Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T10:20:49.366Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

24 - Expertise and Expert Performance in Teaching

from Part V.I - Domains of Expertise: Professions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2018

By
James W. Stigler  and
Kevin F. Miller
Edited by
K. Anders Ericsson ,
Robert R. Hoffman ,
Aaron Kozbelt  and
A. Mark Williams
K. Anders Ericsson
Affiliation:
Florida State University
Robert R. Hoffman
Affiliation:
Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition
Aaron Kozbelt
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
A. Mark Williams
Affiliation:
University of Utah
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance , pp. 431 - 452
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ball, D. L., Bass, H., Hill, H., Sleep, L., Phelps, G., & Thames, M. (2006). Knowing and using mathematics in teaching. Paper presented at the Learning Network Conference, Washington, DC, January.Google Scholar
Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2007). 2007 Wallace Foundation Distinguished Lecture – What makes education research “educational”? Educational Researcher, 36, 529–540.Google Scholar
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 398–407.Google Scholar
Berliner, D. C. (1986). In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15, 5–13.Google Scholar
Berliner, D. C. (1990). What’s all the fuss about instructional time? In Ben-Peretz, M. & Bromme, R. (eds.), The nature of time in schools: Theoretical concepts, practitioner perceptions (pp. 3–35). New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar
Birman, B. F., Le Floch, K. C., Klekotka, A., Ludwig, M., Taylor, J., Walters, K., … & O’Day, J. (2007). State and local implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act. Volume I, Title I: Teacher quality under NCLB: Interim report. US Department of Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED497970).Google Scholar
Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In Gernsbacher, M. A., Pew, R. W., Hough, L. M., & Pomerantz, J. R. (eds.), Psychology and the real world: Essays illustrating fundamental contributions to society (pp. 56–64). New York: Worth.Google Scholar
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–144.Google Scholar
Bond, L., Smith, T., Baker, W., & Hattie, J. A. (2000). The certification system of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards: A construct and consequential validity study. Greensboro, NC: Center for Educational Research and Evaluation, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.Google Scholar
Bransford, J. D., Goldman, S. R., & Vye, N. J. (1991). Making a difference in people’s ability to think: Reflections on a decade of work and some hopes for the future. In Sternberg, R. J. & Okagaki, L. (eds.), Influences on children (pp. 147–80). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. T. (1979). Assessing the impact of planned social change. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2, 67–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavalluzzo, L. C. (2004). Is National Board certification an effective signal of teacher quality? Alexandria, VA: CNA Corporation Working Paper.Google Scholar
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement: Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26, 673–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D. (2011). Teaching and its predicaments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, D., & Hill, H. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. The Teachers College Record, 102, 294–343.Google Scholar
Correa, C. A., Perry, M., Sims, L., Miller, K. F., & Fang, G. (2008). Connected and culturally embedded beliefs: Chinese and U.S. teachers talk about how their students best learn mathematics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 140–153.Google Scholar
Cortina, K. S., Miller, K. F., McKenzie, R., & Epstein, A. (2015). Where low and high inference data converge: Validation of CLASS assessment of mathematics instruction using mobile eye tracking with teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 389–403.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1997). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cuban, L. (1990). Reforming again, again, and again. Educational Researcher, 19, 3–13.Google Scholar
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council.Google Scholar
de Groot, A. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
de Groot, A. D. (1966). Perception and memory versus thought: Some old ideas and recent findings. In Kleinmuntz, B. (ed.), Problem solving. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
D’Mello, S., Lehman, B., Pekrun, R., & Graesser, A. (2014). Confusion can be beneficial for learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 153–170.Google Scholar
Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37, 32–64.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Hoffman, R. R., & Feltovich, P. J. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 685–706). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. A. (2008). Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: A general overview. Academic Emergency Medicine: Official Journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 15, 988–994.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.Google Scholar
Fadde, P. J., & Klein, G. A. (2010). Deliberate performance: Accelerating expertise in natural settings. Performance Improvement, 49, 5–14.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94–118.Google Scholar
Feldon, D. F. (2007). The implications of research on expertise for curriculum and pedagogy. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 91–110.Google Scholar
Fisher, C. W., Berliner, D. C., Fully, N. N., Marliave, R. S., Cahen, L. S., & Dishaw, M. M. (1980). Teaching behaviors, academic learning time and student achievement: An overview. In Denham, C. & Lieberman, A. (eds.), Time to learn (pp. 7–32). Washington, DC: US Department. of Education, National Institute of Education, Program on Teaching and Learning.Google Scholar
Gabor, A. (1990). The man who discovered quality: How W. Edwards Deming brought the quality revolution to America. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Gallimore, R. (1996). Classrooms are just another cultural activity. In Speece, D. & Keogh, B. (eds.), Research on classroom ecologies: Implications for children with learning disability (pp. 229–250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gallimore, R., & Tharp, R. (2004). What a coach can teach a teacher, 1975–2004: Reflections and reanalysis of John Wooden’s teaching practices. The Sport Psychologist, 18, 119–137.Google Scholar
Gawande, A. (2007). Better: A surgeon’s notes on performance. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
Goldhaber, D., & Anthony, E. (2007). Can teacher quality be effectively assessed? National board certification as a signal of effective teaching. Review of Economics and Statistics, 89, 134–150.Google Scholar
Hanushek, E. A. (2003). The failure of input-based schooling policies. Economic Journal, 113, F64–F98.Google Scholar
Harris, D. N., & Sass, T. R. (2009). The effects of NBPTS‐certified teachers on student achievement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28, 55–80.Google Scholar
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In Stevenson, H., Azuma, H., & Hakuta, K. (eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262–272). New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Hill, H. C., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Learning mathematics for teaching: Results from California’s mathematics professional development institutes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 330–351.Google Scholar
Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 371–406.Google Scholar
Hoetker, J., & Ahlbrand, W. P. Jr (1969). The persistence of the recitation. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 145–167.Google Scholar
Hoffman, R. R. (1998). How can expertise be defined? Implications of research from cognitive psychology. In Williams, R., Faulkner, W., & Fleck, J. (eds.), Exploring expertise (pp. 81–100). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hogan, T., & Rabinowitz, M. (2009). Teacher expertise and the development of a problem representation. Educational Psychology, 29, 153–169.Google Scholar
Ingersoll, R. M., & May, H. (2012). The magnitude, destinations, and determinants of mathematics and science teacher turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34, 435–464.Google Scholar
Jackson, C. K. (2012). Recruiting, retaining, and creating quality teachers. Nordic Economic Policy Review, 1, 61–105.Google Scholar
Jackson, C. K., Rockoff, J. E., & Staiger, D. O. (2014). Teacher effects and teacher-related policies. Annual Review of Economics, 6, 801–825.Google Scholar
Kane, T. J., McCaffrey, D. F., Miller, T., & Staiger, D. O. (2013). Have we identified effective teachers? Validating measures of effective teaching using random assignment. Seattle, WA: MET Project of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.Google Scholar
Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2012). Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. Seattle, WA: MET Project of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.Google Scholar
Kellman, P. J., & Garrigan, P. (2009). Perceptual learning and human expertise. Physics of Life Reviews, 6, 53–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kenney, C. (2008). The best practice: How the new quality movement is transforming medicine. New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Sotelo, F. L., & Stigler, J. W. (2010). Teachers’ analyses of classroom video predict student learning of mathematics: Further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 172–181.Google Scholar
Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Thompson, B. J., Santagata, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers’ analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 568–589.Google Scholar
Kersting, N. B., Sherin, B. L., & Stigler, J. W. (2014). Automated scoring of teachers’ open-ended responses to video prompts bringing the classroom-video-analysis assessment to scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 74, 950–974.Google Scholar
Kersting, N. B., Sutton, T., Kalinec-Craig, C., Stoehr, K. J., Heshmati, S., Lozano, G., & Stigler, J. W. (2016). Further exploration of the classroom video analysis (CVA) instrument as a measure of usable knowledge for teaching mathematics: Taking a knowledge system perspective. ZDM, 48, 97–109.Google Scholar
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75–86.Google Scholar
Lampert, M. (2003). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lampert, M., Franke, M. L., Kazemi, E., Ghousseini, H., Turrou, A. C., Beasley, H., … & Crowe, K. (2013). Keeping it complex using rehearsals to support novice teacher learning of ambitious teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 226–243.Google Scholar
Langley, G. J., Moen, R., Nolan, K. M., Nolan, T. W., Norman, C. L., & Provost, L. P. (2009). The improvement guide: A practical approach to enhancing organizational performance (2nd edn.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Hurd, J. (2004). A deeper look at lesson study. Educational Leadership, 61, 19–22.Google Scholar
Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35, 3–14.Google Scholar
Lewis, C., & Tsuchida, I. (1998). A lesson is like a swiftly flowing river. American Educator, 22, 12–17.Google Scholar
Lipsey, M. W. (1993). Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. New Directions for Evaluation, 57, 5–38.Google Scholar
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Miller, K. F. (2011). Learning from the experience of others: What education can learn from video-based research in other fields. In Sherin, M., Jacobs, V., & Phillip, R. (eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 51–65). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Morris, A. K., & Hiebert, J. (2011). Creating shared instructional products: An alternative approach to improving teaching. Educational Researcher, 40, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, F., & Dyerson, R. (1999). Expert humans or expert organizations? Organization Studies, 20, 225–256.Google Scholar
Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. V. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 237–257.Google Scholar
Resnick, D., & Resnick, L. (1977). The nature of literacy: An historical exploration. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 370–385.Google Scholar
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73, 417–458.Google Scholar
Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94, 247–252.Google Scholar
Roth, K. J., Garnier, H. E., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., & Wickler, N. I. (2011). Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 117–148.Google Scholar
Rother, M. (2009). Toyota Kata: Managing people for improvement, adaptiveness and superior results. Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Sabers, D. S., Cushing, K. S., & Berliner, D. C. (1991). Differences among teachers in a task characterized by simultaneity, multidimensional, and immediacy. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 63–88.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. M., Goldenberg, C. N., & Gallimore, R. (2009). Increasing achievement by focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of Title I schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 1006–1033.Google Scholar
Schwartz, D. L., Chase, C. C., Oppezzo, M. A., & Chin, D. B. (2011). Practicing versus inventing with contrasting cases: The effects of telling first on learning and transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 759–775.Google Scholar
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–23.Google Scholar
Simon, N. S., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high-poverty schools: What we know and can do. Teachers College Record 117, 1–36.Google Scholar
Skemp, R. R. (1987). The psychology of learning mathematics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (2004). Improving mathematics teaching. Educational Leadership, 61, 12–17.Google Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. (1906). Principles of learning. New York: A. G. Seiler.Google Scholar
UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2015). A Teacher for Every Child: Projecting Global Teacher Needs from 2015 to 2030. October, Number 27, page 1. Montreal: UNESCO. Institute for Statistics. http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/fs27-a-teacher-for-every-child-projecting-global-teacher-needs-from-2015-to-2030-en.pdf.Google Scholar
US Department of Education (2016). Digest of Education Statistics, 2014 (NCES 2016–006).Google Scholar
Wang, Z., Miller, K. F., & Cortina, K. S. (2013). Using the LENA in teacher training: Promoting student involvement through automated feedback. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 4, 290–305.Google Scholar
Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Williams, B. A. (1998). Thought and action: John Dewey at the University of Michigan. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Bentley Historical Library Bulletin #44.Google Scholar
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W. Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Issues and Answers. REL 2007-No. 033. Austin, TX: Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×