@article{hunt_duarte_miller_bentley_albrecht_kruse_2023, title={Teacher Beliefs and Perspectives of Practice: Impacts of Online Professional Learning}, volume={13}, ISSN={["2227-7102"]}, url={https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/13/1/68}, DOI={10.3390/educsci13010068}, abstractNote={Efforts to improve teachers’ knowledge of tools and strategies are often intertwined with their beliefs regarding mathematics teaching and learning. Yet, few studies have examined the impact of professional development designed to bolster teachers’ knowledge of and beliefs about young children’s mathematical development. In this study, we evaluated whether participants’ beliefs changed significantly after engaging in online professional learning on teaching math to young children, overall orientations of participants’ teaching practices and shifts over time, and how changed beliefs might coincide with changed orientations to practice. We employed a multilevel mixed methods design, with quantitative results showing changes in participants’ overall beliefs based on survey data. We discuss how trends in perceived instructional practices coincide with beliefs found to be statistically significant in the quantitative analysis and the potential for online professional development to influence beliefs. Considerations for design of online professional learning and implications for future research are shared.}, number={1}, journal={EDUCATION SCIENCES}, author={Hunt, Jessica and Duarte, Alejandra and Miller, Brittany and Bentley, Brianna and Albrecht, Laura and Kruse, Lance}, year={2023}, month={Jan} }
 @misc{lavery_bostic_kruse_krupa_carney_2020, title={Argumentation Surrounding Argument-Based Validation: A Systematic Review of Validation Methodology in Peer-Reviewed Articles}, volume={39}, ISSN={["1745-3992"]}, DOI={10.1111/emip.12378}, abstractNote={AbstractSince it was formalized by Kane, the argument‐based approach to validation has been promoted as the preferred method for validating interpretations and uses of test scores. Because validation is discussed in terms of arguments, and arguments are both interactive and social, the present review systematically examines the scholarly arguments which appear in 83 papers on argument‐based validation methods published in peer‐reviewed journals. Findings suggest that scholars generally agree on the nature and importance of argument‐based validation but disagree on whether validation should be structured or unstructured, formal or informal. Implications are discussed, including promotion of the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, APA, and NCME) as a foundation for consensus in the field.}, number={4}, journal={EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT-ISSUES AND PRACTICE}, author={Lavery, Matthew Ryan and Bostic, Jonathan D. and Kruse, Lance and Krupa, Erin E. and Carney, Michele B.}, year={2020}, month={Dec}, pages={116–130} }