Instructional Leadership Notes

Subject 1: EDUC90755 Evidence for Learning and Teaching.

The major focus of this subject is how school leaders know that teachers and students are learning in positive ways throughout their school. Students will explore the current evidence-base about what works best; what criteria can be developed to make decisions about success; how to develop a program logic for their leadership role; and how to evaluate the impacts of leadership decisions on both teachers’ and students’ learning. This subject aligns with the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership Australian Professional Standard for Principals.

You can expect to:

  • Analyse and integrate the key findings from research findings into a coherent story about the major influences on student and teacher learning;
  • Understand and apply how to reflect on the evidence of impact in a school;
  • Understand and apply program logic, degree of implementation, and evaluating effects of interventions;
  • Critically evaluate the empirical research that studies impact in schools;
  • Develop tools for using to evaluate impact in multiple situations.

Recommended Text

The following text is recommended be purchased prior to the commencement of this subject: Hattie, J. (2012). Visible Learning for Teachers. Oxford, UK: Routledge.

PreReading: Coursework booklet, pre-reading for jig saw, Kami version

Reading List:

  • Glass, G. V. (2000). Meta-Analysis at 25, 1–29.
  • Snook, I., O’Neill, J., Clark, J., O’Neill, A.-M., & Openshaw, R. (2009). Invisible Learnings?: A Commentary on John Hattie’s Book – ‘Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-analyses Relating to Achievement’. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 44(1), 93–106.
  • GLASS, G. V. (1976). Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research1. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3–8.
  • Chiu, C. W. T. (1998). Synthesizing Metacognitive Interventions : What training characteristics can improve reading performance? Annual Meeting of the American Eductional Research Association, 0, 1–45.
  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., & Rothstein, H. (2007). In Introduction to Meta-Analysis (pp. 1–115).
  • Visible learning. (2017). Visible Learning plus 250+ Influences on Student Achievement. In Visible Learning Plus (p. 1,2). Visible Learning Limited Partnership and Cognition Education Group.
  • John Hattie: Visible Learning Pt1. Disasters and below average methods. (2011, November 28). John Hattie: Visible Learning Pt1. Disasters and below Average Methods.; Mike Bell (YouTube).
  • (2011). In John Hattie, Visible Learning. Pt 2: effective methods.
  • Hattie, J. (2010). On Being a ‘Critic and Conscience of Society’: The Role of the Education Academic in Public Debates. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 45(1), 85–96.
  • OISE UofT. (2012, July 31). Visible Learning – An Interview with Dr. John Hattie. Visible Learning – An Interview with Dr. John Hattie; OISE UofT.
  • Webber, Bev., & Educational Research., N. Z. C. (2002). In Teachers make a difference : what is the research evidence? : conference proceedings, October 2002 / compiled by Bev Webber.
  • Galloway, A. M. (2003). Improving Reading Comprehension Through Metacognitive Strategy Instruction:Evaluating the Evidence for the Effectiveness of the Reciprocal Teaching Procedure, 1–238.
  • Crissman, J. K. (2006). The Design and Utilization of Effective Worked Examples: A Meta-Analysis, 1–201.
  • Fendick, F. (1990). The Correlation Between Teacher Clarity of Communication and Student Achievement Gain:A Meta-Analysis, 1–153.
  • Chiu, C. W. T. (1998). Synthesizing Metacognitive Interventions:What Training Characteristics Can Improve Reading Performance? Effect of Metacognitive Intervention, 2–45.
  • Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). Examining the Effects of Classroom Discussion on Students’ Comprehension of Text: A Meta-Analysis. In Journal of Educational Psychology (Vol. 101, pp. 740–764).
  • Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2011). Collective Impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 9(1), 36–41.
  • Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets and human nature: promoting change in the Middle East, the schoolyard, the racial divide, and willpower. The American Psychologist, 67(8), 614–626.
  • United Way. (2010–2020). In A Guide to Developing an Outcome Logic Model and Measurement Plan (pp. 1–64). United Way.
  • W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Using Logic Models to Bring Together Planning, Evaluation, and Action. In W.K. Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide (pp. 1–71). W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
  • [Digital image file]. (1997). In Program Logic at a Glance.
  • Innovation Network. (2010–2020). Logic Model Workbook. In Innovation Network (pp. 1–25). Innovation Network.
  • He, Y., Rohr, J., Miller, S. D., Levin, B. B., & Mercier, S. (2010). Toward Continuous Program Improvement: Using a Logic Model for Professional Development School Program Evaluation. School-University Partnerships, 4(1), 15–28.
  • Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2010–2020). In Spotlight-Reframing feedback to improve teaching and learning (pp. 1–16). Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.
  • Sutton, R., Hornsey, M. J., Douglas, K. M. H., & John. (2011). Feedback in schools. In Feedback: The communication of praise, criticism, and advice. (pp. 1–14). Peter Lang Publishing: New York.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). In The Power of Feedback (pp. 1–32). Review of Educational Research.
  • Wiliam, D. (2011). In Providing Feedback That Moves Learning Forward (pp. 1–3). Solution Tree Press.
  • Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational Assessment Knowledge and Skills for Teachers. In Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice (pp. 3–13). National Council on Measurement in Education.
  • Rubie-Davis, Christine., Hattie, John., & Hamilton, R. (2006). Expecting the best for students: Teacher expectations and academic outcomes. The British Psychological Society, not known, 1–16.
  • Kember, D., Biggs, J., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2004). Examining the multidimensionality of approaches to learning through the development of a revised version of the Learning Process Questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 261–279.
  • Hattie, J. (1990–2015). In The Power of the Solo Model to Address Fundamental Measurement Issues (pp. 1–24). University of North Carolina at Greensboro Nola Purdie, Queensland University of Technology.
  • Hooked Education. (n.d.). SOLO Taxonomy. HookED; Hook Education. Retrieved 14 February 2020, from
  • Smith, T. W., Baker, W. K., Hattie, John., & Bond, L. (2013). A VALIDITY STUDY OF THE CERTIFICATION SYSTEM OF THE NATIONAL BOARD FOR PROFESSIONAL TEACHING STANDARDS. In Advances in Program Evaluation (pp. 1–35). Emerald Group Publishing.
  • Danielson Group. (n.d.). A VISION OF EXCELLENCE. The Danielson Group; The Danielson Group. Retrieved 17 February 2020, from
  • (2010–2020). In Charlotte Danielson’s FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING.
  • Danielson, C. (n.d.). Evaluations That Help Teachers Learn. Ascd Learn.Teach.Lead; ascd Learn.Teach.Lead. Retrieved 17 February 2020, from
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (2010). Initial Findings from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project. In Learning about Teaching (pp. 1–7). Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
  • Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 1–11.
  • Netherlands institute for curriculum development. (2010). In An Introduction to Educational Design Research (pp. 1–129). Netherlands institute for curriculum development.
  • Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2012). Combining High-Quality Observations with Student Surveys and Achievement Gains. In Gathering Feedback for teachers (pp. 1–68). Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.