Multiple meta-analyses have now documented small positive effects of teacher professional development (PD) on pupil test scores. However, the field lacks any validated explanatory account of what differentiates more from less effective in-service training. As a result, researchers have little in the way of advice for those tasked with designing or commissioning better PD. We set out to remedy this by developing a new theory of effective PD based on combinations of causally active components targeted at developing teachers’ insights, motivating change, developing teaching techniques, and then embedding these changes in teachers’ practice. We test two important implications of the theory using data identified through a systematic review and meta-analysis of 104 randomized controlled trials, finding qualified empirical support for the theory. The main contribution of the article is to provide a testable theory of what makes PD more effective, which can be used to guide future empirical research on this topic.

This article presents a methodology for the developmental evaluation of a lesson study programme in primary and secondary schools. Our approach combined the principles of (i) user-focused evaluation, in which, as evaluators, we acted as participatory members of the innovation team and sought to involve users in the design and implementation of evaluation tools, (ii) a multi-level logical model to guide data collection and impact measurement and (iii) an ‘improving rather than proving’ approach to evaluation. The evaluation tools were used on a programme to promote lesson study in London schools involving 133 teachers and 33 schools. The evaluation methodology included outcomes at school leadership, teacher and student levels. Issues of internal and external validity are discussed and strengths and weaknesses are described. Findings showed promise in the use of our scale to measure changes in teacher pedagogical outcomes and in the recording of qualitative changes to both teachers and students as a result of the lesson study cycles. Suggestions for the future use and development of this methodology are proposed, including better use of control groups and quantitative measures to record changes in learning outcomes for students. List of Abbreviations: HE: Higher Education; LS: Lesson Study; PD: Professional Development

In this paper, we identify patterns of subject and qualification choices made at age 14. Much of the previous research on ‘subject choice’ has focussed on the later stages of educational trajectories, particularly Higher Education. However, the choices made at early branching points can limit pupils’ subsequent options, potentially contributing to educational inequalities. This paper identifies the patterns of General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) subjects chosen by a cohort of young people born in 1989/1990. We make use of the Next Steps data (formerly the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England (LSYPE)) which is linked to the National Pupil Database. We develop an approach to measuring the academic selectivity of subjects and qualifications. We examine the roles of social class, parental education, income, gender and ethnicity in determining participation in these curriculum groupings. Using measures of prior attainment from age thirteen, we address the question of whether curriculum differentials simply reflect differences in prior attainment or whether they actually operate above and beyond existing inequalities. We find clear socio‐economic, gender, ethnic and school‐level differences in subjects studied which cannot be accounted for by prior attainment.