Review of research on teachers' pedagogical judgments, plans, and decisions
ResearchPublished 1982
This paper reviews research on teachers' instructional judgments, plans, and decisionmaking. It examines conceptualizations, methods, and research modeling these judgments, plans, and decisions. The final section discusses the implications and need for further research.
Topics
Document Details
- Copyright: RAND Corporation
- Availability: Available
- Year: 1982
- Print Format: Paperback
- Paperback Pages: 46
- Paperback Price: $23.00
- Document Number: P-6833
Citation
RAND Style Manual
Chicago Manual of Style
Shavelson, Richard J., Review of research on teachers' pedagogical judgments, plans, and decisions, RAND Corporation, P-6833, 1982. As of October 12, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P6833.html
Shavelson, Richard J., Review of research on teachers' pedagogical judgments, plans, and decisions. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1982. https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P6833.html. Also available in print form.
This publication is part of the RAND paper series. The paper series was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.