Content-Based Collaborative Inquiry (CBCI) &Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI): In CBCI and CGI, teachers work togetherto create deeper understandings of how their students think about and understandparticular subjects. In CBCI, teachers and facilitators pose questions aboutstudents’ understandings, collect and analyze data, share the results withtheir colleagues, and collaborate to create instructional

solutions. In the process, teachers build understandingsof content and pedagogy that support student learning (Bray, Gause-Vega,Goldman, Secules, & Zech, 2000). In CGI, teachers create models of how studentsthink and solve problems. Teachers use these models of student thinking todevelop instructional materials that address students’ learning needs. CGIprovides opportunities for teachers to deepen their own understandings ofsubject matter, while they develop ways to teach it more effectively(Carpenter, Fennema, Franke, & Levi, 2001).

基于内容的协同查询（诚邦）和认知引导指令（CGI）：在诚邦和CGI，教师共同创造更深的理解学生如何思考和理解特定的主题。在诚邦，教师和辅导员对学生的理解问题，收集和分析数据，与同事分享成果，合作创造教学解决方案。在这个过程中，教师建设内容和教学，支持学生学习的理解（Bray，高斯维加，戈德曼，缓释胶囊剂，与亚，2000）。在CGI，教师创造学生如何思考和解决问题的模型。教师利用这些学生的思维模式来开发解决学生学习需求的教学材料。CGI提供教师深化自己的主题的理解的机会，而他们开发更有效的方法教（木匠，介绍，弗兰卡，&利维，2001）。

Lesson Study: Lesson study is a multi-step process inwhich teachers work together to create, study, and improve their lessons. Inthis approach, a member of the study group teaches a lesson while others make

detailed observations. After the lesson, all members ofthe group meet to discuss their observations and to consider how the lessonmight be improved. The lesson is taught again to a different group of students,and the process of observation, collaborative data analysis, and lessonrevision is repeated (Fernandez and Chokshi, 2002; Watanabe, 2002). Lessonstudy is another model of using collaborative self-study of

teachers’ practices as a means to support teacher growthand instructional improvement (Mid-Atlantic Eisenhower Regional Consortium,2002).

课例研究：课例研究是一个多步骤的过程中，师生共同创造，学习，提高他们的功课。在这种方法中，研究小组的成员在其他人的过程中教授一个教训

详细观测。在课程结束后，小组的所有成员都会讨论他们的意见，并考虑如何改进课程。的教训又对另一组学生，和观察的过程中，协同数据分析，教训是反复修改（费尔南德兹可士，2002；渡边，2002）。课研究是利用协同自学的另一种模式。教师的做法，作为一种手段，以支持教师的增长和教学改进（大西洋中部艾森豪威尔地区联盟，2002）。

What are the effects of professional development onteaching practices and student learning?

A number of studies report positive effects of teacherprofessional development on teaching practices. Many studies rely on teachers’self-reports of the impact of professional development. Measures based onindependent observations of teachers’ classroom practices are less common. Fewstudies examine the effect of teacher professional development on studentlearning.

专业发展对教学实践和学生学习的影响是什么？

教师专业发展对教学实践的积极影响。许多研究依赖于教师专业发展的影响报告。基于独立意见的教师课堂教学的措施是不太常见的。很少有研究探讨教师专业发展对学生学习的影响。

.

A review of several professional development programssuggests that “the content of in-service programs does indeedmake a difference,and that programs that focus on subject-matter knowledge and on student

learning of particular subject matter are likely to havelarger positive effects on student learning than are programs that focus mainlyon teaching behaviors” (Kennedy, 1998, p. 9). This review concludes that,

compared to other models, CGI approaches (see above) hadthe greatest effect on students’ basic skills, reasoning, and problem-solvingperformance (Berne & Wilson, 1999; Cohen, Hill, & Kennedy, 2002;

Kennedy, 1998).

回顾几个专业发展计划提出“在职节目内容并indeedmake差，而且程序，对学科知识和对学生的关注学习特定的主题很可能有更大的积极影响，对学生的学习比的程序，主要集中在教学行为“（甘乃迪，1998，p 9）。本文的结论是，

与其他模型相比，CGI方法（见上文）对学生的基本技能，影响最大的推理，解决问题的表现（伯尔尼和威尔逊，1999；科恩，山，甘乃迪，2002；甘乃迪，1998）。

Further research on CGI suggests that when teacherscollaborate they are more likely to take risks, learn from mistakes, and sharesuccessful strategies.

在CGI进一步的研究表明，当老师们合作的时候，他们更容易冒险，从错误中吸取教训，并分享成功的策略。

。

“When teachers reflect on their own classroom practicesin

principled ways, teachers can integrate their practicalknowledge with research-based knowledge in ways that contribute to moresuccessful practices” (Carpenter, Fennema, Franke, & Levi, 2001, p. 655).

。“当老师在原则上反思自己的课堂实践，

教师可以将自己的实践知识与研究知识的方式结合在一起，这是有助于更成功的做法”（木匠，介绍，弗兰卡，利维，2001，p. 655）。

“Teachers who participated in CGI taught problem solvingsignificantly more and taught number facts and skills significantly less. Theteachers used different instructional strategies, listened to students more,and

believed that instruction would build on what studentsknow. Analyses of student achievement showed that students of CGI teachersrecalled number facts at a higher level, [and exceeded] students in controlclassrooms

in problem solving and confidence” (Berne & Wilson,1999, p. 184).

“教师参加CGI教更多解决问题的事实和技能教数明显减少。老师使用不同的教学策略，更多地听取学生的意见，并且相信教学应该建立在学生已知的上面。

相信教学会建立在学生们所知道的。学生成绩分析表明，CGI师生回顾了一些事实的数据表明，在学生解决问题和信心上已经达到了一个很高的水平，甚至有所超越（伯尔尼·威尔逊，1999，p. 184）。

Content-Based Collaborative Inquiry (CBCI) &Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI): In CBCI and CGI, teachers work togetherto create deeper understandings of how their students think about and understandparticular subjects. In CBCI, teachers and facilitators pose questions aboutstudents’ understandings, collect and analyze data, share the results withtheir colleagues, and collaborate to create instructional

solutions. In the process, teachers build understandingsof content and pedagogy that support student learning (Bray, Gause-Vega,Goldman, Secules, & Zech, 2000). In CGI, teachers create models of how studentsthink and solve problems. Teachers use these models of student thinking todevelop instructional materials that address students’ learning needs. CGIprovides opportunities for teachers to deepen their own understandings ofsubject matter, while they develop ways to teach it more effectively(Carpenter, Fennema, Franke, & Levi, 2001).

基于内容的协同查询（诚邦）和认知引导指令（CGI）：在诚邦和CGI，教师共同创造更深的理解学生如何思考和理解特定的主题。在诚邦，教师和辅导员对学生的理解问题，收集和分析数据，与同事分享成果，合作创造教学解决方案。在这个过程中，教师建设内容和教学，支持学生学习的理解（Bray，高斯维加，戈德曼，缓释胶囊剂，与亚，2000）。在CGI，教师创造学生如何思考和解决问题的模型。教师利用这些学生的思维模式来开发解决学生学习需求的教学材料。CGI提供教师深化自己的主题的理解的机会，而他们开发更有效的方法教（木匠，介绍，弗兰卡，&利维，2001）。

Lesson Study: Lesson study is a multi-step process inwhich teachers work together to create, study, and improve their lessons. Inthis approach, a member of the study group teaches a lesson while others make

detailed observations. After the lesson, all members ofthe group meet to discuss their observations and to consider how the lessonmight be improved. The lesson is taught again to a different group of students,and the process of observation, collaborative data analysis, and lessonrevision is repeated (Fernandez and Chokshi, 2002; Watanabe, 2002). Lessonstudy is another model of using collaborative self-study of

teachers’ practices as a means to support teacher growthand instructional improvement (Mid-Atlantic Eisenhower Regional Consortium,2002).

课例研究：课例研究是一个多步骤的过程中，师生共同创造，学习，提高他们的功课。在这种方法中，研究小组的成员在其他人的过程中教授一个教训

详细观测。在课程结束后，小组的所有成员都会讨论他们的意见，并考虑如何改进课程。的教训又对另一组学生，和观察的过程中，协同数据分析，教训是反复修改（费尔南德兹可士，2002；渡边，2002）。课研究是利用协同自学的另一种模式。教师的做法，作为一种手段，以支持教师的增长和教学改进（大西洋中部艾森豪威尔地区联盟，2002）。

What are the effects of professional development onteaching practices and student learning?

A number of studies report positive effects of teacherprofessional development on teaching practices. Many studies rely on teachers’self-reports of the impact of professional development. Measures based onindependent observations of teachers’ classroom practices are less common. Fewstudies examine the effect of teacher professional development on studentlearning.

专业发展对教学实践和学生学习的影响是什么？

教师专业发展对教学实践的积极影响。许多研究依赖于教师专业发展的影响报告。基于独立意见的教师课堂教学的措施是不太常见的。很少有研究探讨教师专业发展对学生学习的影响。

.

A review of several professional development programssuggests that “the content of in-service programs does indeedmake a difference,and that programs that focus on subject-matter knowledge and on student

learning of particular subject matter are likely to havelarger positive effects on student learning than are programs that focus mainlyon teaching behaviors” (Kennedy, 1998, p. 9). This review concludes that,

compared to other models, CGI approaches (see above) hadthe greatest effect on students’ basic skills, reasoning, and problem-solvingperformance (Berne & Wilson, 1999; Cohen, Hill, & Kennedy, 2002;

Kennedy, 1998).

回顾几个专业发展计划提出“在职节目内容并indeedmake差，而且程序，对学科知识和对学生的关注学习特定的主题很可能有更大的积极影响，对学生的学习比的程序，主要集中在教学行为“（甘乃迪，1998，p 9）。本文的结论是，

与其他模型相比，CGI方法（见上文）对学生的基本技能，影响最大的推理，解决问题的表现（伯尔尼和威尔逊，1999；科恩，山，甘乃迪，2002；甘乃迪，1998）。

Further research on CGI suggests that when teacherscollaborate they are more likely to take risks, learn from mistakes, and sharesuccessful strategies.

在CGI进一步的研究表明，当老师们合作的时候，他们更容易冒险，从错误中吸取教训，并分享成功的策略。

。

“When teachers reflect on their own classroom practicesin

principled ways, teachers can integrate their practicalknowledge with research-based knowledge in ways that contribute to moresuccessful practices” (Carpenter, Fennema, Franke, & Levi, 2001, p. 655).

。“当老师在原则上反思自己的课堂实践，

教师可以将自己的实践知识与研究知识的方式结合在一起，这是有助于更成功的做法”（木匠，介绍，弗兰卡，利维，2001，p. 655）。

“Teachers who participated in CGI taught problem solvingsignificantly more and taught number facts and skills significantly less. Theteachers used different instructional strategies, listened to students more,and

believed that instruction would build on what studentsknow. Analyses of student achievement showed that students of CGI teachersrecalled number facts at a higher level, [and exceeded] students in controlclassrooms

in problem solving and confidence” (Berne & Wilson,1999, p. 184).

“教师参加CGI教更多解决问题的事实和技能教数明显减少。老师使用不同的教学策略，更多地听取学生的意见，并且相信教学应该建立在学生已知的上面。

相信教学会建立在学生们所知道的。学生成绩分析表明，CGI师生回顾了一些事实的数据表明，在学生解决问题和信心上已经达到了一个很高的水平，甚至有所超越（伯尔尼·威尔逊，1999，p. 184）。