Two studies investigated the effects of a live, collaborative Professional Development (PD) program versus individualized PD with a multimedia software program. For both studies, teachers were randomly assigned to either a Virtual Workshop (VW) group that used the software program or to an Actual Workshop (AW) group that participated in a face-to-face workshop that included collaborative activities. The same teaching routine, the Concept Anchoring Routine, was taught to the teachers in both studies. In Study 1, teachers’ scores on a knowledge test about the routine and written plans for using the routine significantly improved from pretest to posttest in both groups. The groups’ posttest scores were not significantly different. Similarly, in Study 2, both groups’ posttest scores with regard to their knowledge of the routine, their written plans for use of the routine, and their implementation of the routine in their classes were significantly higher than their baseline scores. There were no differences between the teacher groups after training. The posttest knowledge scores of the whole groups of students being taught by both groups of teachers were also significantly higher than their pretest scores. Similar significant results were achieved by the students with LD. Moreover, the whole groups of students of VW teachers earned significantly higher posttest scores than the whole groups of students of AW teachers. Both teacher groups were satisfied with the training they received and with the routine. The students of both groups were satisfied with the way their teachers used the routine to help them learn.

两项研究调查了实时协作专业发展 (PD) 计划与使用多媒体软件程序的个性化 PD 的效果。对于这两项研究，教师被随机分配到使用软件程序的虚拟研讨会 (VW) 组或参加包括协作活动在内的面对面研讨会的实际研讨会 (AW) 组。相同的教学程序，概念锚定程序，被教授给两个研究的老师。在研究 1 中，两组教师在例行知识测试和使用例行程序的书面计划中的分数从前测到后测都有显着提高。各组的后测成绩没有显着差异。同样，在研究 2 中，两组在例行程序知识方面的后测分数，他们使用例程的书面计划，以及他们在课堂上执行例程的情况明显高于他们的基线分数。培训后教师组之间没有差异。两组教师所教授的全组学生的后测知识分数也显着高于前测分数。患有 LD 的学生也取得了类似的显着结果。此外，大众教师的整个学生群体的后测成绩明显高于AW教师的学生群体。两个教师组都对他们接受的培训和日常工作感到满意。两组的学生都对老师使用例行程序帮助他们学习的方式感到满意。他们在课堂上对常规的实施明显高于他们的基线分数。培训后教师组之间没有差异。两组教师所教授的全组学生的后测知识分数也显着高于前测分数。患有 LD 的学生也取得了类似的显着结果。此外，大众教师的整个学生群体的后测成绩明显高于AW教师的学生群体。两个教师组都对他们接受的培训和日常工作感到满意。两组的学生都对老师使用例行程序帮助他们学习的方式感到满意。他们在课堂上对常规的实施明显高于他们的基线分数。培训后教师组之间没有差异。两组教师所教授的全组学生的后测知识分数也显着高于前测分数。患有 LD 的学生也取得了类似的显着结果。此外，大众教师的整个学生群体的后测成绩明显高于AW教师的学生群体。两个教师组都对他们接受的培训和日常工作感到满意。两组的学生都对老师使用例行程序帮助他们学习的方式感到满意。培训后教师组之间没有差异。两组教师所教授的全组学生的后测知识分数也显着高于前测分数。患有 LD 的学生也取得了类似的显着结果。此外，大众教师的整个学生群体的后测成绩明显高于AW教师的学生群体。两个教师组都对他们接受的培训和日常工作感到满意。两组的学生都对老师使用例行程序帮助他们学习的方式感到满意。培训后教师组之间没有差异。两组教师所教授的全组学生的后测知识分数也显着高于前测分数。患有 LD 的学生也取得了类似的显着结果。此外，大众教师的整个学生群体的后测成绩明显高于AW教师的学生群体。两个教师组都对他们接受的培训和日常工作感到满意。两组的学生都对老师使用例行程序帮助他们学习的方式感到满意。患有 LD 的学生也取得了类似的显着结果。此外，大众教师的整个学生群体的后测成绩明显高于AW教师的学生群体。两个教师组都对他们接受的培训和日常工作感到满意。两组的学生都对老师使用例行程序帮助他们学习的方式感到满意。患有 LD 的学生也取得了类似的显着结果。此外，大众教师的整个学生群体的后测成绩明显高于AW教师的学生群体。两个教师组都对他们接受的培训和日常工作感到满意。两组的学生都对老师使用例行程序帮助他们学习的方式感到满意。