IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i3p21582440241276172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mind the Gap: How Teachers’ Professional Development Preferences Relate to Scientific Recommendations

Author

Listed:
  • Mareike Ehlert
  • Elmar Souvignier

Abstract

There is extensive empirical research on principles of effective teacher professional development (PD). However, teachers’ expectations of PD and how well these align with scientific recommendations are only rarely addressed. N  = 125 teachers were presented with video vignettes on two evidence-based interventions of varying complexity for which they indicated their own PD preferences. Teachers’ preferences were then compared to scientific recommendations for effective PD. In line with scientific recommendations, teachers generally preferred coherent PD with a clear content focus and collective participation. However, there were large differences between individual teachers’ preferences as well as between PD features. A striking discrepancy between research and practice was found for PD duration: Most teachers preferred one-shot workshops (six contact hours at most). Surprisingly, teachers barely differed in their PD preferences for interventions of varying complexity, indicating that teachers have clearly defined notions of PD. Regression analyses on individual and contextual factors did not yield systematic results to explain teachers’ PD preferences. In sum, teachers’ desired short duration, their lacking awareness of adjusting PD for interventions of varying complexity, and individually significant deviations from scientific recommendations for PD make it necessary to clearly communicate evidence-based standards to teachers—and policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Mareike Ehlert & Elmar Souvignier, 2024. "Mind the Gap: How Teachers’ Professional Development Preferences Relate to Scientific Recommendations," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(3), pages 21582440241, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:3:p:21582440241276172
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241276172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241276172
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241276172?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:3:p:21582440241276172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.