ANZCTR - Registration

The ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers

Trial registered on ANZCTR

Registration number

ACTRN12619000412134

Ethics application status

Approved

Date submitted

20/02/2019

Date registered

13/03/2019

Date last updated

26/02/2020

Date data sharing statement initially provided

13/03/2019

Type of registration

Retrospectively registered

Titles & IDs

Public title

Building Capacity for Quality Teaching in Australian Schools - The effects of the Quality Teaching Rounds professional development intervention on student literacy, numeracy and science outcomes.

Scientific title

Building Capacity for Quality Teaching in Australian Schools: A Randomised Controlled Trial assessing the effects of the Quality Teaching Rounds professional development intervention on student literacy, numeracy and science.

Secondary ID [1]

Nil known

Universal Trial Number (UTN)

Trial acronym

Linked study record

Health condition

Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:

Educational outcomes (literacy, numeracy and science ability)

Condition category

Condition code

Other

Research that is not of generic health relevance and not applicable to specific health categories listed above

Intervention/exposure

Study type

Interventional

Description of intervention(s) / exposure

Quality Teaching Rounds is a professional development process in which a form of instructional "rounds" (Elmore, 2007) are undertaken by a group of teachers in a professional learning community (PLC) (Lave & Wenger, 1991), with analysis and discussion guided by a pedagogical model, the Quality Teaching model (NSW Department of Education and Training [NSW DET], 2003). Groups of four (or more) teachers working in a PLC (not necessarily from the same school) undertake a set of rounds together over a period of 3-6 months. The teachers within the PLC are responsible for administering the rounds.

A "round" is comprised of sequential sessions that occur on a single day, involving:
1. Reading discussion: Designed to support the group in developing a shared theoretical basis for professional conversations and build a sense of professional community (typically one hour);
2. Observation: One PLC member teaches a lesson that is observed by all other members of the PLC (a full lesson length, typically 30-80 minutes); and
3. Coding and discussion: Individual coding of the observed lesson, including coding by the observed teacher, using the Quality Teaching framework (NSW DET, 2003), is followed by discussion whereby all PLC members contribute (typically one to two hours).

Lessons are coded using the Quality Teaching framework (NSW DET, 2003), which is made up of 18 elements of teaching practice (see below), within three dimensions of teaching and learning. Each element has a set of 5 descriptors, with elements coded from 1 to 5 depending on the agreement of the lesson with the element descriptor. The elements form the topics of professional discussion during each of the rounds undertaken.

Dimension 1. Intellectual Quality
Deep knowledge
Deep understanding
Problematic knowledge
Higher order thinking
Metalanguage
Substantive communication

Dimension 2. Quality Learning Environment
Explicit quality criteria
Engagement
High expectations
Social support
Students’ self-regulation
Student direction

Dimension 3.Significance
Background knowledge
Cultural knowledge
Knowledge integration
Inclusivity
Connectedness
Narrative

As a group of teachers undertake each round within a "set" of rounds, an implementation fidelity checklist is completed and submitted online. The fidelity checklist consists of:
1- a professional reading session was conducted
2- PLC members were present throughout the lesson
3- PLC members individually coded all Quality Teaching elements prior to the lesson discussion
4- the post-lesson discussion was at least 60 min in duration
5- the host teacher was included in the discussion
6- PLC members were present throughout the discussion
7- PLC members provided their codes and justification using evidence from the lesson for each QT element
8- the Quality Teaching Classroom Practice Guide was a consistent point of reference throughout the discussion

Further to teacher fidelity checks, a member of the research team attends a round for each of the PLCs within the study during the intervention period to cross check teacher understanding of the rounds protocols.

In Quality Teaching Rounds, at least one lesson is observed for every member of the PLC, and PLC members stay together for an entire set of rounds. The intent of QTR is to focus on the relationship between classroom practice and student learning and to show respect for the teacher and the teaching-learning process by watching a whole lesson each time (Bowe & Gore, 2017). During the intervention period teachers participating in the intervention will carry out a full "set" of Quality Teaching Rounds, with each teacher in a PLC being observed across the study period. Schools are funded for the teachers involved to be "released" from class for the four days they are undertaking QTR.

Training workshop: Prior to commencing rounds, two teachers from each PLC are funded release from class to participate in a two-day QTR workshop to prepare them for conducting QTR within their school. The training workshops will provide background information on the Quality Teaching framework and Quality Teaching Rounds, highlighting the intention and importance of each component of the approach (i.e. PLCs, readings, observation, individual coding, group discussion). Teachers will be given opportunities to practice the QT coding process and participate in simulated rounds using sample video-recorded lessons. This training is delivered by a member of the research team.

As the QTR intervention is designed to modify the teaching practice of those teachers involved, students in this study receive the intervention via the modified teaching practice of their classroom teacher.

Intervention code [1]

Behaviour

Comparator / control treatment

There are three control arms in this study: 1) Trainer led-QTR group; 2) Peer-observation time-equivalent active wait-list control; and 3) Professional-development-as-usual wait-list control.

1) Trainer led-QTR group
This group receives the QTR intervention, however the training for teachers is delivered by a trainer that has been trained by the members of the research team. Teachers in this group are funded for the equivalent amount of teacher release as the intervention group to undertake QTR in 2019.

QTR Trainers were exemplary teachers targeted and recruited by members of the research team after responding to advertising from the New South Wales Department of Education (NSWDoE) and The University of Newcastle (UoN). Trainers undertake 28 days of training in the theory, and practical delivery of QTR two-day training workshops.

2) Peer-observation time-equivalent active wait-list control
Teachers in this group participate in an alternative form of Professional Development called Peer Observation. This method is endorsed by the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, the regulatory body for accreditation of Australian teachers. As with the intervention, two of the four teachers in a PLC are funded for two days of training in this method, and the four teachers involved in the PLC are funded for the equivalent number of release days as the intervention teachers for 2019

Teachers undertake peer observation in pairs, with the key components:
1- Pre-observation meeting: Identify focus of the observation, agree date/time and duration
of observation, and provide background and context for the lesson that will be observed.
2- Classroom observation: Observer records data – what the teacher and students say, do, make and write. Discreet interaction with observed teacher and/or students may occur if appropriate.
3- Post-observation debrief: Observer shares data collected relevant to the identified focus, observer and teacher share reflections
looking at connections between data collected and the teaching and student learning in relation to the teacher’s focus, observer poses questions to prompt further development, observer reflects on observations in
relevance to their own practice, and plan next steps – action to be taken using shared reflections to improve practice.

3) Professional-development-as-usual wait-list control
Schools in this group will continue their in-school professional development as usual, with no additional funding provided for professional development in 2019.

In 2020, teachers in the wait-list control groups will receive training in Quality Teaching Rounds (trainer-led version). This will not involve any data collection, and is purely to ensure that the benefits of QTR are made available to all schools participating in the research project.

Control group

Active

Outcomes

Primary outcome [1]

Mathematics achievement.
Australian Council for Educational Research's Progressive Achievement Tests (PATs) for Mathematics (PAT-M 4), Each of these tests has multiple iterations which are developmentally appropriate for different school year levels (e.g. Year 2, Year 3). Analysis will utilize the test scaled score (interval scale from 0 to 100).

Timepoint [1]