Abdul Basit Khan Situation like this varies in any classroom environment in a given school site/school district. Oftentimes, most teachers are not so welcoming , hesitant, to come out from their comfort zone of teaching style/s, thus, negatively impacting their active participation in any professional development training they attend. For example, as a schoolteacher, I tend to listen and try my best to learn more in innovative ways, via visualizing how integrating these new educational professional development training can enhance my already effective teaching styles to benefit my students and prepare them to become effective contributors in society in this postmodern world.

I am a professional private teacher for physics and maths since 2005. If you set a problem for pupils to solve on their own, joining in and helping them with the process can have a number of unwanted influences:

• Students get the impression that they are not proficient enough to work on their own. They dont't emancipate themselves from the idea that they still need help.
• Students don't get to know the rewarding feeling that ruminating on a problem for hours can unlock subconscious intuitions. Some of these usually only occur after long periods of fruitless trying.
• By joining in you may impose your own ideas and your own thinking style on that of the students. You may thereby effectively block some original ideas your students might otherwise have had.
• You stabilise the idea of a hierarchy of learners, with you on top and students below, as opposed to an approach "at eyes-levels".

In real teaching situations, I find it very tempting to help when I see a student struggle for more than an minute or two. But I have almost always found that leaving them alone for more than half an hour is much more rewarding. This is, provided they have good material and enough understanding to find solutions themselves.

• Frequently intervening when students struggle
• Potential Negative Effect: Reduces understanding of fostering student independence and resilience. Action Plan:Set clear boundaries for intervention (e.g., allow 30 minutes of independent effort). Provide guiding questions instead of solutions.
• Focusing primarily on delivering content rather than concepts
• Potential Negative Effect: Limits ability to embrace deeper, conceptual approaches emphasized in training. Action Plan:Emphasize real-world applications. Encourage project-based learning to focus on the "why" behind concepts.
• Relying heavily on teacher-centered instruction
• Potential Negative Effect: Conflicts with student-centered strategies encouraged in professional development. Action Plan:Gradually introduce student-led activities. Incorporate collaborative group work into lessons.
• Solving problems for students instead of guiding them
• Potential Negative Effect: Hinders adoption of inquiry-based learning and critical thinking approaches. Action Plan:Use Socratic questioning to guide students to solutions. Encourage exploration of multiple problem-solving methods.
• Praising correct answers excessively
• Potential Negative Effect: Limits focus on growth-oriented feedback and reflective practices. Action Plan:Shift praise to highlight effort, strategy, and improvement. Encourage self-assessment and peer feedback.
• Using rigid, one-size-fits-all lesson plans
• Potential Negative Effect: Reduces flexibility in adapting to diverse learner needs as emphasized in training. Action Plan:Differentiate instruction by incorporating varied activities and assessments. Tailor lessons to students' individual learning styles.
• Encouraging competition over collaboration
• Potential Negative Effect: Undermines efforts to integrate collaborative and cooperative teaching methods. Action Plan:Promote teamwork through group projects and shared goals. Emphasize the value of peer learning.
• Avoiding technology in teaching
• Potential Negative Effect: Creates difficulty in adopting digital tools and techniques introduced in training. Action Plan:Integrate simple educational technologies (e.g., online quizzes, digital collaboration tools) to build confidence and skills.
• Over-reliance on grading and testing
• Potential Negative Effect: Conflicts with formative assessment practices promoted in professional development. Action Plan:Implement formative assessment techniques (e.g., exit tickets, peer reviews, ongoing feedback loops).
• Dominating classroom discussions
• Potential Negative Effect: Reduces understanding of how to facilitate meaningful student-led discussions. Action Plan:Adopt a facilitator role by asking open-ended questions. Use techniques like "think-pair-share" to encourage student participation.

Paul Pajo Please add citations and references if you have.

Here: Article Reconciling Traditional Practices with Contemporary Pedagogy...

Frequently intervening when students struggle

• Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House. This book explores the concept of growth mindset and its impact on learning, directly relating to fostering student independence and resilience.
• Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: The comprehensive guide. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. While a comprehensive guide to teaching, the specific link to the negative impact of frequent intervention may require further context from within the guide.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70. This article focuses on strategies for promoting self-regulated learning, which connects to reducing teacher intervention.

Focusing primarily on delivering content rather than concepts

• Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Understanding by Design (UbD) is a framework that emphasizes conceptual understanding over mere content delivery, making this citation highly relevant.
• Bell, S. (201). Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(3), 350-364. Project-Based Learning (PBL) naturally encourages a focus on concepts, but this citation's relevance may depend on how explicitly it addresses the potential negative impact of content-focused teaching.
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314. This article explores shifts in teacher education towards deeper conceptual approaches, which could provide valuable context.

Relying heavily on teacher-centered instruction

• Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to create and use rubrics for formative and summative assessment. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Rubrics can be used in both teacher-centered and student-centered instruction; this is relevant depending on whether it specifically critiques over-reliance on teacher-centered approaches.
• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (2008). Cooperation in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. This book strongly advocates for cooperative learning, a student-centered approach, making it relevant to the negative impacts of excessive teacher-centered instruction.
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. This work explores learning theories that underpin student-centered approaches, providing a strong theoretical foundation.

Solving problems for students instead of guiding them

• National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Inquiry-based learning necessitates that students grapple with problems.
• Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2016). The foundation of critical thinking: Concise edition. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. This book emphasizes the development of critical thinking skills, which are hindered when teachers solve problems for students.
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266. This article provides further insight into problem-based learning and its benefits for student learning.

Praising correct answers excessively

• Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge. While Hattie's work emphasizes the power of feedback, its specific relevance to the negative impact of excessive praise for correct answers requires further context.
• Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Brookhart likely addresses a variety of feedback strategies, including the potential pitfalls of focusing solely on praising correct answers.
• Dweck, C. S. (2007). The perils and promises of praise. Educational Leadership, 65(2), 34-39. Dweck directly addresses the issue of praise and its potential to undermine a growth mindset.

Using rigid, one-size-fits-all lesson plans

• Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Differentiated instruction is a core concept that counters the use of rigid lesson plans.
• Gregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. (2002). Differentiated instructional strategies: Connecting content to student thinking. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Similar to Tomlinson, Gregory & Chapman advocates for adapting instruction to meet diverse learner needs, directly contrasting with the use of one-size-fits-all plans.
• Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935-947. Subban provides a research-based perspective on the benefits and implementation of differentiated instruction.

Encouraging competition over collaboration

• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (2008). Cooperation in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. As Johnson & Holubec champions cooperation, it likely addresses the drawbacks of fostering a competitive classroom environment.
• Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315-342. Slavin offers a comprehensive overview of cooperative learning research and its benefits.

Over-reliance on grading and testing

• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. This seminal work on formative assessment is highly relevant, as it advocates for assessment practices that move beyond grading and testing.
• Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge. Hattie's work broadly addresses effective learning practices. Its relevance here depends on how explicitly it discusses the downsides of over-relying on summative assessment.
• Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. This book focuses on the use of assessment to improve instruction and student learning, offering alternatives to over-reliance on grades.

Dominating classroom discussions

• Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2009). Active learning: An introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief, 2(4), 1–7. Active learning encourages student participation, but this is relevant depending on if it directly critiques teacher-dominated discussions.
• Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. This work focuses on the dynamics of classroom discussion and likely offers insights into the negative effects of teacher dominance.
• Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. This book examines the role of dialogue in learning, potentially offering strategies for more student-centered discussions.

Avoiding technology in teaching

• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. TPACK is a framework that emphasizes the interconnectedness of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge, directly relevant to this bullet point.
• Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. This study examines factors influencing teachers' adoption of technology, providing valuable context for understanding resistance to technology integration.
• ISTE Standards for Educators. (https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators). ISTE standards directly address the effective integration of technology in education, making them highly relevant.