Essay Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Call-To-Action--Action-Research-As-An 👈

1. Author retains copyright and grants license of first publication to the Mid-Atlantic
Education Review. Article published under a Creative Commons BY-NC license. Readers
may copy and distribute for non-commercial purposes provided they indicate original authorship and original
publication. For more information, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/
Volume 2
Issue 1
Spring, 2014
ISSN 2328-3610 (electronic)
ISSN 2328-3174 (print)
Mid-Atlantic Education Review
Editorial Staff
Kevin Crouse, Editor of Peer Review
Jessie Curtis, Editor of Final Publication
Associate Editors
Meredith Byrnes
Diana Cano
Anneliese Haines
Christopher J. Manente
Reviewers
Rosemary G. Carolan
Stephen Coffin
Jessie Curtis
Mara Conroy Hughes
Jeanette Joyce
Jamie Liberti
Dessi Kirova
Amy Pickard
Atiya Strothers
Sora Alexandria Suh

2. A Call to Action Research:
Action Research as an
Efective Professional
Development Model
Mid-Atlantic Education Review
Vol. 2, No. 1 (12-22)
© The Authors, 2014
http://maereview.org
Jeanne Dyches Bissonnette
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Katie Caprino
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Abstract
Professional development is one of the most pressing and challenging issues in
education today. Action research, which asks individual teachers to focus on a particular
issue in their classrooms as means to improve instructional practice (James, Milenkiewicz
& Bucknam, 2008), responds to the criticism of fragmented, decontextualized
professional development because it provides a learning space in which teachers can
learn about their students as well as their own teaching practices. Action research wields
the power to bridge the gap between theory and practice, empower teachers, and impact
student learning.
Keywords: professional development, action research
Authors retain copyright and grants license of first publication to the Mid-Atlantic
Education Review. Article published under a Creative Commons BY-NC license. Readers
may copy and distribute for non-commercial purposes provided they indicate original authorship and
original publication. For more information, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/

3. A Call to Action Research: Action Research as an Effective Professional Development Model
Introduction
How best to craft meaningful professional development has long been a matter of
debate amongst leaders in education. The debate has many facets, but most people would
agree on one aspect: professional development for teachers needs improvement. Sykes
(1996) claims that professional development is “the most serious unsolved problem for
policy and practice in American education today” (p. 465). Though No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) requires that states “ensure the availability of ‘high-quality’ professional
development for all teachers,” it fails to describe factors that would contribute to high
quality, meaningful professional development (Borko, 2004). State legislation has also
fallen short of answering the question of what constitutes effective professional
development. Certainly, professional development is a particularly challenging entity to
fix given its numerous, varying definitions (Telese, 2012) and models (e.g., after-school
sessions, online training, continuing education, workshops, and summer institutes).
Additionally, the nuanced needs and strengths of the teachers, facilitators and contexts
involved in the professional development process make creating one-size-fits-all
solutions difficult (Borko, 2004). Finally, referencing rhetoric that characterizes teachers
as professionals capable of enacting change while simultaneously holding teachers
collectively responsible for the failure of schools, Clark and Florio-Ruane (2001) observe
that “universal uncertainty, rapidly changing circumstances, and locally disruptive
challenges call for a fundamental redesign of approaches to teacher professional
development and lifelong learning” (p. 4). To that end, the authors assert that action
research should emerge as an integral component of such a redesign.
In this literature review, characteristics of ineffective and effective professional
development are provided as a means to situate action research as a powerful, effective
professional development opportunity that empowers teachers to think critically about
their own practice, become leaders in local communities of practice, and have a positive
impact on students’ learning. The authors hope that this literature review will inspire
teachers who want to engage in meaningful professional development and inform
administrators or other school personnel responsible for facilitating teacher development.
Teacher educators will find this article relevant to their methods courses and may even
consider planning for pre-service teachers to engage in action research alongside their
cooperating teachers. Additionally, the authors believe that this literature review may
encourage researchers to further examine the impact of action research on teacher
efficacy.
Ineffective Professional Development
Researchers have identified key features of ineffective professional development:
these include fragmentation, lack of implementation, and lack of teacher-centeredness.
Telese (2012) finds that “a key component in teachers’ lifelong learning process is
continual professional development. However, it is often viewed as being fragmented, on
an as-needed basis, and relatively superficial” and there are claims that “professional
development is rarely considered developmental because there are few programs that
address teachers’ learning and the practices they are to enact” (p. 103). Superficial,
fragmented professional development — characterized as “one-shot, fix-‘em-up
Fall-Winter 2014 13

4. Jeanne Dyches Bissonnette and Katie Caprino
experiences” (Fleischer & Fox, 2003, p. 259) — disallows a developmental approach to
teachers’ learning (Clark & Florio-Ruane, 2001; Telese, 2012) and fails to address local
contexts for teaching (Kent, 2004; Little, 1993). Additionally, professional development
leaders contribute to the lack of implementation if they do not allow teachers to set goals
and celebrate teachers’ efforts (Ferguson, 2006). It is unsurprising that many teachers
report professional development either reinforces current practices or has no impact at all
(Hill, 2009). Action research addresses both the fragmentation and lack of
implementation.
Lack of teacher-centeredness (Friden, Hanegan, & Nelson, 2009; Kent, 2004)
limits effectiveness especially if teachers do not design their professional development
(Clark & Florio-Ruane, 2001). Abadiano and Turner (2004) summarize the work of the
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, which characterized professional
development as having a top-down approach in which teachers are passive participants to
whom information is transferred by “experts” (p. 87). A “mini-industry of consultants”
(Sykes, 1996, p. 465) has taken professional development out of the hands of teachers.
“Talking heads” (Fleischer & Fox, 2003, p. 259) from outside of the building
decontextualize professional development and do not transform teachers into active
participants in their own professional growth. Professional development is more effective
and authentic when its premise and foundation are directly connected to, and a natural
outgrowth of, a teacher’s own practice (Friden et al., 2009). When teachers become
central figures within their professional development, they become agents of change in
their classrooms (Sykes, 1996). Action research allows teachers to become active
participants in a more meaningful, contextual, and authentic professional development.
Effective Professional Development
Research indicates that effective professional development is sustained, content-
based, contextually-situated, and teacher-centered. Blau, Cabe, and Whitney (2011)
suggest that successful professional development— that is, development that prompts
teachers to examine and alter their practices— should be school-based and continuous
because an absence of sustained context, a lack of guidance, and follow-up sessions often
result in a lack of implementation. The authors emphasize that “research on teachers’
professional development indicates the importance of intensive sustained, school-based
programs if teachers are to adopt new practices and redefine existing ones in significant
ways” (p. 1). The “intensive, sustained, school-based” professional development Blau,
Cabe, and Whitney argue for is possible—and, perhaps more importantly, sustainable—
with action research.
Supportive teacher-led communities, whether school-based teachers’ groups
designed around student needs (Lieberman, 1995) or online professional communities
(Swenson, 2003) have provided successful models of teacher-centered collaboration and
reflection (Borko, 2004). A 2012 report from Scholastic and the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation found that teacher retention and the perceived collegial environment of a
school are directly correlated. Though the benefits of these teacher learning communities
are well documented, certain challenges exist in their creation and sustainability.
Grossman, Wineburg and Woolworth (2001) point out that many teacher learning
communities exist outside of the hours of the school days and even outside the walls of
14 Mid-Atlantic Education Review

5. A Call to Action Research: Action Research as an Effective Professional Development Model
the school building. Thus, finding the time—and a common meeting space—can prove
problematic for teachers seeking out the opportunity to engage in a teacher learning
community. To that end, educators and administrators must consider carefully the
allocation of teachers’ time in order for teachers to find time in their instructional days to
participate in these learning communities. The administration might look to reducing the
time teachers spend on tasks they say deplete their time: that is, disciplining students,
supervising students outside of the classroom, completing paperwork, and analyzing
standardized test scores and district-required assessments (Scholastic and Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation, 2012). If teachers’ time is preserved with greater fidelity, perhaps they
will be more likely to create, engage, and actively participate in a teacher learning
community.
Clark and Florio-Ruane (2001) find that effective professional development must
be teacher-led. This leadership may take on any number of forms. For example,
professional development that prepares teachers to analyze their own classroom data
(such as student work and observations) has proven to inform effective instructional
practices (Whitcomb, Borko, & Liston, 2009). Wood and Lieberman (2010) emphasize
the National Writing Project’s philosophy of teachers teaching teachers through its three
learning principles: authorship, authority, and authorization. When teachers are allowed
to select their own action research projects, receive support from their colleagues in
discourse communities, and share their findings with their colleagues, professional
development is teacher-led and differentiated according to needs and interests (Hill,
2009). Action research, which is both teacher-led and differentiated, combats the oft-
criticized one-size-fits-all, top-down quality of many professional development models.
Action Research Defined
Action research asks individual teachers to focus on a particular issue in their
classrooms as a means to improve instructional practice (James, Milenkiewicz &
Bucknam, 2008). As they engage in the action research process, teachers pose a question,
collect and analyze data, and develop a plan to address the findings (Smeets & Ponte,
2009). By becoming action researchers, teachers assess the events, struggles, and
successes in their classroom to make informed decisions about their instructional
practices. In short, teachers function as researchers; their classroom becomes their
laboratories, their students become their subjects. Babkie and Provost (2004) offer the
following planning guide for conducting research and outline the steps of the action
research process:
• Identify the problem/concern to be researched.
• Collect information from various sources and evaluate it.
• Develop a plan for intervention/change.
• Implement the intervention/change and collect data.
• Analyze the data/evaluate the results of the intervention or change.
• Plan for future action: keep, revise, or alter the intervention. (p. 262)
Fall-Winter 2014 15

6. Jeanne Dyches Bissonnette and Katie Caprino
Teachers who engage in action research scrutinize their own practice. This
constant examination often leads to teachers having a more developed sense of self-
efficacy; additionally, they report increased content and pedagogical knowledge (Short &
Rinehart, 1992). The action research process allows teachers to explore the relationship
between theory and classroom practice (Kirkwood & Christie, 2006). Maclean & Mohr
(1999) find that teacher-researchers raise questions about what they think and observe
about their teaching and their students’ learning. They collect student work in order to
evaluate performance, but they also see student work as data to analyze in order to
examine the practices that produced it. Action researchers tend to be more reflective and
deliberate in their teaching; simply put, “teachers who do action research improve their
own teaching” (Smeets & Ponte, 2009, p. 178).
When teachers participate in action research, the benefits are not confined to their
classrooms. Smeets and Ponte (2009) maintain that schools benefit when their teachers
participate in action research because teacher-researchers tend to take responsibility for
school-wide educational improvements. In 2012, The New Teacher Project (TNTP)
published a report suggesting that teachers who are granted leadership opportunities are
less likely to leave their school due to job dissatisfaction. Thus, by creating a space for
teachers to grow as leaders, schools may very well benefit from school-wide
improvements, increased job satisfaction, and lower attrition rates.
Action research is contextual, requires the teacher to be a reflective practitioner,
and can be enacted independently by one teacher or a team (Furlong & Salisbury, 2005).
MacLean and Mohr (1999) advocate for research groups. Groups may be organized in a
variety of ways, either by content, grade, or an issue in need of assessment. Group
research includes shared responsibilities. Members work to challenge and support each
other in all aspects of the research process—from research methodology to draft writing
to analysis and interpretations. Teachers must also have an organized system for
collecting data, ideas, and plans. A research log, which may contain “dates and times,
careful quoting, observations and reflections” (1999, p. 12), is an essential component of
this system. The writing in the research log should be “think writing” (p. 13), or writing
that reflects one’s thoughts in the research process. These logs provide teachers with a
space to organize their work, note important occurrences, and plan for future steps.
Periodically, teacher-researchers should meet with members of their groups to “support
the process of analysis” (p. 21).
Once the research projects are complete, it is critical that teachers are granted
opportunities to relate their experiences and findings to other members of the school
community. This piece is vital as “professional discourse needs the participation of
teacher-researchers” (MacLean & Mohr, 1999, p. 83). A research group may opt to
disseminate their discoveries through common group findings (MacLean & Mohr, 1999)
in which members of the research group discuss, evaluate, and synthesize commonalities
in their findings in a professional learning community, at a faculty meeting, or in a report
or article. Regardless of which format is chosen, it is imperative that teachers share their
projects with others; doing so not only validates the teacher-researchers’ work, but also
creates a space for educators and other stakeholders to have conversations that wield the
power to improve students’ educational experiences.
Teachers have the greatest knowledge of the events of their classroom and the
most immediate opportunity to effect change; they are the best candidates to research
16 Mid-Atlantic Education Review

7. A Call to Action Research: Action Research as an Effective Professional Development Model
questions of practice. Teachers’ exposure to their classroom, the students, and data make
them the “experts” in the field (Jakar, 1993, p. 71). If teachers are to guide and instruct
their students in a meaningful, informed fashion, teachers must be “reflective
practitioners, using research-based pedagogy in and adapting it to their own particular
classrooms” (Hanhs-Vaughn & Yanowitz, 2009, p. 422). Action research provides the
vehicle for this reflective approach. Teachers who use data collected in their own
classrooms to evaluate their students’ needs increase their confidence in their ability to
address the objectives of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Ultimately, teacher-
researchers are empowered to craft CCSS-focused lessons by the acquisition and
assessment of this data. Given these findings, action research emerges as an exemplar of
effective professional development.
Transitioning to Action Research as Professional Development
Professional development is one of the most pressing and challenging issues in
education today (Sykes, 1996). Antoniou and Kyriakide (2013) argue that “the demand
for improving the quality of teaching and learning and the demand for increasing
accountability have put issues related to effective professional development high on the
agenda of educators, researchers and policy makers” (p. 1). The joint report by Scholastic
and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (2012) indicates that teachers receive only
limited time to collaborate with colleagues and that teachers at all levels of their careers
seek opportunities for professional development. Action research responds to the
criticism of fragmented, decontextualized professional development because it provides
time for teachers to learn about their students and their own teaching practices.
Research shows that training teachers to function as action researchers in their
own classrooms has benefits for the teacher themselves, their students, and the entire
school community (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1990; Llewellyn & Van Zee, 2010; Mertler,
2009). Action research is sustained, content-based, contextually-situated, and teacher-
centered: all qualities of effective professional development. Teachers become engaged in
the professional development process when it involves action research as it allows for
explicit discussion of the events, challenges, and successes in their own classroom.
Professional development becomes more meaningful when it involves action research
because it allows for the integration of a question directly related to the teacher’s content
(Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1990).
Teachers, like students, want to be engaged in the material presented to them;
action research functions as the catalyst for this meaningful professional development
experience. Despite its reported benefits, critiques of action research do exist. Initially,
teachers may be frustrated about embarking upon action research; the sentiment may be
they now have yet another thing to do. Also, teachers may experience anxiety because
they do not view themselves as researchers. However, Berger, Boles, and Troen (2005)
reported that though teachers admitted being intimidated by the prospect of teacher
research, they found the concepts learnable after undergoing meaningful training. By
training teachers to function as researchers in their own classroom, they can better
determine, evaluate, and assess the needs of their students. Ultimately, these findings
demonstrate that action research allows for better-informed instructional decision-
Fall-Winter 2014 17

8. Jeanne Dyches Bissonnette and Katie Caprino
making, helps teachers more confidently teach the CCSS, and has a positive impact on
student learning.
Conclusion
In writing this article, the authors intend to inform stakeholders in the education
community— professors, teachers, and administrators— of the power the action research
model wields in transforming professional development. Teachers who are action
researchers make better-informed decisions about their instructional practices and learn to
be reflective and purposeful in their instructional choices. They evolve as collaborators
and feel a deeper connection to their colleagues, administration, and school community.
Action research wields the power to bridge the gap between theory and practice because
it grants teachers an opportunity to thoughtfully examine their teaching practices.
Additionally, when teachers make informed decisions about their instructional practice,
they can better meet the needs of their students.
At all stages of their careers, teachers maintain that effective, meaningful
professional development is a critical component of their practice (Scholastic and Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation, 2012). Those who choose to improve their practice through
contextually-based and individually-selected action research projects, engage in
meaningful discourse around their students’ and their own learning, and share their work
with colleagues at the K-12 and higher education levels truly embody the qualities of
empowered, change-making teachers. The current rhetoric around education names
teachers as both professionals who are capable of change but who are also responsible for
the failure of schools (Clark and Florio-Ruane, 2001). Action research as professional
development may contribute to changing the rhetoric around teachers’ work because it
foregrounds teachers' professional expertise and commitment.
A Call to Action Research
The authors advocate for action research as an effective professional development
model, state and district resources to support action research, and further studies. The
teacher-led nature of action research means that practices and instructional shifts are
implemented locally in the microcosm of the classroom. Successful practices in one
teacher’s classroom may not necessarily translate to another teacher’s classroom; teacher
personality, student ability level, or an array of other factors may contribute to a project’s
success. Valuing both teacher and student context is not only an asset of action research
but a vital – and often overlooked – component in today’s classrooms.
In the current educational environment, it is difficult to receive support and
funding for professional development that does not enhance student test scores.
Whitcomb, Borko, and Liston (2009) believe that “the paucity of quality research reflects
the labor-intensive nature of running effective professional development and the lack of
resources to study its impact; second, too few studies demonstrate the value that quality
professional development adds to student learning” (p. 211). States and local districts
must provide resources and support for teachers to engage in action research. Once they
do, they may find that action research – because of its focus on teacher-driven projects
that support students’ learning – can indeed increase student achievement (Goddard,
Goddard, & Tschannen-Moran, 2007; National Council for Literacy Learning, 2014).
18 Mid-Atlantic Education Review

9. A Call to Action Research: Action Research as an Effective Professional Development Model
Additional scholarly research around action research in K-12 classrooms is both
warranted and needed. Moreover, the authors maintain that it is critical to create a
community of K-12 teacher-researchers who present and publish their work in
practitioner or scholarly journals. This requires commitment from universities, K-12
schools, and teachers if action research practices are to be implemented with fidelity.
School administrators play an integral role in legitimizing this process: they must work in
tandem with teachers to create a climate conducive to collaboration and provide the
necessary time to participate in both research and reflection, which has been proven
beneficial for teachers and students alike (Gebhard, 2005; Vogt & Au, 1995). Teacher
educators should collaborate with teacher-researchers to support their projects. Educators
involved in methods instruction may find rich data on the implications for future practice
when pre-service teachers engage in research with their cooperating teachers. Methods
students may benefit greatly from involvement in their cooperating teachers’ action
research. Furthermore, investigating the impact of action research on teachers’ efficacy
may prove to be productive for educational researchers. To that end, teachers,
administrators, teacher educators, and researchers are challenged to answer the call to
action research.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dr. Jocelyn Glazier (UNC-Chapel Hill) for her
role in the conceptualization of this piece.
References
Abadiano, H. R., & Turner, J. (2004). Professional staff development: What works?
National English Reading Association Journal, 40(2), 87-91.
Antoniou, P. & Kyriakides, L. (2013). A dynamic integrated approach to teacher
professional development: Impact and sustainability of the effects on improving
teacher behaviour and student outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 1-
12.
Babkie, A. M., & Provost, M. C. (2004). Teachers as researchers. Intervention in School
and Clinic, 39(5), 260-268.
Berger, J. G., Boles, K. C., & Troen, V. (2005). Teacher research and school change:
Paradoxes problems, and possibilities. Teaching and Teacher Education: An
International Journal of Research and Studies, 21(1), 93–105.
Blau, S.D., Cabe, R.H., & Whitney, A. (2011). Evaluating IIMPaC: Teacher and student
outcomes through a professional development program in the teaching of
writing (Executive summary). Santa Barbara, California: South Coast
Writing Project at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
Fall-Winter 2014 19

10. Jeanne Dyches Bissonnette and Katie Caprino
Clark, C. M., & Florio-Ruane, S. (2001). Conversations as support for teaching in new
ways. In C. M. Clark (Ed.), Talking Shop: Authentic Conversation and Teacher
Learning (pp. 1-15). New York: Teachers College.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1990). Research on teaching and teacher-research:
The issues that divide. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2–10.
Ferguson, R. (2006). 5 Challenges to effective teacher professional development.
Journal of Staff Development, 27(4), 48-52.
Fleischer, C., & Fox, D. L. (2003). Beginning words: Toward meaningful on-line
professional development in English education. English Education, 35(4), 259-
261.
Friden, K., Hanegan, N., & Nelson, C. R. (2009). Authentic and simulated professional
development: Teachers reflect what is modeled. School Science and
Mathematics, 109(2): 79-94.
Furlong, J., & Salisbury, J. (2005). Best practice research scholarships. An evaluation.
Research Papers in Education, 20(1), 45–83.
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.
Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher
community Teachers College Record, 103(6), 942-1012.
Hanhs-Vaughn, D.L., & Yanowitz, K. L. (2009). Who is conducting teacher research?
The Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 415-424.
Hill, H. C. (2009). Fixing teacher professional development. The Phi Delta Kappan,
90(7), 470- 476.
Jakar, V. S. (1993). Teacher as researcher: Outside the ivory tower. English Teachers'
Journal: Israel, (46), 70-72.
James, E., Milenkiewicz, M., & Bucknam, A. (2008). Participatory action research for
educational leadership : using data-driven decision making to improve schools.
Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Kent, A. M. (2004). Improving teacher quality through professional development.
Education, 124(3), 427-435.
Kirkwood, M., & Christie, D. (2006). The role of teacher research in continuing
professional development. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54, 429–448.
Lieberman, A. (1995). Practices that support teacher development: Transforming
conceptions of professional learning. The Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 591-596.
Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational
reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129-151.
20 Mid-Atlantic Education Review

11. A Call to Action Research: Action Research as an Effective Professional Development Model
Llewellyn, D., & van Zee, E. (2010). Action research: expanding the role of classroom
teachers to inquirers and researchers. Science Scope, 34(1), 10. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE
%7CA235194563&v=2.1&u=unc_main&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=bb38651
29bccfc1308510d8ad8a6ba59
MacLean, M., & Mohr, M.. (1999). Teacher-researchers at work. Berkeley, CA: The
National Writing Project.
Mertler, C. 2009. Action research: Teachers as researcher in the classroom. 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
National Center for Literacy Education/National Council of Teachers of English. (2014).
Remodeling literacy learning together: Paths to standards implementation.
Retrieved from
http://www.literacyinlearningexchange.org/sites/default/files/2014nclereport.pdf
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State
School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards. Washington, DC:
Authors.
The new teacher project. (2012). Understanding the real retention crisis in America’s
urban schools: The irreplaceables. Retrieved from http://tntp.org/irreplaceables
Scholastic and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2012). Primary sources: 2012
America’s teachers on the teaching profession. Retrieved from
http://www.scholastic.com/primarysources/pdfs/Gates2012_full.pdf
Short, P. M., & Rinehard, J. S. (1992). School participant empowerment scale:
Assessment of level of empowerment within the school environment.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 195-960.
Smeets, K., & Ponte, P. (2009). Action research and teacher leadership. Professional
Development in Education, 35(2), 175-193.
Swenson, J. (2003). Transformative teacher networks, on-line professional development,
and the write for your life project. English Education, 35(4), 262-321.
Sykes, G. (1996). Reform of and as professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(7),
465–467.
Telese, J. A. (2012). Middle school mathematics teachers’ professional development and
student achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 105(2), 102-111.
Vogt, L. A. & Au, K. (1995). The role of teachers' guided reflection in effecting positive
program change. The Bilingual Research Journal, 19(1), 101-120.
Whitcomb, J., Borko, H., & Liston, D. (2009). Growing talent: Promising professional
development models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(207), 207-
212.
Fall-Winter 2014 21

12. Jeanne Dyches Bissonnette and Katie Caprino
Wood, D. R., & Lieberman, A. (2010). Teachers as authors: The national writing
project’s approach to professional development. International Journal of
Leadership in Education: Theory and Practice, 3(3), 255-273
Author
JEANNE DYCHES BISSONNETTE is a doctoral student at the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill and a former high school English teacher in Raleigh, North Carolina. Her
research interests include secondary English education and culturally relevant pedagogy.
She can be reached at jeanne.bissonnette@unc.edu.
KATHRYN CAPRINO is a doctoral candidate in Education at the University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her research interests are in English education, the teaching of
writing, new literacies, critical literacy, and technology integration in the secondary
English classroom. Prior to pursuing her doctoral degree, Kathryn taught middle school,
high school, and community college English. She can be reached at
kcaprino@email.unc.edu.
The Journal
THE MID-ATLANTIC EDUCATION REVIEW is a peer-reviewed, online journal that
provides a forum for studies pertaining to educational issues of interest to educators and
researchers in the Mid-Atlantic region. The Review publishes articles that contribute to
the knowledge base of researchers, policy-makers, teachers, and administrators. To
appeal to a broad educational audience, articles cover a spectrum in their level of
analysis, subject focus, and methodological approach. The journal is available at
http://maereview.org .
The Mid-Atlantic Education Review is edited and published by the Rutgers
Graduate School of Education, New Brunswick, New Jersey. Founded in 1923, the
Rutgers Graduate School of Education (GSE) community creates new knowledge about
educational processes and policies. The GSE is a national leader in the development of
research-based instructional, professional, and outreach programs. Additional information
is available by visiting http://gse.rutgers.edu .
22 Mid-Atlantic Education Review