Based on self-determination theory, this research aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of the CASIS professional development (PD) program for fostering (1) teachers’ use of five recommended pedagogical practices during a writing lesson and (2) students’ motivational resources (intrinsic, identified, and controlled regulations) toward writing. Two quasi-experimental studies with two-time points were conducted among preservice (Study 1, n = 32) and inservice (Study 2, n = 111) elementary teachers and their students (Study 1, n = 559; Study 2, sample 1, n = 1779; sample 2, n = 1471). In both studies, the CASIS PD program appeared to foster the use of two of the five recommended pedagogical practices. For the other three, some effects were observed in one study but were not always reproduced in the other. Although the CASIS PD program fostered greater use of the pedagogical practices, this effect did not always translate directly to the students’ motivational resources. However, some significant differences were observed between students of the CASIS and the control groups on identified and controlled regulations, as a function of the socioeconomic background of the schools in which teachers and students were sampled. The results are discussed in light of past research and relevant theories.

基于自我决定理论，本研究旨在评估CASIS专业发展（PD）计划在以下方面的有效性：促进（1）在写作课中教师使用五种推荐的教学方法，以及（2）学生的动机资源（本能） ，确定和控制的法规）。 在职前（研究1，n = 32）和在职（研究2，n  = 111）小学教师和学生（研究1，n  = 559；研究2，样本1 ）中进行了两个具有两个时间点的准实验研究。 ，n  = 1779;样本2，n = 1471）。在两项研究中，CASIS PD计划似乎都鼓励使用五种推荐的教学实践中的两种。对于其他三个，在一项研究中观察到了某些效果，但在其他研究中却未总是再现。尽管CASIS PD计划促进了教学方法的更多使用，但这种效果并不总是直接转化为学生的动机资源。但是，根据对教师和学生进行抽样的学校的社会经济背景，在确定和控制的法规上，CASIS学生与对照组之间存在一些显着差异。根据过去的研究和相关理论讨论了结果。