost, C., Camara, A., Bouy, B., Bah, M., Sivaraman, M., Hsieh, P. J., Jayanty, C.,
Brady, T., & Gawron, P. (2021). How much can we remedy very low learning levels in rural
parts of low-income countries? Impact and generalizability of a multi-pronged para-teacher
intervention from a cluster-randomized trial in The Gambia. Journal of Development
Economics, 148, 102539.
Eells, R. J. (2011). Meta-analysis of the relationship between collective teacher efficacy and
student achievement
Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2010). Instructional rounds in education: A network
approach to improving teaching and learning. Teacher Librarian, 37(3), 69.
Evans, L. (2011). The ‘shape’of teacher professionalism in England: Professional standards,
performance management, professional development and the changes proposed in the 2010
White Paper. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 851-870.
Evans, L. (2014). Leadership for professional development and learning: enhancing our
understanding of how teachers develop. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(2), 179-198.
Fackler, S., & Malmberg, L. (2016). Teachers' self-efficacy in 14 OECD countries: Teacher,
student group, school and leadership effects. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 185-195.
99
Fisher, J. B., Schumaker, J. B., Culbertson, J., & Deshler, D. D. (2010). Effects of a
computerized professional development program on teacher and student outcomes. Journal
of Teacher Education, 61(4), 302-312.
Fishman, B., Konstantopoulos, S., Kubitskey, B. W., Vath, R., Park, G., Johnson, H., & Edelson,
D. C. (2013). Comparing the impact of online and face-to-face professional development in
the context of curriculum implementation. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 426+.
Franco, M., & Patrick, S. K. (2023). State teacher shortages: Teaching positions left vacant or
filled by teachers without full certification. Learning Policy
Institute.Https://Learningpolicyinstitute.Org/Product/State-Teacher-Shortages-Vacancy,
Fraser, C., Kennedy, A., Reid, L., & Mckinney, S. (2007). Teachers’ continuing professional
development: Contested concepts, understandings and models. Journal of in-Service
Education, 33(2), 153-169.
Frumin, K., Dede, C., Fischer, C., Foster, B., Lawrenz, F., Eisenkraft, A., Fishman, B., Jurist
Levy, A., & McCoy, A. (2018). Adapting to large-scale changes in Advanced Placement
Biology, Chemistry, and Physics: the impact of online teacher communities. International
Journal of Science Education, 40(4), 397-420. 10.1080/09500693.2018.1424962
García, E., & Weiss, E. (2019). US Schools Struggle to Hire and Retain Teachers. The Second
Report in" The Perfect Storm in the Teacher Labor Market" Series. Economic Policy
Institute,
Garet, M. S., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., Uekawa, K., Falk, A.,
Bloom, H. S., & Doolittle, F. (2008). The Impact of Two Professional Development
Interventions on Early Reading Instruction and Achievement. NCEE 2008-4030. National
Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,
100
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American
Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
Garrett, R., Citkowicz, M., & Williams, R. (2019). How responsive is a teacher’s classroom
practice to intervention? A meta-analysis of randomized field studies. Review of Research in
Education, 43(1), 106-137.
Geiger, T., & Pivovarova, M. (2018). The effects of working conditions on teacher retention.
Teachers and Teaching, 24(6), 604-625.
Gibbs, G. R. (2018). Analyzing Qualitative Data. SAGE Publications, Limited.
10.4135/9781526441867
Ginsburg, M. (2011). EQUIP2 state-of-the-art knowledge in education. Teacher Professional
Development.A Guide to Education Project Design Based on a Comprehensive Literature
and Project Review.Washington DC: USAID,
Glazerman, S., Isenberg, E., Dolfin, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Grider, M., & Jacobus, M.
(2010). Impacts of Comprehensive Teacher Induction: Final Results from a Randomized
Controlled Study. NCEE 2010-4027. National Center for Education Evaluation and
Regional Assistance,
Goddard, R. D., Skrla, L., & Salloum, S. J. (2017). The Role of Collective Efficacy in Closing
Student Achievement Gaps: A Mixed Methods Study of School Leadership for Excellence
and Equity. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 22(4), 220-236.
10.1080/10824669.2017.1348900
101
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning,
measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal,
37(2), 479-507.
Goddard, R., Goddard, Y., Sook Kim, E., & Miller, R. (2015). A Theoretical and Empirical
Analysis of the Roles of Instructional Leadership, Teacher Collaboration, and Collective
Efficacy Beliefs in Support of Student Learning. American Journal of Education, 121(4),
501-530. 10.1086/681925
Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). A theoretical and empirical
investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in
public elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 109(4), 877-896.
Greenleaf, C. L., Litman, C., Hanson, T. L., Rosen, R., Boscardin, C. K., Herman, J., Schneider,
S. A., Madden, S., & Jones, B. (2011). Integrating Literacy and Science in Biology:
Teaching and Learning Impacts of Reading Apprenticeship Professional Development.
American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 647-717. 10.3102/0002831210384839
Gu, Q., & Day, C. (2013). Challenges to teacher resilience: Conditions count. British
Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 22-44.
Gumus, S. (2013). The effects of teacher-and school-level factors on teachers participation in
professional development activities: The role of principal leadership. Journal of
International Education Research (JIER), 9(4), 371-380.
Guo, Y., Justice, L. M., Sawyer, B., & Tompkins, V. (2011). Exploring factors related to
preschool teachers’ self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 961-968.
10.1016/j.tate.2011.03.008
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Corwin press.
102
Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi Delta
Kappan, 90(7), 495-500.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2015). Professional capital: Transformng teaching in every
school. Teachers College Press.
Hattie, J.Mindframes and Maximizers. Paper presented at the Third Annual Visible Learning
Conference, Washington, DC,
Heller, J. I., Daehler, K. R., Wong, N., Shinohara, M., & Miratrix, L. W. (2012). Differential
effects of three professional development models on teacher knowledge and student
achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(3), 333-
362. 10.1002/tea.21004
Henry, G. T., & Redding, C. (2020). The consequences of leaving school early: The effects of
within-year and end-of-year teacher turnover. Education Finance and Policy, 15(2), 332-
356.
Hertz, B., Grainger Clemson, H., Tasic Hansen, D., Laurillard, D., Murray, M., Fernandes, L.,
Gilleran, A., Rojas Ruiz, D., & Rutkauskiene, D. (2022). A pedagogical model for effective
online teacher professional development—findings from the Teacher Academy initiative of
the European Commission. European Journal of Education, 57(1), 142-159.
10.1111/ejed.12486
Hipp, K. A. (1996). Teacher Efficacy: Influence of Principal Leadership Behavior.
Hochberg, E. D., & Desimone, L. M. (2010). Professional development in the accountability
context: Building capacity to achieve standards. Educational Psychologist, 45(2), 89-106.
103
Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2014). Predicting teachers’ instructional behaviors:
The interplay between self-efficacy and intrinsic needs. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 39(2), 100-111.
Horn, M. B., & Goldstein, M. (2018). Putting School Budgets in Teachers' Hands: What if endusers in the classroom made purchasing decisions? Education Next, 18(4), 82-84.
Huang, K., Yeomans, M., Brooks, A. W., Minson, J., & Gino, F. (2017). It Doesn't Hurt to Ask:
Question-Asking Increases Liking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3),
430–452. 10.1037/pspi0000097
Iarossi, G. (2006). Power of Survey Design: A User's Guide for Managing Surveys, Interpreting
Results, and Influencing Respondents (1st ed.). World Bank Publications. 10.1596/978-0-
8213-6392-8
Itzchakov, G., & Weinstein, N. (2021). High-Quality Listening Supports Speakers' Autonomy
and Self-Esteem when Discussing Prejudice. Human Communication Research, 47(3), 248–
283.
Ingersoll, R. M., Sirinides, P., & Dougherty, P. (2018). Leadership Matters: Teachers' Roles in
School Decision Making and School Performance. American Educator, 42(1), 13.
Ippolito, J. (2010). Three ways that literacy coaches balance responsive and directive
relationships with teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 164-190.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development Alexandria,
VA; Association for supervision and curriculum development. 2005): Implementation
Research-a Synthesis of the Literature, Monography, National Implementations Research
Network, University of South Florida, USA,
104
Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of
Educational Research, 86(4), 945-980.
King, F. (2014). Evaluating the impact of teacher professional development: An evidence-based
framework. Professional Development in Education, 40(1), 89-111.
Kirsten, N. (2020). Svenska lärares deltagande i kompetensutveckling: En statistisk bearbetning
av uppgifter om lärares kompetensutveckling i TALIS, TIMSS, PIRLS och PISA 2001-
2018.
Klassen, R. M., Chong, W. H., Huan, V. S., Wong, I., Kates, A., & Hannok, W. (2008).
Motivation beliefs of secondary school teachers in Canada and Singapore: A mixed methods
study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(7), 1919–1934. 10.1016/j.tate.2008.01.005
Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers' self-efficacy and job satisfaction:
Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology,
102(3), 741.
Kluger, A. N., & Itzchakov, G. (2022). The Power of Listening at Work. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 9(1), 121–146. 10.1146/annurevorgpsych-012420-091013
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). The Learning Way: Meta-cognitive Aspects of Experiential
Learning. Simulation & Gaming, 40(3), 297-327. 10.1177/1046878108325713
Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The Effect of Teacher Coaching on Instruction
and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence. Review of Educational
Research, 88(4), 547-588. 10.3102/0034654318759268
105
Kraft, M. A., & Hill, H. C. (2020). Developing ambitious mathematics instruction through webbased coaching: A randomized field trial. American Educational Research Journal, 57(6),
2378–2414.
Lay, C. D., Allman, B., Cutri, R. M., & Kimmons, R. (2020). Examining a decade of research in
online teacher professional development. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education, , 5
573129.
LeCompte, M. D., & Schensul, J. J. (2010). Designing & conducting ethnographic research: an
introduction, second edition (2nd ed.). AltaMira Press.
Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (2014). Teachers as professionals: Evolving definitions of staff
development. Handbook of Professional Development in Education, 3(1), 67-71.
Lindvall, J., Kirsten, N., Eriksson, K., Brehmer, D., & Ryve, A. (2023). Does the duration of
professional development programs influence effects on instruction? An analysis of 174
lessons during a national-scale program. European Journal of Teacher Education, , 1-19.
10.1080/02619768.2023.2198101
Little, C. A., & Housand, B. C. (2011). Avenues to professional learning online: Technology tips
and tools for professional development in gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 34(4), 18-
27.
Lofthouse, R. M., Leat, D., & Towler, C. (2010). Improving Teacher Coaching in Schools; A
Practical Guide. National College for Teaching and Leadership.
Ma, X., & Marion, R. (2021). Exploring how instructional leadership affects teacher efficacy: A
multilevel analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(1), 188-
207. 10.1177/1741143219888742
106
Malmberg, L., Hagger, H., & Webster, S. (2014). Teachers' situation-specific mastery
experiences: teacher, student group and lesson effects. European Journal of Psychology of
Education, 29(3), 429-451. 10.1007/s10212-013-0206-1
Masters, J., De Kramer, R. M., O'Dwyer, L. M., Dash, S., & Russell, M. (2010). The effects of
online professional development on fourth grade English language arts teachers' knowledge
and instructional practices. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(3), 355-375.
May, H., Sirinides, P. M., Gray, A., & Goldsworthy, H. (2016). Reading Recovery: An
evaluation of the four-year i3 scale-up.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Moolenaar, N. M., Sleegers, P. J. C., & Daly, A. J. (2012). Teaming up: Linking collaboration
networks, collective efficacy, and student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education,
28(2), 251-262. 10.1016/j.tate.2011.10.001
Mora-Ruano, J., Heine, J. H., & Gebhardt, M. (2019). Does Teacher Collaboration Improve
Student Achievement? Analysis of the German PISA 2012 Sample. Frontiers in Education
(Lausanne), 410.3389/feduc.2019.00085
Morgan, D. N., & Bates, C. C. (2018). Addressing the barriers of time. The Reading Teacher,
72(1), 131–134.
Naidoo, K., and S. K. Kirch. (2016) “Candidates use a new teacher development process,
transformative reflection, to identify and address teaching and learning problems in their
work with children.” Journal of Teacher Education 67 (5): 379–391
107
Naidoo, K., & Naidoo, L. J. (2023). Designing teaching and reflection experiences to develop
candidates' science teaching self-efficacy. Research in Science & Technological Education,
41(1), 211–231. 10.1080/02635143.2021.1895098
Neuman, S. B., & Wright, T. S. (2010). Promoting language and literacy development for early
childhood educators: A mixed-methods study of coursework and coaching. The Elementary
School Journal, 111(1), 63-86.
OECD. (2014). Education at a glance 2014: OECD indicators. OECD publ. 10.1787/eag-2014-
en
Opfer, D. (2016). Conditions and practices associated with teacher professional development and
its impact on instruction in TALIS 2013.
Parker, K., Hannah, E., & Topping, K. J. (2006). Collective teacher efficacy, pupil attainment
and socio-economic status in primary school. Improving Schools, 9(2), 111–129.
10.1177/1365480206064965
Partelow, L. (2019). What to make of declining enrollment in teacher preparation programs.
Center for American Progress, 3
Patfield, S., Gore, J., & Harris, J. (2023). Shifting the focus of research on effective professional
development: Insights from a case study of implementation. Journal of Educational
Change, 24(2), 345-363. 10.1007/s10833-021-09446-y
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice. Sage publications.
Penuel, W. R., Gallagher, L. P., & Moorthy, S. (2011). Preparing Teachers to Design Sequences
of Instruction in Earth Systems Science: A Comparison of Three Professional Development
108
Programs. American Educational Research Journal, 48(4), 996-1025.
10.3102/0002831211410864
Polly, D., McGee, J., Wang, C., Martin, C., Lambert, R., & Pugalee, D. K. (2015). Linking
professional development, teacher outcomes, and student achievement: The case of a
learner-centered mathematics program for elementary school teachers. International Journal
of Educational Research, 72, 26-37. 10.1016/j.ijer.2015.04.002
Popova, A., Evans, D. K., Breeding, M. E., & Arancibia, V. (2022). Teacher professional
development around the world: The gap between evidence and practice. The World Bank
Research Observer, 37(1), 107–136.
Powell, D. R., Diamond, K. E., Burchinal, M. R., & Koehler, M. J. (2010). Effects of an early
literacy professional development intervention on head start teachers and children. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 299.
Quint, J. (2012). Professional development for teachers: What two rigorous studies tell us.
MDRC Paper,
Ramos, G., & Hughes, T. (2020). Could More Holistic Policy Addressing Classroom Discipline
Help Mitigate Teacher Attrition? JEP : Ejournal of Education Policy,
21(1)10.37803/ejepS2002
Ramsey, R. P., & Sohi, R. S. (1997). Listening to your customers: The impact of perceived
salesperson listening behavior on relationship outcomes. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 25(2), 127–137. 10.1007/BF02894348
Richter, E., Kunter, M., Marx, A., & Richter, D. (2021). Who Participates in Content-Focused
Teacher Professional Development? Evidence From a Large Scale Study. Frontiers in
Education (Lausanne), 610.3389/feduc.2021.722169
109
Robinson, K., & Aronica, L. (2009). The element: How finding your passion changes everything.
Penguin.
Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How Teacher Turnover Harms Student
Achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4-36.
10.3102/0002831212463813
Roth, K. J., Garnier, H. E., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., & Wickler, N. I. Z. (2011).
Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 117-148. 10.1002/tea.20408
Runhaar, P., Sanders, K., & Yang, H. (2010). Stimulating teachers' reflection and feedback
asking: An interplay of self-efficacy, learning goal orientation, and transformational
leadership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(5), 1154-1161. 10.1016/j.tate.2010.02.011
Scher, L., & O'Reilly, F. (2009). Professional Development for K-12 Math and Science
Teachers: What Do We Really Know? Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness,
2(3), 209-249. 10.1080/19345740802641527
Schiefele, U., Streblow, L., & Retelsdorf, J. (2013). Dimensions of teacher interest and their
relations to occupational well-being and instructional practices. Journal for Educational
Research Online, 5(1), 7-37.
Schwille, J., & Dembélé, M. (2007). Global perspectives on teacher learning: improving policy
and practice.
See, B. H., Morris, R., Gorard, S., Kokotsaki, D., & Abdi, S. (2020). Teacher recruitment and
retention: A critical review of international evidence of most promising interventions.
Education Sciences, 10(10), 1-45. 10.3390/educsci10100262
110
Shaha, S., Lewis, V., O’Donnell, T., & Brown, D. (2004). Evaluating professional development.
Journal of Research in Professional Learning, 1, 1-18.
Smith, C. (2010). The great dilemma of improving teacher quality in adult learning and literacy.
Adult Basic Education and Literacy, 4(2), 67.
Sorensen, L. C., & Ladd, H. F. (2020). The Hidden Costs of Teacher Turnover. AERA Open,
6(1), 2332858420905812. 10.1177/2332858420905812
Stevens, D., & Frazelle, S. (2016). Online Credit Recovery: Enrollment and Passing Patterns in
Montana Digital Academy Courses. REL 2016-139. Regional Educational Laboratory
Northwest,
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research : grounded theory
procedures and techniques. Sage Publications.
Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016). A coming crisis in teaching?
Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the US. Learning Policy Institute,
Swackhamer, L. E., Koellner, K., Basile, C., & Kimbrough, D. (2009). Increasing the selfefficacy of inservice teachers through content knowledge. Teacher Education Quarterly,
36(2), 63-78.
Sweeney, D. (2003). Learning along the way: Professional development by and for teachers.
Stenhouse Publishers.
Tay, L. Y., Tan, L. S., Aiyoob, T. B., Tan, J. Y., Ong, M. W. L., Ratnam-Lim, C., & Chua, P. H.
(2023). Teacher reflection - call for a transformative mindset. Reflective Practice, 24(1),
27–44. 10.1080/14623943.2022.2130224
Teemant, A., Wink, J., & Tyra, S. (2011). Effects of coaching on teacher use of sociocultural
instructional practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 683-693.
111
Teitel, L. (2009). Improving teaching and learning through instructional rounds. Harvard
Education Letter, 25(3), 1-3.
TNTP Mirage 2015
Torlakson, T. (2012). Greatness by design California Task Force on Educator Excellence.
Trotter, Y. D. (2006). Adult Learning Theories: Impacting Professional Development Programs.
The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 72(2), 8.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & McMaster, P. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy: Four professional
development formats and their relationship to self-efficacy and implementation of a new
teaching strategy. The Elementary School Journal, 110(2), 228-245.
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2013). Youth resistance research and theories of change. Routledge.
Valentine, G. (2005). Tell me about...: using interviews as a research methodology. Methods in
human geography (pp. 110-127). Routledge.
von Suchodoletz, A., Jamil, F. M., Larsen, R. A., & Hamre, B. K. (2018). Personal and
contextual factors associated with growth in preschool teachers' self-efficacy beliefs during
a longitudinal professional development study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 278-
289.
Wahlstrom, K. L., & Louis, K. S. (2008). How teachers experience principal leadership: The
roles of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared responsibility. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 458-495.
Wan, S. W., & Lam, P. H. (2010). Factors Affecting Teachers' Participation in Continuing
Professional Development (CPD): From Hong Kong Primary School Teachers'
Perspectives. Online Submission,
112
Washington: High-Quality Professional Development for Teachers. (2013, Jul 15,). US Official
News
Waters, J. (2015). Snowball sampling: A cautionary tale involving a study of older drug users.
International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(4), 367-380.
Watt, H. M., Richardson, P. W., & Wilkins, K. (2014). Profiles of professional engagement and
career development aspirations among USA pre service teachers. International Journal of
Educational Research, 65, 23-40.
Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009).
Professional learning in the learning profession. A Status Report on Teacher Development in
the United States and Abroad.Dallas, Tx: National Staff Development Council,
Weinstein, N., Huo, A., & Itzchakov, G. (2021). Parental listening when adolescents selfdisclose: A preregistered experimental study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,
209, 105178. 10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105178
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the
evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. issues &
answers. rel 2007-no. 033. Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest (NJ1),
113
APPENDIX A: Interview Protocol
Research Questions:
RQ1. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building self-efficacy to aid their current
opportunities to transfer learning across the teachers they support.
RQ2. How do Teacher Leaders perceive PD building collective efficacy to aid the
transfer of learning into the classrooms they support?
Introduction to the Interview:
Thank you so much for meeting with me today and agreeing to do an interview based on your
qualification as a Teacher Leader with two or more years in the Multi-Classroom Leadership
position. The purpose of this study is to identify best practices within teacher professional
development (PD), endorsed by elementary Teacher Leaders, that foster gains in student
achievement while considering self and collective educator efficacy. As I have noted to you
already, upon your approval, I will be recording the interview for my review and data analysis
purposes only. This recording will not be shared with others. Please relax and enjoy the
conversation.
Interview Questions Potential Probes
RQ
Addressed
1. Tell me about your path to becoming a
Teacher Leader. Introductory
114
2. As a Teacher Leader, what are your
additional duties or leadership
opportunities that you perform. 1,2
3. What do you think are the
characteristics of a confident teacher? 1
4. Tell me about the professional
development you received on the path to
becoming a Teacher Leader
1
5. What specifically in the PD aided your
confidence in your ability to transfer the
learning into your classroom
instruction?
Probe:What specific features or
design elements of the PD enabled
building your confidence
OVER TIME? (see if the elements
you discussed in Chapter 2 were
present). 1
6. Tell me about a time in which you felt
highly confident in your ability to teach a
subject area to the students you currently
serve.
Can you further specify what gave
you that level of confidence? 1
115
Now I am going to ask you some
questions related to working with other
teachers.
7. To what extent have you engaged in
PD to build your ability to work
collectively with other teachers to
improve practice?
If you have engaged in this kind of PD,
what did that look like? 1,2
8. Tell me about your experiences
working with other teachers to improve
their practice. 2
9. How do you perceive the PD you have
received as aiding the transfer of learning
to others to improve their classroom
instruction?
1,2
10. What Professional Development
strategies have you led or participated in
that you perceive as helping you build
your capacity to work with other
1,2
116
teachers to improve their practice and
why?
11. How could PD better build your
confidence to work with other teachers to
transfer learning into their classroom
instruction?
1,2
12. Do you have anything else about
Professional Development that you have
participated in or have led that you think
would be important for me to know? 1,2
For my last question…
13. As an elementary level MCL in
School District A, would you be willing
to suggest any other elementary level
MCL’s that you have deep respect for
and whom you think I should seek as a
participant in this study?
Network
Gathering
Conclusion to the Interview:
117
Thank you so much for your participation in this interview. I found your answers to be
thoughtful and enlightening. Thank you for the leadership and investment in students you show
every day.
118
APPENDIX B: Participant Consent Form
University of Southern California Information Sheet
My name is Troy Moore, and I am a student at the University of Southern California. I am
conducting a research study to identify best practices within teacher professional development
(PD), endorsed by elementary Teacher Leaders like yourself. The name of this research study is
Teacher Professional Development. I am seeking your participation in this study.
Your participation is completely voluntary, and I will address your questions or concerns at any
point before or during the study.
You may be eligible to participate in this study if you meet the following criteria:
1. A current employee of School District A
2. Work with an Elementary School
3. Hold the current position of Multi-Classroom Leader (MCL)
4. You are over 18 years old.
If you decide to participate in this study, you will be asked to do the following activities:
1. Participate in a 1:1 online interview over Zoom for 45-60 minutes.
2. Review your interview transcript via email for 10-15 minutes.
After you complete the online interview and review your interview transcript via email you will
receive a $25 Amazon Gift Card via email.
I will publish the results in my publication. Participants will not be identified in the results. I will
take reasonable measures to protect the security of all your personal information. All data will be
de-identified prior to any publication or presentations. I may share your data, de-identified with
other researchers in the future.
If you have any questions about this study, please contact me: tamoore@usc.edu or at 704-681-
1873. If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
hrpp@usc.edu.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
A significant level of resources is invested in K-12 teacher professional development (PD) with little positive impact on teaching and learning. The purpose of this study was to identify best practices within teacher professional development (PD) that are perceived by elementary school Teacher Leaders to aid the transfer of learning into classroom instruction. Understanding practices related to building teacher self and collective efficacy within teacher PD from identified elementary Teacher Leaders in a large urban school district that serves around 150,000 students led to further understanding of barriers, successes, and needs associated with professional development for teachers more broadly. Qualitative analysis and interviews with Teacher Leaders, specifically identified as Multi-Classroom Leaders, produced key findings regarding the significance of coaching, practice, reflection, safe environments, intentional relationship building, and the ability to engage in hard conversations. Recommendations for aiding the transfer of PD into classroom instruction include instructional coaching as a PD priority, consistent inclusion of reflection and practice within PD frameworks, and intentional training for navigating difficult conversations.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Perceptions of professional development from the lens of the global teacher in a rapidly evolving, linguistically diverse instructional environment
PDF
Exploring primary teachers' self-efficacy and technology integration in early reading instruction
PDF
Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction
PDF
Classrooms beyond the binary: elementary teachers gendered beliefs and classroom practices
PDF
Disrupting cis-heteronormativity: creating safe and affirming conditions for racially marginalized LGBTQ+ students through a critical reflection coaching group
PDF
Modeling collaboration in K–12 teacher professional development
PDF
Creative trouble: an exploration of elementary classroom teachers' perceptions of their roles in educational justice
PDF
A teacher's use of data to support classroom instruction in an urban elementary school
PDF
The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy
PDF
Perceptions of early childhood educators on how reflective supervision influences instructional effectiveness and teacher wellbeing
PDF
Better together: teacher attrition, burnout, and efficacy
PDF
Implementation of the PLC coaching model at American Community School
PDF
Supporting world language teachers to develop a culturally sustaining curriculum and reflect on its enactment
PDF
Reimagining professional learning for early childhood educators of color
PDF
Teacher management style: its impact on teacher-student relationships and leadership development
PDF
Teacher self-efficacy and instructional coaching in California public K-12 schools: effective instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher...
PDF
Digital learning in K12: putting teacher professional identity on the line
PDF
Examining teacher retention and attrition in novice teachers
PDF
A professional development program evaluation: teacher efficacy, learning, and transfer
PDF
Professional learning communities: the role of school principals, district directors, assistant superintendents, and superintendents in developing collective efficacy in public secondary school...
Asset Metadata
Creator
Moore, Troy Alan
(author)
Core Title
Efficacy drivers that aid teacher professional development transfer
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2024-12
Publication Date
01/06/2025
Defense Date
09/30/2024
Publisher
Los Angeles, California
(original),
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
Coaching,collaboration,collective efficacy,crucial conversations,education,educator,efficacy,feedback,K-12,knowledge transfer,learning,Modeling,multi-classroom leader,OAI-PMH Harvest,opportunity culture,PD,practice,reflection,reform,relationship building,safe environment,self-efficacy,social cognitive theory,teacher leader,Teacher Leadership,teacher professional development,teaching
Format
theses
(aat)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Krop, Cathy (
committee chair
), Carbone, Paula (
committee member
), Plunkett, Allison (
committee member
)
Creator Email
tamoore@usc.edu,troyamoore78@gmail.com
Unique identifier
UC11399F7VG
Identifier
etd-MooreTroyA-13714.pdf (filename)
Legacy Identifier
etd-MooreTroyA-13714
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
theses (aat)
Rights
Moore, Troy Alan
Internet Media Type
application/pdf
Type
texts
Source
20250109-usctheses-batch-1231
(batch),
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
collaboration
collective efficacy
crucial conversations
educator
efficacy
feedback
K-12
knowledge transfer
learning
multi-classroom leader
opportunity culture
PD
practice
reflection
reform
relationship building
safe environment
self-efficacy
social cognitive theory
teacher leader
teacher professional development