This document describes a model for supporting collaborative teacher research that was developed and tested over three years. The model includes components like motivation, a learning community, use of data like videos and student work, dedicated time for research, and a structured process using problem-based learning. Teachers found elements like pursuing their own research questions, peer support, facilitator guidance, and extended time to be most useful for improving their practice through inquiry. The model provides an example of effective professional development centered around teacher research.

1. “See, try, research and
reflect”: A model for
supporting collaborative
teacher research
Meilan Zhang, Jan Eberhardt, Mary Lundeberg,
Matthew J. Koehler, Joyce Parker
4/13/2009
PBL TPC Project
Copyright © 2007
Michigan State University
Board of Trustees
Teacher Professional Continuum
Project no. ESI - 0353406

2. Background
 Ineffectiveness of traditional PD model
 One-shot, one-size-fits-all
 Irrelevant to teachers’ classroom practice
 Teacher Research as a promising PD activity
 Develop teachers as reflective practitioners
 Empower teachers from “known” to “knower”
 Close research-practice gap
 Contribute to the knowledge base in education
community
Ref.: Lumpe, 2007; Wilson & Berne, 1999; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999;
Loucks-Horsley, et al, 2003; Roth, 2007.

3. “Rocky Road” of Teacher Research
 Most teachers are unfamiliar with research
 Confuse with library research
 Stereotyped view of traditional quantitative research
 The research process itself is difficult for
teachers
 Lack of time for research
 Lack of support from colleagues and
administrators
Ref.: Christenson et al., 2002; Esposito & Smith, 2006; Price & Valli, 2005;
Zeichner, 2003

4. Supporting teacher researchers
 Teachers need support to engage in
teacher research
 Few studies have systematically explored
what are important conditions for
productive teacher research

5. Developing a teacher research model
 Drawing upon previous research
 Teacher research (Christenson et al., 2002; Cochran-Smith &
Lytle, 1993; Levin & Merritt, 2006; van Zee, Lay, & Roberts, 2003;
Zeichner, 2003)
 Professional development (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, &
Yoon, 2001; Loucks-Horsley et al., 2003; Penuel, Fishman, Yamaguchi,
& Gallagher, 2007)
 Teacher learning (Schön, 1983; Shulman, 1986)
 Japanese lesson study (Fernandez, Cannon, & Choski, 2003)
 Problem-Based Learning (Gijbels, Dochy, Bossche, & Segers,
2005; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Schmidt, 1993)

6. Developing a teacher research model
 In the summer PD
 Brainstorming research questions
 Developing research plan
 Getting feedback from peers and facilitators
 Learning about the PBL approach
 Learning about videotaping and editing skills
 In the school year
 Implementing research plan
 Collecting data: videotaping, student work
 Analyzing data
 Meeting in small groups monthly
 Presenting to the group
 Discussing problems using the PBL approach
 Searching literature on learning issues

7. Research question
 From the teacher researchers’
perspectives, what components in the
collaborative teacher research model are
useful to support teachers in studying their
own practice?

8. Methods
 Participants:
 45 in total: 34 females; 11 males
 34 for one year; 6 for two years; 5 for three years
 Year 1: 10 (3 males and 7 females)
 Year 2: 28 (7 males and 21 females)
 Year 3: 23 (2 males and 21 females)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Females
Males

9. Data sources
Participants Data sources Number of participants Date of collection
Year 1 Individual interviews* 10 End of Year 1
Year 2 Individual interviews* 17 End of Year 2
Focus group interviews 27 End of Year 2
E-stories/written reflections 28 End of Year 2
Year 3 Individual interview* 14 End of Year 3
Survey* 22 End of Year 3
Focus group interview 23 End of Year 3
E-stories/written reflections 22 End of Year 3
* Data was collected by the third party project evaluators.
Table 1: Description of data sources

10. Data Analysis
 Descriptive quantitative data
 Qualitative data
Identify themes from teachers’ statements in
different data sources

11. Results
 A model for teacher research
 Motivation
 Community
 Data (evidence)
 Time
 Process

12. Self-directedprocess Externalhealthypressure
Self-directedprocess Externalhealthypressure
Motivation
PeerteachersFacilitators
PeerteachersFacilitators
Com
m
unity
Teachingvideo
Studentwork
Teachingvideo
Studentwork
Data
Summerpreparation
Extendedstudytime
Summerpreparation
Extendedstudytime
Time
PBLapproach
Literaturesearching
PBLapproach
Literaturesearching
Process
Teacher
Research
Teacher
Research

13. Results
Mean* Std.
Group discussion of my problem 4.6 0.75
Group discussion of someone else’s problem 4.5 0.75
Guidance of facilitator 4.5 0.81
Analysis of student work 4.5 0.68
Teaching problem development in summer 4.4 0.87
Analysis of my own video 4.2 0.87
Group research of literature 4.0 0.95
Video analysis of TIMSS teachers in summer 3.1** 1.03
* 1= Not useful, 5= Very useful. ** N=17.
Table 2: Teachers’ ratings on the usefulness of PBL model components (N=21)

14. Results
 Self-directed process (or choice for studying “my
own” issues)
I was not “told what to do”, but allowed to explore my own
issues. I had “ownership” and learned more by doing my own
research, then being able to discuss it. It was relevant to my
immediate teaching practice.
(Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, written reflection, 4/10/2007)
I had never thought that this could be so meaningful to do your
own research project. We are [doing it for] our own. We really
got excited with thinking of our own little assessments and
testing ourselves and seeing if we could see changes in our kids
and their achievements. (Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, Focus group
interview, 05/16/2007)

15. Results
 Self-directed process (or choice for studying “my
own” issues )
Moderator: One thing we struggle with is trying to figure out how
this professional development differs from other professional
development that you’ve experienced in the past or also are
doing at the same time.
Teacher 1: [In this PD] no one is telling us, “This is what you
should do.”
Teacher 2: Yes, [This PD is] self-directed in many ways.
Teacher 3: Yes, it’s not like, “Here’s a book. Follow along while
I speak. Read my PowerPoint.”
(Year 3, Focus group interview, 5/14/2008)

16. Results
 Healthy pressure to maintain teachers’ focus
and effort
… it forced me to stay focused on what I wished to change …
There is something about knowing that you are going to meet
next month, and you have to kind of talk about something, so
you should do something, or you are going to have nothing to
talk about. So there is a little pressure. You work hard on that.
You have to work. You know if you were not involved [in the PD],
you might think this [strategy] would need to try, but you wouldn’t
probably, because you don’t have to. (Year 2, Kindergarten teacher,
interview, 4/25/2007)

17. Results
 Healthy pressure to maintain teachers’ focus
and effort
“The [monthly] meetings required research for our problems.
Without this, I would not take the time to research but would use
the “trial and error” method to evaluate changes. I feel I’ve
gained 10 years of experience by pooling our group (peers and
mentors) and research.” (Year 3, 4th grade teacher, survey, 5/14/2008)
I’ve always questioned my practice but this just gave me the
forced time to deal with the things that I’ve always wanted to
address and look into. (Year 3, 6th grade teacher, Focus group interview,
5/14/2008)

18. Results
 Collaborative learning community
One of the best things about this process is watching
everybody else as we went through because it made
me think about my own classroom practice every
single time. When we went to Sue's classroom and
she did science talks, it was like I couldn't wait to
wake up the next day and get to my classroom so I
could do that in my class. And watching the
assessment stuff with Leslie and I was like, “Oh, I
have to think about that the next time I do this.” I just
don't think that we do that enough as teachers.
(Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, Focus group interview, 5/16/2007)

19. Results
 Collaborative learning community
The usefulness, I think the main thing would just be
having people you are required for three hours to sit
down and talk about science with just because I don’t
get that very often here. Yes, we have staff meetings
but maybe ten minutes are spent when you are
actually talking with other science people in your
department. So just having that opportunity to
discuss “What are you doing in your classroom, what
is working for you?” I think that is huge because we
all teach science, I mean people may teach other
things but the one thing we all have in common is we
all teach science.
(Year 1, 8th
grade teacher, interview, 5/2006)

20. Collaborative learning community
 Too nice to each other
In our group, it's just everyone is positive. If anyone brings up the
negative, it is the person who is presenting, usually we brought up
with "Er, ... Not a problem!" ... We probably are too nice to each
other. You know, you don’t want to hurt any people's feelings;
(Year 2, 8th
grade teacher, interview, 4/9/2007)
 Group problems
 Grade level
 School
 Research topics

21. Results
Table 3: Teachers’ ratings on facilitators’ role (N=22)
Mean* Std.
The facilitator has helped me think more deeply
about my students and classroom practice.
4.8 0.43
I believe my group could meet effectively even
without a facilitator.
2.1 1.04
•1= strongly disagree; 2= disagree; 3= varies or uncertain how to respond; 4= agree; 5= strongly agree.
•(17 teachers rated 5 and 5 rated 4 on the first question.)
 Facilitator guidance

22. Results
 Facilitator guidance
I have been thinking about the importance of the
guidance of the facilitators. I learned about how small
groups work in our group and have been thinking
about how difficult it is even for us as adults to work
productively and cooperatively in our small group. It is
the guidance of our facilitator that has given us the success
we've had this year. We could not be effective without
them.
(Year 3, Kindergarten teacher, Survey, 5/14/2008)
Our facilitator really did a great job questioning and making me
think more deeply about question or problem. She was really
great at making me think!
(Year 3, 3rd
grade teacher, Survey, 5/14/2008)

23. Results
 Analysis of teaching videos
You have one perception of what is happening when you are
going through any experience and a different one when you
view it as a witness.
(Year 2, 6th
grade teacher, Survey, 6/2006)
What I really realized is that the videotaping of myself, watching
all of that. It lends itself not just to teaching science, but it taught
me so much about teaching in general and so that was a really
an eye opener for me to go back and look at that…
(Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, focus group interview, 5/16/2007)
It is really helpful to look at your teaching through video,
because how often do you film yourself? You have a feeling for
what’s going on but how often do you actually sit down and
watch yourself doing it?
(Year 3, Kindergarten teacher, Focus group interview, 5/14/2008)

24. Results
 Limitation of video
Not suitable for all tasks, e.g., individual
writing work.
Capture only partial classroom practice
Analyzing video is time consuming

25. Results
 Analysis of student work
Analyzing student work was the line that allowed me
to clearly reflect on my teaching effectiveness and on
guiding future instructional practices.
(Year 3, 3rd
grade teacher, Survey, 5/14/2008)
Something we all need time to do because it is so
important to understanding what our students know
and need to know. We are kind of forced to do it, and
I'm thankful for the time.
(Year 3, 5th
grade teacher, Survey, 5/14/2008)

26. Results
 Summer preparation
I don’t think you can do it without the time in
the summer, where you get to really focus on
it without any distraction in the school year.
(Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, Interview, 4/25/2007)
I just feel like I hop on a merry-go-round at the
beginning of the year and it just goes around
faster and faster and doesn’t slow down.
(Year 1, 5th
grade teacher, Interview, May, 2006)

27. Results
 Extended studying time
By being a one-year experience, I had the time and
opportunity to “see, try, research and reflect”.
(Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, written reflection, 4/10/2007)
I also like that it goes through the whole year, because you know
you go to something for one day and even though it is great, you
go back, you mean to try it but you just forget. You put it on the
shelf, and you don’t do it. But when the last year like that, we
meet each month, work on things, so it is a continuous process.
You know you stay involved with that. It is just not something
that you think is neat, but do not try. So your really have time in a
year to try stuff. And because of that, I really have tried things in
my teaching, not just talk about it, or learn about it. But with that
whole year of time, I have time to try something that I might
not try. It changed my science teaching I think for the better. I
am excited about these changes.
(Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, interview, 4/25/2007)

28. Results
 Analysis of teaching problem using PBL approach
I really enjoyed working through the PBL process with
my peers. It was a great way to talk about, discuss,
and analyze what had worked and what had not
worked. Through this analysis the group and I came
to several conclusions.
(Year 3, 3rd
grade teacher, Written reflection, 5/14/2008)
I really enjoyed the brainstorming sessions that we had before
we started each task. It allowed the group to discuss the task
and get several different perspectives of how to solve the
problem before going off and getting started on it.
(Year 1, 7th
grade teacher, Interview, May, 2006)

29. Results
 Literature searching
[The] group research of literature helped me better
understand how to get all children involved in
discussions!
(Year 3, 4th
grade teacher, Survey, 5/14/2008)
It is still hard for me to know when to step in and
correct misconceptions and when to let my students
figure things out for themselves....and though it was a
learning issue for us nearly every month we could not
find a significant amount of research on young
children and inquiry.
(Year 2, Kindergarten teacher, Written reflection, 5/2008)

30. Discussion
 Contribution: Developed a comprehensive model
that supports teacher research
 Importance of using video as evidence to
examine teaching
 Only 12% of teachers in 78 studies used video
evidence (Roth, 2007)
 Importance of self-directedness in teacher
research
 In many teacher research studies, teachers were not
self-directed. (e.g., Honan, 2007)

31. Limitation and future research
 Limitation
 Coding for frequency
 Reliance on self report data
 Lack of evidence on teacher learning and student
learning
 Future research
 Case studies of teacher research
 Impact of teacher research on teacher learning and
student learning