Main Article Content

Laura Carlotta Foschi


This paper analyses the innovative aspects and evaluation methods of an experience in teachers’ Continuous Professional Development training examines the results obtained. After introducing the panorama in which Continuous Professional Development (CPD) takes place and highlighting the relevance it assumes in the Italian context, the paper describes the content and structural features of training, as well as providing a descriptive narrative of an activity example. The training is analysed according to areas and attributes of innovation, and key elements of effective teacher CPD. The training evaluation methods adopted, both traditional and innovative, are examined, and the results obtained discussed. The analyses carried out show that the training achieved encouragingly positive results.

Article Details

Articles - Special Issue


Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, ... Wittrock, M. C. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY, USA: Longman.

Avery, J. (2014). Leveraging crowdsourced peer-to-peer assessments to enhance the case method of learning. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 22(1), 1-15.

Barber, M., & M. Mourshed, M. (2009). Shaping the Future: How good education systems can become great in the decade ahead. Report on the international education roundtable 7 July 2009, Singapore. Retrieved from

Bell, A., Mladenovic, R., & Price, M. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the usefulness of marking guides, grade descriptors and annotated exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(7), 769-788. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2012.714738

Bocconi, S., Kampylis, P., & Punie, Y. (2012). Innovating learning: key elements for developing creative classrooms in Europe. Luxembourg, LU: Publications Office of the European Union. doi: 10.2791/90566

Carless, D., & Chan, K. K. H. (2017). Managing dialogic use of exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 930-941. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2016.1211246

Carless, D., Chan, K. K. H., To, J., Lo, M., & Barrett, E. (2018). Developing students’ capacities for evaluative judgement through analysing exemplars. In D. Boud, R. Ajjawi, P. Dawson, & J. Tai (Eds), Developing Evaluative Judgement in Higher Education: Assessment for knowing and producing quality work (pp. 108-116). London, UK: Routledge.

Cecchinato, G., & Papa, R. (2016). Flipped classroom: un nuovo modo di insegnare e apprendere. Torino, IT: UTET.

Cecchinato, G., Papa, R., & Foschi, L. C. (2019). Bringing game elements to the classroom: The role of challenge and technology. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), 158-173. doi: 10.17471/2499-4324/1078

Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2011). Learning by reviewing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 73-84. doi: 10.1037/a0021950

Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291-309. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399

Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, D. J., Gatlin, S. J., & Heilig, J. V. (2005). Does teacher preparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, Teach for America, and teacher effectiveness. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42), 1-48. doi: 10.14507/epaa.v13n42.2005

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Palo Alto, CA, USA: Learning Policy Institute.

Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX, USA: National Staff Development Council.

Davies, P. (2006). Peer assessment: Judging the quality of students work by comments rather than marks. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 69-82. doi: 10.1080/14703290500467566

Davies, P. (2009). Review and reward within the computerised peer‐assessment of essays. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(3), 321-333. doi: 10.1080/02602930802071072

Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. doi: 10.3102/0013189X08331140

Desimone, L. M., & Garet, M. S. (2015). Best practices in teachers’ professional development in the United States. Psychology, Society and Education, 7(3), 252–263.

European Commission (2005). Common European principles for teacher competences and qualifications. Bruxelles, BE: European Commission.

European Commission (2007). Improving the Quality of Teacher Education. Retrieved from

European Commission (2013). Supporting teacher competence development for better learning outcomes. Retrieved from

European Council (2009a). Council conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (‘ET 2020’). Retrieved from

European Council (2009b). Council conclusions of 26 November 2009 on the professional development of teachers and school leaders. Retrieved from

European Council (2013). Council recommendation of 9 July 2013on the National Reform Programme 2013 of Italy and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of Italy, 2012-2017. Bruxelles, BE: European Council.

European Council (2014). Council conclusions of 20 May 2014 on effective teacher education. Retrieved from

European Council (2017). Council Conclusions on school development and excellent teaching. Retrieved from

European Council (2018). Council recommendation of 13 July 2018 on the 2018 National Reform Programme of Italy and delivering a Council opinion on the 2018 Stability Programme of Italy. Bruxelles, BE: European Council.

Eurostat (2017). Classroom teachers and academic staff by education level, programme orientation, sex and age groups. Retrieved from

Foschi, L. C., & Cecchinato, G. (2019). Validity and reliability of peer-grading in in-service teacher training. Italian Journal of Educational Research, Special Issue, 177-194. doi: 10.7346/SIRD-1S2019-P177

Foschi, L. C., Cecchinato, G., & Say, F. (2019). Quis iudicabit ipsos iudices? Analisi dello sviluppo di competenze in un percorso di formazione per insegnanti tramite la valutazione tra pari l’autovalutazione. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(1), 49-64. doi: 10.17471/2499-4324/1019

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945. doi: 10.3102/00028312038004915

Guskey, T.R. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. Educational Leadership, 59 (6), 45–51.

Guskey, T.R., Roy, P., & von Frank, V. (2014). Reach the highest standard in professional learning: Data. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Corwin.

King, F. (2014). Evaluating the impact of teacher professional development: an evidence-based framework. Professional Development in Education, 40(1), 89–111. doi: 10.1080/19415257.2013.823099

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212-218. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

Leadbeater, C., & Wong, A. (2010). Learning from the extremes. Retrieved from

Li, H., Xiong, Y., Zang, X., Kornhaber, M. L., Lyu, Y., Chung, K. S., & Suen, H. K. (2016). Peer assessment in the digital age: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(2), 245-264. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2014.999746

Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A user’s manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall.

MIUR (2016). 2016-2019 Teacher Training Plan. Retrieved 12/28, 2019, from

MIUR (2019). Permanent teachers. Public school. Retrieved from

Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2013.795518

O’Mahony, T. K., Vye, N. J., Bransford, J. D., Sanders, E. A., Stevens, R., Stephens, ... Soleiman, M.K. (2012). A comparison of lecture-based and challenge-based learning in a workplace setting: Course designs, patterns of interactivity, and learning outcomes. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 182- 206. doi: 10.1080/10508406.2011.611775

OECD (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264018044-en

OECD (2010). Inspired by technology, driven by pedagogy: A systemic approach to technology-based school innovations. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/20769679

OECD (2014). TALIS 2013 Results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264196261-en

OECD (2017). How can professional development enhance teachers’ classroom practices? Paris, FR: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/2745d679-en

OECD (2018). Effective teacher policies: Insights from PISA. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264301603-en

OECD (2019). TALIS 2018 Results (Vol. 1): Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/1d0bc92a-en

OECD/Eurostat (2018). Oslo manual 2018: guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation, 4th Edition. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing/Luxembourg, LU: Eurostat. doi: 10.1787/9789264304604-en

Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4), 309-323. doi: 10.1080/0260293022000001337

Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417-458. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00584.x

Sadler, D. R. (1987). Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education, 13(2), 191-209. doi: 10.1080/0305498870130207

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144. doi: 10.1007/BF00117714

Scheerens, J. (2000). Improving school effectiveness. fundamentals of educational planning (Vol. 68). Paris, FR: UNESCO, International Institute for educational planning.

Schwartz, D. L., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J. D. (1999). Toward the development of flexibly adaptive instructional designs. Hillsdale, MI, USA: Erlbaum.

Swennen, A., Lunenberg, M., & Korthagen, F. (2008). Preach what you teach! Teacher educators and congruent teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14, 531–542. doi: 10.1080/13540600802571387

Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76(3), 467-481. doi: 10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3

Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education.

UNESCO (2016). Education 2030: Incheon declaration and framework for action for the implementation of sustainable development goal 4. Paris, FR: UNESCO.

United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York, NY, USA: UN.

Vuorikari, R. (2018). Innovating professional development in compulsory education – Examples and cases of emerging practices for teacher professional development. Luxembourg, LU: Publications Office of the European Union. doi: 10.2760/734136

Vuorikari, R. (2019). Innovating professional development in compulsory education - An analysis of practices aimed at improving teaching and learning. Luxembourg, LU: Publications Office of the European Union. doi: 10.2760/948518

Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W. Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007 - No. 033). Washington, DC, USA: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.