ITL Research Executive Summary

8/2/2019 ITL Research Executive Summary

1/16

Innovative Teachingand Learning ResearchExecutive SummaryOctober 2010


2/16

Project Sponsor:James Bernard, Director,

Partners in Learning

Program Director:

Maria Langworthy,

Langworthy Research

CONTRIBUTING

RESEARCH PARTNERS:

Agora Center, University

of Jyvskyl, Finland

Centre for Strategic and

International Studies,

Indonesia

Institute of NewTechnologies, Russia

Association of Teachers and

Researchers of ICT in Education

and Training, Senegal

SRI RESEARCH TEAM:

Barbara Means

Kea Anderson

Gucci Estrella

Larry Gallagher

Amy Hafter

Corinne Singleton

Yukie Toyama

ITL Research: Executive Summary of Pilot Year FindingsLinda Shear, Gabriel Novais, and Savitha Moorthy, SRI International


3/16

1

In a classroom in Russiastudents are conducting a 2-month investigation intoclimate factors such as temperature and humidity in theirclassroom, and devising plans to use live plants to improvethe air quality in their school.

While specific goals for change vary, common themes

include developing problem-solving and teamwork skills,

and using technology to support more powerful learning.

Although there are inspiring examples of innovative teaching

promoting this kind of learning1, research continues to show

that in most places classroom practice lags behind goals (e.g.,

OECD, 2009; Law, Pelgrum, & Plomp, 2010). The sources of

this gap between the rhetoric of change and the realities ofclassrooms range from lack of access to resources and training

to lack of clear expectations in systems that are still organized

and incented toward traditional measures of achievement.

Most students still experience instruction that is largely

lecture-based, and extensive national education investments

in technology have not yet resulted in widespread

transformation of learning opportunities.

In a growing number of countries, the Innovative Teaching

and Learning (ITL) Research program is fueling inquiry and

discussion among policymakers, educators, and researchers

about the distance between teaching and learning visions and

practiceand what to do about it. ITL Research, sponsored

by Microsofts Partners in Learning, investigates innovative

teaching practices, the conditions that enable teachers

to teach in new ways, and the resulting connection with

students 21st century skills. As the program progresses,

these methods will be adapted into tools and processes that

educators can use to examine, discuss, and ultimately improvethe educational opportunities they provide to students.

This report summarizes results from the pilot year of

ITL Research (2009-10), with data from four participating

countries: Finland, Indonesia, Russia, and Senegal. The goal of

a program pilot is to test and tune instruments and methods,

so thefindings reported here should be considered preliminary

and in need ofconfirmation through further research in

subsequent years of this program. However, these results do

raise issues and suggest important considerations regarding the

conditions that support innovative teaching and learning.

Around the world, thereis growing consensusamong education leaders,researchers and educatorsthat teaching and learning must change to help students developthe skills they will need to succeed in the 21st century (Ananiadou &

Claro, 2009; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2004; Scheuermann

and Pedr, 2009).

1 See for example http://www.microsoft.com/education/pil/IT_home.aspx


4/16

ITL Research seeks to build an understanding of the conditions that support innovative teaching practice supported by

effective use of ICT.2 The research design looks across the complex ecosystem of influences that shape teaching and learning

within national, school, and classroom contexts. While the conceptual framework below does not claim to be comprehensive,

it does emphasize a range of factors that extensive prior research has shown to be linked to teaching practices and deepstudent learning.3 Methods and measures in ITL Research build on and are guided by these and many other leading studies

and frameworks, and are described in greater detail in Shear, Means, Gallagher, House, & Langworthy (2009).

In this model, innovative teaching practices encompass both pedagogy and technology. While ICT is an important focus

of this research, its use is not seen as an end in itself. Rather, appropriate use of ICT is considered an important enabler of a

student-centered learning environment that helps students build both deep subject matter knowledge and skills such as

collaboration, communication, problem-solving, and self-regulation that they will need to succeed in the 21st century. See

Shear et al., 2009 for more detailed definitions of the constructs central to ITL Research (available at www.itlresearch.com).

About ITL Research

ITL Research uses a distributed design to carry out research

that is at once global and local in scope. SRI International

is the global research organization responsible for design,

coordination, and results synthesis, ensuring that overall

design parameters and instruments are developed centrally

and implemented consistently across countries. A research

partner in each country manages local design, data collection,

analysis and the sharing offindings with local and regional

stakeholders. ITL Research is grounded in partnerships with

government and key organizations that influence education

policy in each country, including theirfinancial sponsorship of

the research in many countries. Finally, ITL Research is guidedby an advisory board of international experts (see http://www.

itlresearch.com/ for a full list of all partners).

OUTCOMESCONTEXT & INPUTS PRACTICES

National School & Teacher

Program

Supports EducatorAttitudes

School Culture

and Supports

Students 21st

Century Skills

Education

PolicyICT Access and

Supports

Classroom Student

Innovative

Teaching

Practices

ITL RESEARCH MODEL

Student-Centered

Pedagogy

Extending

learning beyond

the classroom

ICT used for

teaching and

learning

2 In this research, ICT

(Information and Com-

munication Technologies) is

defined broadly to include

not only computers and

the Internet but also smart

phones, electronic white-

boards, and other hardware

and software tools.

3 See for example Law,

Pelgrum, & Plomp, 2010;

Bransford, Brown, &

Cocking, 1999; Darling-

Hammond et al., 2008.

2

rogram

SupportsProfessional

Development


5/16

ITL Research is a mixed-methods study that uses several distinct lenses into classroom practice, all based on a common

framework. The major constructs that define innovative teaching on this projectstudent-centered pedagogies, extension

of learning beyond the classroom, and ICT integration into teaching and learningare translated into measurable indicators

for data collection via survey instruments, classroom observation protocols, and rubrics to characterize teaching and learning.

Although these data sources differ in focus, each allows us to construct a comparable, aggregate measure for innovative

teaching practices.

Teacher and school leader surveysprovide self-reported data across a

wide range of participants. In the pilot

year, we surveyed approximately 600

teachers and their school leaders in each

country, representing a total sample of

2406 teachers and 82 school leaders.

Teachers responded to questions about

their teaching practices, the resources

that were available to them, and their

professional development experiences. By

combining their responses to questions

on the frequency with which they engage

in a variety of teaching practices, we get

a measure of what teachers say that they

and their students do over the course of a

school year. In the results that follow, this

measure is reported as the innovative

teaching practices index.

A more specific and objective lenson classroom practice comes from the analysis oflearning activities and student work,

as illustrated in the following sample [page 4] from a classroom in Russia. Samples of learning activities and student work were

collected from 48 teachers per country. Learning activities are the assignments that teachers ask students to complete, and

can include work done in or out of class, activities that last one class period or two months, basic worksheets or complicated

projects. Researchers also collected samples of the work that students did in response to these learning activities, which

include essays, worksheets, presentations, or other student products. By recruiting and training experienced educators to code

samples of learning activities and student work on common rubrics that describe specific dimensions of 21st century skills,

we get a measure of the extent to which students have the opportunity to acquire these skills and the extent to which they are

demonstrating those skills in the work they do. The definitions and rubrics that operationalize the concepts of 21st century

teaching and learning were developed by SRI, building on prior research (Bryk, Nagaoka, & Newmann, 2000; Matsumura &

Pascal, 2003; Mitchell, Shkolnik, Song, Uekawa, Murphy, Garet, & Means, 2005; Shear, Means, Gorges, Toyama, Gallagher, Estrella,

& Lundh, 2009).

How do we measure innovative teaching?

ITL RESEARCH SAMPLE

Survey Schools 91 schools

Teacher survey 2,406 teacher surveys

School leader survey 82 respondents

Site Visit/Artifact

Collection Schools24 schools

Teacher interviews

Teacher observations

96 interviewees

96 classroom observedSchool leader

interviews24 interviewees

Learning activities 650 samples

Student work 3,647 samples

METHOD ACTUAL 4-COUNTRY SAMPLE

3


6/16

4

A third measure of teaching practice comes from

classroom observations, which were conducted by

researchers during an on-site visit with a subset of the

teachers who submitted examples of learning activities and

student work. This data source, along with accompanying

interviews, provides a more thorough understanding of

teaching and learning in selected settings within each country.

In 2010-11, case studies of selected schools will deepen this

local perspective.

All ITL Research tools are available to the public at http://

www.itlresearch.com. These tools are updated annually for

the three-year duration of this project. The project team is

in the process of adapting these methods to support use by

educators as well as researchers, with the goal of offering

tools and processes that educators can use to analyze and

discuss classroom practice as well as to plan learning activities

that offer improved opportunities for students to build 21st

century skills.

LEARNING ACTIVITY & STUDENT WORK SAMPLES

CODING A LEARNING ACTIVITY FOR

EVIDENCE OF COLLABORATION:

LEARNING ACTIVITYAND STUDENTWORK

CODING DIMENSIONS:

EXAMPLE LEARNING ACTIVITYAND STUDENTWORKRESPONSE FROM RUSSIA:

Student B, Age 14

Learning Activity Dimensions Student Work Dimensions

Knowledge building Knowledge building

ICT integration into teaching and learning ICT integration into teaching and learning

Self regulation and assessment

RK

Problem-solving and innovation

Collaboration

Problem-solving and innovation

Skilled communication

Remember what we have learned about writing an essay.

Ask your relatives to tell you about the beginning of the war. Where were they during

the War? How did they learn about its end? Transcribe the interview

on a computer.

Use the internet to gather materials about the places your relatives lived during the

War, inclusing photos of that period.

Write an essay for the school newspaper devoted to World War II.

1)

2)

3)

4)

Essay: Why should we remember World War II?


7/16

5

In a classroom in Senegal students are able tosee dynamic visualizations of cell division becausetheir teacher, whose classroom is not equipped withtechnology, has brought in his own laptop computerso that he can enrich his teaching.

Preliminaryfindings: Innovative teachingand student learning of 21C skills4

The quality of a teachers assignment strongly

predicts the quality of the work that a student does

in response.

Over 90% of the variance in student work scores on

21st century skills was due not to differences in the

students but differences in the tasks they were asked

to do.

The data suggest a ceiling effect imposed by

teacher assignments: while it is possible for students

to build and exhibit a greater level of 21st century

skills than their learning activities call for, they rarely

do so.

While innovative teaching practice was typically

a goal at these schools, learning activity analysis

suggests that most actual classroom instruction

does not yet reflect these goals.

This section reports preliminary findings from analysis of surveys,learning activities and student work, interviews and classroomobservations. It is important to recognize that these findings onlyshow associations between measures; they do not demonstrate thata given variable causes an outcome, and may not capture importantexplanatory factors.

Preliminary findingsfrom the pilot year

4Findings in this section are based on analysis of learning activities and student work.


8/16

6

The quality of a teachers assignment strongly predictsthe quality of the work that a student does in response.

On dimensions captured by both learning activities and student work, over two-thirds of student work products received the

same score as their corresponding learning activity.5 Across all dimensions, mean scores for a given learning activity strongly

predicted aggregate scores for associated student work. The results corroborate otherfindings (see for example, Bryk, Nagaoka,

& Newmann, 2000; Mitchell et al., 2005) that highlight the importance of giving students challenging learning activities if we

want them to do high-level work.

Over 90% of the variance in student work scores on 21st century skillswas due not to differences in the students but differencesin the tasks they were asked to do.More often than not (55%), the six different student work products rated for a given learning activity all received identical

scores on every dimension of 21st century skills. For any given dimension, over 70% of student work sets had no variation in

scores among students.

The data suggest a ceiling effect imposed by teacher assignments:while it is possible for students to build and exhibit a greater levelof 21st century skills than their learning activities call for,they rarely do so.Very few pieces of student work scored higher than their associated learning activity on any given dimension. These data

further suggest the importance of setting the bar high when designing learning activities to elicit 21st skill development from

students.

While innovative teaching practice was typically a goal at these schools,learning activity analysis suggests that most actual classroom instructiondoes not yet reflect these goals.Overall, on every dimension, over half of all assignments received the lowest possible score. On average, scores were slightly

higher on learning activities for younger students, which may reflect the fact that teachers of older students may be more

focused on preparing students with factual knowledge for exams.

LEARNING ACTIVITY SCORES

AND STUDENT WORK SCORES

5In reality, the rubrics for learning activities and student work are not exactly parallel, but a 2 on knowledge building for learning activities

generally represents the same degree of complexity as a 2 on knowledge building for student work.


9/16

7

Preliminary findings: Drivers of innovative teaching6

In this research, variables that associated

significantly with teacher-reported innovative

teaching practices include:

> Teacher participation in high-touch, ongoing

types of professional development, such as

research and networks of educators

> Teacher collaboration and peer support

> Incentives and recognition for new teaching

practices, as reported by school leaders

> Subject matter taught

Professional development courses which

emphasize ICT integration into instruction

associate more strongly with teacher-reported

ICT use than those which emphasize technical

skills.

By contrast, teachers report that the majority of

the professional development they are offered

focuses on ICT skills rather than ICT integration.

While research suggests that teacher beliefs

are an important driver of teaching practices,

surveyed teachers often reported both

constructivist beliefs and beliefs about the

value of direct transmission.

In this study, teachers who participated in professional development had higher scores

on the innovative teaching practices index than those who did not.

More specifically, professional development activities with the strongest relationships to innovative teaching

practices included individual or collaborative research and participation in a teacher network for professional

development. Classes/workshops and informal dialogue showed weaker relationships to innovative teaching

practices overall.

0.59

0.50

0.43

0.42 0.39 0.39

0.30

0.26

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Research Teachernetwork for

PD

Formalmentoring

Qualificationprogram

Conference,seminar

Classroomobservations

Informaldialogue

Class orworkshop

Meandifference,

innovativeteaching

practices*

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES & INNOVATIVE TEACHING PRACTICES

6Findings in this section are based on analysis of teacher and school leader surveys.


10/16

8

When I meet with

other colleagues,

we exchangeexperiences. For

exampleif my

teaching method for

a certain teaching

material is not

appropriate, I might

use my colleagues

ways. Teacher in

Indonesia

I have autonomy

but try to seek

advice from more

experienced

teachers. Teacher in Russia

My school

welcomes our

creative thinking

and helps me teach

as I feel best for my

students. Teacher in Russia

Peers can be an important source of support for teachers. Teachers

who reported collaborating frequently with other teachers also

reported more innovative teaching practices, on average.For example,

55% of teachers who scored in the upper third on the innovative teaching

practices index discussed student work with other teachers at least once

a week. By contrast, only 24% of teachers in the lower third on innovative

teaching practices did so. In interviews, teachers commonly credited their

colleagues with offering new ideas, teaching advice, and technological

support, inspiring newfound energy from collaboration among peers.

In schools where school leaders report making efforts to incentivize

innovative teaching, teachers scored higher on the innovative teaching

practices index than those in schools with less supportive leadership.

Among the school-level practices reported on by school leaders, theincentives and recognition scale associated most significantly and most

consistently across countries with teacher-reported innovative teaching

practices.

INCENTIVES AND RECOGNITION FOR

INNOVATIVE TEACHING


11/16

ICT-FOCUSED PROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENT AND ICT USE

Teachers of reading, writing, and social studies classes typically scored higher than teachers of other subjects on

measures of innovative teaching. Math teachers had the lowest scores, echoing previous research (e.g., OECD, 2009; AIR/

SRI, 2006). Subject matter differences are likely due, at least in part, to varying levels of curriculum rigidity across subjects.

Professional development courses that emphasize ICT integration into instruction associate more strongly with

teacher-reported ICT use than those that emphasize technical skills.On average, teachers who received training

focused on ICT integration scored significantly above the mean on ICT use, while teachers who received ICT skills trainingscored only slightly above the mean. 7

By contrast, teachers report that the majority of the professional development they are offered focuses on ICT

skills rather than ICT integration. In all four countries, more surveyed teachers reported receiving mainly technically-

focused ICT training as opposed to training on ICT integration. Interviewed teachers also reported that ICT-related

professional development is overly focused on technical skills.

While research suggests that

teacher beliefs are an importantdriver of teaching practices,

surveyed teachers often reported

both constructivist beliefs and

beliefs about the value of direct

transmission. In 3 of 4 countries,

teachers constructivist beliefs coexist

with direct transmission beliefs. In these

countries, over 85% of teachers agreed

that instruction should be built around

problems with clear, correct answers.

But over 80% also agreed with the

seemingly contradictory statement that

thinking and reasoning processes are

more important than specific curriculum

content. Differences in national culture,

pedagogical traditions, and student

examination systems might lie behind

differences in patterns across countries.

These findings are consistent with

OECDs TALIS study (OECD, 2009).

The best way for me to serve my students is to coverthe curriculum by the end of the school year so thatno student or parent could accuse me of not tackling achapter or topic that has been chosen to be tested in oneof the national exams. Teacher in Senegal

7 Analysis methods adjusted for the fact that many teachers participated in both forms of professional development.

9


12/16

With the use of the

Internet, I can see

that the students arenow even smarter

than their teacher.

The information they

got was very rich.

Teacher in Indonesia

[When they began

using ICT] teachers

became aware that

memorizing and

recalling information

are losing their

previous value

because information

is easily accessible

through ICT.

Therefore, it is nowmore useful not

just to memorize

facts, but to work

on development of

such skills as analysis,

systematization,

storing, and

applying of this veryinformation.

Education leader in

Russia

Both teacher and student ICT use are significantly associated with other

innovative teaching practices (student centered pedagogy and extending

learning beyond the classroom).

In classroom observations, higher-level uses of ICT (i.e., uses that represent

stronger integration with deep teaching and learning) associate more

strongly with innovative teaching than do more basic uses of ICT.

In observed classes and among surveyed teachers, basic uses of ICT remain

the most frequent.

ICT access in the classroom is a stronger predictor of teachers ICT use than is

ICT access elsewhere in the school.

Access to ICT is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for ICT use.

The most common teacher-reported barriers to ICT use are lack of computers

for student and teacher use, and lack of technical and pedagogical support.

Both teacher and student ICT use are significantly associated with other

innovative teaching practices. ICT integration into teaching and learning

correlates significantly with student-centered pedagogies and extension of learning

beyond the classroomthe studys other elements of innovative teaching. Over the

course of a year, high-level and low-level ICT use tended to co-occur.

In classroom observations, higher-level uses of ICT (i.e., uses that

represent stronger integration with deep teaching and learning)

associate more strongly with innovative teaching than do more basic

uses of ICT. Classrooms featuring at least some higher-level student ICT

use scored higher on innovative teaching practices, on average, than either

classrooms featuring no student ICT use or classrooms featuring basic use only.

This result echoes findings from other research (e.g., Shear et al., 2009).

BASIC AND HIGH-LEVEL ICT USE

Preliminary findings: ICT Use8

8 Findings in this section are based on teacher surveys and classroom observations.

10

EXAMPLES OF BASIC STUDENT ICT USE EXAMPLES OF HIGH-LEVEL STUDENT ICT


13/16

ICT ACCESS AND USE

In observed classes and among surveyed teachers, basic uses of ICT remain the most frequent. Students used ICT

in primarily basic ways in nearly three-fourths (72%) of classes observed across countries. Likewise, over the course of a year,

teachers most commonly use ICT primarily for planning and administrative functions, rather than for pedagogical purposes.

While basic uses of ICT occur with different frequencies across country samples, higher-level uses are almost equally

infrequent in all samples.

ICT access in the classroom is a stronger predictor of teachers ICT use than is ICT access elsewhere in the school.

The data suggest that having ICT in the school building is not sufficient to promote its use to support teaching and learning.

39% of teachers with above-average ICT integration scores had desktop computers in their classrooms, compared to only

20% of teachers with below-average integration scores. Both groups of teachers, however, had high levels of school ICT

access74% of above average teachers and 73% of below average teachers reported access to computers elsewhere in

the school. Easy access to computers within the classroom, rather than the disruption of scheduling and moving to a shared

computer lab, reduces barriers to ICT integration in teaching and learning.

Access to ICT is a

necessary, but not

sufficient, condition

for ICT use.While on

average, teachers with

more access to ICT also

had higher levels of

ICT integration, there

were many examples

of teachers who had

classroom ICT access to

computers but did not

use it actively in theirteaching. In other words,

teachers with the same

or similar levels of ICT

access used ICT in their

teaching to varying

degrees.

The most common teacher-reported barriers to ICT use are lack of computers for student and teacher use, and

lack of technical and pedagogical support. Although teachers report similar barriers in all countries, the magnitude

varies depending on the availability of resources and histories of ICT use in individual countries. In some countries, barriers

related to security and hardware reliability are critical factors.

The amount of devices is not a problem. The problemof using them. School leader in Finland

Although we have a well-equipped computer room, wecan hardly use it because of too frequent power outages.

Teacher in Senegal

11

is the quality


14/16

While most countries have clear goals to prepare students

for the 21st century, specific definitions and guidance to

educators are often lacking.9 The definitions, examples

and tools offered by ITL Research can help educators on a

productive path to change.

The characteristics of students learning environments

and the activities they are asked to do in the classroomstrongly predict the work they will do in response. Reform

efforts should consider carefully how they are encouraging

and supporting teachers to teach in new ways, and in

particular to choose student learning activities that

provide opportunities to develop and exercise 21st

century skills.

Use of ICT by teachers and students is significantly

associated with innovative teaching practices more

generally. This association is stronger when ICT is used

in higher-level ways that promote deeper student

engagement with content. More commonly among

teachers in the ITL Research sample, ICT is used in more

basic ways, to access content (for students) and as a

presentation tool (for teachers and students). In some

countries, these uses may represent important steps

toward innovation. Nevertheless, models and tools for

using ICT in ways that powerfully promote deep student

learning can help prepare teachers for taking the next step.

This report has summarized the main results from the 2009-10 pilotyear of ITL Research. Because this was a pilot year, it is important

to consider these results suggestive rather than final. However, anumber of reflections are appropriate:

Reflections and Implications

9This finding echoes survey results reported in Ananiadou and Claro, 2009.

12

Access to ICT is necessary but not sufficient to enable its

use. School administrators and policymakers should be

aware that ICT access within classrooms associates more

strongly with integration into instruction than does accessin computer labs or other shared spaces. However, drivers of

ICT use are more strongly associated with individual teachers

than with the environment: some teachers in low-access

environments find creative ways to gain access to tools,

while ICT in some high-access classrooms goes unused.

In ITL Research, types of professional development that

associate most strongly with teacher-reported innovative

teaching practices include professional development related

to pedagogy and ICT integration rather than ICT skills, and

professional development that is deeper and more ongoingthan a single workshop or training (for example, teacher

engagement in research on teaching and learning or teacher

engagement in collaborative networks with other teachers

in their school). Policymakers should be cautious about

drawing causal implications from these results; it could be

that teachers who already think more innovatively about

their practices are more likely to engage in these forms of

professional development. However, it should be noted that

more common forms of professional development, such as

single workshops, have a weaker association with innovative

teaching practices, and teachers regard ongoing interactions

and follow-up as essential (and often lacking) supports for

helping them integrate ideas into practice.

Among schools visited in the pilot year of ITL Research in

all participating countries, researchers found examples of

teachers that are experimenting with at least some elements

of innovative teaching practice, including more student-

centered approaches to instruction, the use of ICT to support

student learning, or a combination. Much less common were

teachers who benefited from a coherent set of supports

at the school and national levels, including clearly-defined

goals for innovative teaching and learning, effective and

ongoing professional development experiences that gobeyond ICT skills to integration and pedagogy, and a policy

context in which teacher incentives and accountability

systems are aligned with goals for innovative instruction. For

investments in ICT and other tools for 21st century learning

to bear fruit, education leaders and policymakers must be

attentive to the integrity of the ecosystem within which

educators operate, and offer programs and incentives at

multiple levels to provide a fertile environment for change.


15/16

AIR/SRI. (2006). Evaluation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundations High School Grants Initiative: 2001-2005final

report. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research.

Ananiadou, K. & Claro, M. (2009). 21st Century Skills and competences for New Millennium learners in OECD

countries. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. EDUWorking paper no. 41. Retrieved from

http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2009doc.nsf/linkto/edu-wkp(2009)20

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, and Experience.

Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Bryk, A. S., Nagaoka, J.K., & Newmann, F. M. (2000). Chicago classroom demands for authentic intellectual work:

Trends from 19971999. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.

Darling-Hammond, L., Barron, B., Pearson, P. D., Schoenfeld, A., Stage, E, Zimmerman, T, Cervetti, G, & Tilson, J.

(2008). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Law, N., Pellgrum, W., & Plomp, T. (2010). Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the world: Findings from the

IEA SITES 2006 study. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre.

Matsumura, L. C., & Pascal, J. (2003). Teachers assignments and student work: Opening a window on classroom

practice. Los Angeles: CRESST/University of California.

Mitchell, K., Shkolnik, J., Song, M., Uekawa, K., Murphy, R., Garet, M., & Means, B. (2005). Rigor, relevance, and

results: The quality of teacher assignments and student work in new and conventional high schools. Washington,

DC: American Institutes for Research and SRI International. OECD (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Paris: OECD.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2004). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved July 15, 2009 from

http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/.

Scheuermann, F. and Pedr, F., Editors. (2009). Assessing the effects of ICT in Education: Indicators, criteria and

benchmarks for international comparisons. JRC/European Commission and OECD.

Shear, L., Means, B., Gorges, T., Toyama, Y., Gallagher, L., Estrella, G., & Lundh, P. (2009). The Microsoft Innovative

Schools Program Year 1 evaluation report. Seattle: Microsoft.

Shear, L., Means. B., Gallagher, L., House, A., & Langworthy, M. (2009). ITL Research Design. Menlo Park, CA: SRI.

References

13

ITL Research is a multi-year program that is continuing to grow beyondthe pilot year. Four additional countries have joined the research for

the following two years, with participation sponsored by local policypartners.10 As the program proceeds, it will focus progressively on usingthe research tools and results from analysis to create hands-on supportsand tools for schools. It is the programs aim that these tools will enableeducators in partner schools to better envision, investigate, and improveinnovative learning opportunities for students. ITL Research is alsooffering research instruments, methods and data to the public domain,and convening researchers around the world who seek to improve thestudy of 21st century teaching and learning.

Next Steps

10New countries joining ITL Research in the 2010-11 school year are: Mexico, sponsored by the National Ministry of Education; England, sponsored by the Specialist Schools and

Academies Trust; United States, sponsored by the Stupski Foundation and the Council of Chief State School Offi cers (Next Generation Learning Project); and Australia, sponsored by

New South Wales Department of Education & Training.

We invite you tojoin this expandingcircle of researchand practice ininnovative teach-ing and learning.To learn more,please visitwww.itlresearch.com


16/16

Visit

www.microsoft.com/education/partnersinlearning

for more research and information

Documents

ITL Research Executive Summary