(* Studies included in the review are denoted with an asterisk)

Akturk, A. O., & Sahin, I. (2011). Literature review on metacognition and its measurement. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3731–3736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.364

Alexander, P. A. (2020). Methodological guidance paper: The art and science of quality systematic reviews. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319854352

Anderman, E. M., Eccles, J. S., Yoon, K. S., Roeser, R., Wigfield, A., & Blumenfeld, P. (2001). Learning to value mathematics and reading: Relations to mastery and performance-oriented instructional practices. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(1), 76–95. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1043

Balagtas, M. U. (2021). Alignment of the Philippine mathematics teacher education curriculum with the programme for international student assessment. European Journal of Mathematics and Science Education, 2(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmse.2.2.145

* Bardach, L., Yanagida, T., Morin, A. J. S., & Lueftenegger, M. (2021). Is everyone in class in agreement and why (not)? Using student and teacher reports to predict within-class consensus on goal structures. Learning and Instruction, 71, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101400

* Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., Neubrand, M., & Tsai, Y.-M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209345157

* Bellens, K., van Damme, J., van den Noortgate, W., Wendt, H., & Nilsen, T. (2019). Instructional quality: catalyst or pitfall in educational systems’ aim for high achievement and equity? An answer based on multilevel SEM analyses of TIMSS 2015 data in Flanders (Belgium), Germany, and Norway. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 7, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-019-0069-2

Berliner, D. C. (2005). The near impossibility of testing for teacher quality. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(3), 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105275904

Bruder, R. (2018). Fachliche Unterrichtsqualität im Kontext der Basisdimensionen guten Unterrichts aus mathematikdidaktischer Perspektive [Subject-related teaching quality in the context of the basic dimensions of good teaching from a mathematical-didactic perspective]. In M. Martens, K. Rabenstein, K. Bräu, M. Fetzer, H. Gresch, I. Hardy, & C. Schelle (Eds.), Konstruktionen von Fachlichkeit: Ansätze, Erträge und Diskussionen in der empirischen Unterrichtsforschung [Constructions of professionalism: approaches, outputs and discussions in empirical classroom research] (pp. 203–218). Klinkhardt, Julius.

Brunner, E. (2018). Quality of mathematics teaching: A question of perspective. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 39(2), 257–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13138-017-0122-z

Busse, A. (2015). Teds-Unterricht: Ziele und Forschungsfragen [Teds-instruct: Targets and research questions]. Universität Hamburg. https://bit.ly/3HEkSpT

Charalambous, C. Y., & Praetorius, A.‑K. (2018). Studying mathematics instruction through different lenses: Setting the ground for understanding instructional quality more comprehensively. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50(3), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0914-8

* Cheema, J. R., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Influences of disciplinary classroom climate on high school student self-efficacy and mathematics achievement: A look at gender and racial-ethnic differences. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1261–1279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9454-4

* Creemers, B. P. M., & Kyriakides, L. (2008). The dynamics of educational effectiveness: A contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. Contexts of learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203939185

Creemers, B. P. M., Kyriakides, L., & Antoniou, P. (2013). Teacher professional development for improving quality of teaching. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5207-8

Dagli, U. Y. (2019). Effect of increased instructional time on student achievement. Educational Review, 71(4), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1441808

De Corte, E. (2004). Mainstreams and perspectives in research on learning (mathematics) from instruction. Applied Psychology, 53(2), 279–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00172.x

* Demir, S. B. (2018). The effect of teaching quality and teaching practices on PISA 2012 mathematics achievement of Turkish students. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 5(4), 645–658. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.463409

Ditton, H. (2002). Unterrichtsqualität - Konzeptionen, methodische Überlegungen und Perspektiven [Teaching quality - concepts, methodological considerations and perspectives]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 30(3), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:7685

Doig, B., Groves, S., Tytler, R., & Gough, A. (2005). Primary and secondary mathematics practice: How different is it? In P. Clarkson (Ed.), Building connections: Research, Theory and Practice. Proceedings of the annual conference held at RMIT, Melbourne (pp. 305–312). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.

Drollinger-Vetter, B. (2011). Verstehenselemente und strukturelle Klarheit: Fachdidaktische Qualität der Anleitung von mathematischen Verstehensprozessen im Unterricht [Elements of understanding and structural clarity: Didactic quality of the instruction of mathematical processes of understanding in the classroom]. Waxmann.

* Dubberke, T., Kunter, M., McElvany, N., Brunner, M., & Baumert, J. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and their impact on instructional quality and student achievement. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 22(3-4), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.22.34.193

* Eriksson, K., Helenius, O., & Ryve, A. (2019). Using TIMSS items to evaluate the effectiveness of different instructional practices. Instructional Science, 47(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9473-1

* Faber, J. M., Glas, C. A. W., & Visscher, A. J. (2018). Differentiated instruction in a data-based decision-making context. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2017.1366342

Fenstermacher, G. D., & Richardson, V. (2005). On making determinations of quality in teaching. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 186–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00462.x

Fischer, R. (1998). Wissenschaft und Bewusstsein der Gesellschaft [Science and awareness in society]. Zeitschrift für Hochschuldidaktik, 3, 106–120.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Gage, N. L., & Needels, M. C. (1989). Process-product research on teaching: A review of criticisms. The Elementary School Journal, 89(9), 253–300. https://doi.org/10.1086/461577

* Gamlem, S. M. (2019). Mapping teaching through interactions and pupils’ learning in mathematics. SAGE Open, 9(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019861485

Gitomer, D. H., & Bell, C. A. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed.). American Educational Research Association. https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-48-6

Guill, K., Lüdtke, O., & Köller, O. (2020). Assessing the instructional quality of private tutoring and its effects on student outcomes: Analyses from the German National Educational Panel Study. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 282–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12281

Hartmann, J., Schauer, S., Krauth, C., & Amelung, V. (2012). Methoden zur Prädiktion von Hochnutzern: ein systematischer Literatur-Review [Methods for predicting heavy users: a systematic literature review]. GMS Medizinische Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3205/mibe000126

Harvey, L., & Green, D. (2000). Qualität definieren: fünf unterschiedliche Ansätze [Defining quality: Five different approaches]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, (Suppl. 41), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:8483

Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332

Helmke, A. (2017). Unterrichtsqualität und Lehrerprofessionalität: Diagnose, Evaluation und Verbesserung des Unterrichts [Teaching quality and teacher professionalism: diagnosis, evaluation and improvement of teaching] (7th ed.). Klett Kallmeyer.

Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classoom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the national council of teachers of mathematics (pp. 371–404). Information Age Pub.

Jentsch, A., Schlesinger, L., Heinrichs, H., Kaiser, G., König, J., & Blömeke, S. (2021). Erfassung der fachspezifischen Qualität von Mathematikunterricht: Faktorenstruktur und Zusammenhänge zur professionellen Kompetenz von Mathematiklehrpersonen [Measuring the subject-specific quality of mathematics teaching: Factor structure and links to the professional competence of mathematics teachers]. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik, 42, 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13138-020-00168-x

* Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011). Identifying effective classroom practices using student achievement data. Journal of Human Resources, 46(3), 587–613. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhr.2011.0010

* Kelcey, B., Hill, H. C., & Chin, M. J. (2019). Teacher mathematical knowledge, instructional quality, and student outcomes: A multilevel quantile mediation analysis. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 30(4), 398–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2019.1570944

* Kistner, S., Rakoczy, K., Otto, B., van Dignath Ewijk, C., Buettner, G., & Klieme, E. (2010). Promotion of self-regulated learning in classrooms: investigating frequency, quality, and consequences for student performance. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9055-3

Klieme, E. (2013). The role of large-scale assessments in research on educational effectiveness and school development. In M. von Davier, E. Gonzalez, I. Kirsch, & K. Yamamoto (Eds.), The role of international large-scale assessments: Perspectives from technology, economy, and educational research (pp. 115–148). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4629-9

Klieme, E., Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., & Ratzka, N. (2006). Qualitätsdimensionen und Wirksamkeit von Mathematikunterricht: theoretische Grundlagen und ausgewählte Ergebnisse des Projektes “Pythagoras“ [Quality dimensions and effectiveness of mathematics teaching: theoretical foundations and selected results of the "Pythagoras" project]. In M. Prenzel & L. Allolio-Näcke (Eds.), Untersuchungen zur Bildungsqualität von Schule: Abschlussbericht des DFG-Schwerpunktprogramms [Studies on the educational quality of schools: Final report of the DFG priority programme] (pp. 127–146). Waxmann.

Klieme, E., & Rakoczy, K. (2008). Empirische Unterrichtsforschung und Fachdidaktik: Outcome-orientierte Messung und Prozessqualität des Unterrichts [Empirical teaching research and subject didactics: Outcome-oriented measurement and process quality of teaching]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 54(2), 222–237. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:4348

Klieme, E., Schümer, G., & Knoll, S. (2001). Mathematikunterricht in der Sekundarstufe I: „Aufgabenkultur“ und Unterrichtsgestaltung [Mathematics teaching in lower secondary education: "task culture" and lesson design]. In Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (Ed.), TIMSS - Impulse für Schule und Unterricht. Forschungsbefunde, Reforminitiativen, Praxisberichte und Video-Dokumente [TIMSS - Impulses for schools and teaching. Research findings, reform initiatives, practice reports and video documents] (pp. 43–58). BMBF.

König, J., Blömeke, S., Jentsch, A., Schlesinger, L., Nehls, C. F. N., Musekamp, F., & Kaiser, G. (2021). The links between pedagogical competence, instructional quality, and mathematics achievement in the lower secondary classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107, 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10021-0

Krainer, K. (2005). Was guter Mathematikunterricht ist, müssen Lehrende ständig selbst erarbeiten!: Spannungsfelder als Orientierung zur Gestaltung von Unterricht [Teachers must constantly work out for themselves what good mathematics teaching is!: Areas of conflict as orientation for the design of lessons]. In C. Kaune, I. Schwank, & J. Sjuts (Eds.), Schriftenreihe des Forschungsinstituts für Mathematikdidaktik: Vol. 40,1. Mathematikdidaktik im Wissenschaftsgefüge: Zum Verstehen und Unterrichten mathematischen Denkens; Festschrift für Elmar Cohors-Fresenborg [Mathematics Didactics in the Structure of Science: On Understanding and Teaching Mathematical Thinking] (1st ed., pp. 165–178). Forschungsinstitut für Mathematikdidaktik Osnabrück.

Krapp, A. (1999). Intrinsische Lernmotivation und Interesse: Forschungsansätze und konzeptuelle Überlegungen [Intrinsic learning motivation and interest: Research approaches and conceptual considerations]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 45(3), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:5958

Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice & Using Software. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446288719

* Kuger, S., Klieme, E., Luedtke, O., Schiepe-Tiska, A., & Reiss, K. (2017). Student learning in secondary school mathematics classrooms: On the validity of student reports in international large-scale studies. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 20(2), 61–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-017-0750-6

Kunter, M. (2005). Multiple Ziele im Mathematikunterricht [Multiple objectives in mathematics teaching]. Waxmann.

* Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional Competence of Teachers: Effects on Instructional Quality and Student Development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032583

Learning Mathematics for Teaching Project. (2011). Measuring the mathematical quality of instruction. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14(1), 25–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-010-9140-1

Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education. (n.d.). Unterrichtsqualität und mathematisches Verständnis in verschiedenen Unterrichtskulturen [Teaching quality and mathematical understanding in different teaching cultures]. https://www.dipf.de/de/forschung/projektarchiv/Pythagoras

Lindmeier, A., & Heinze, A. (2020). Die fachdidaktische Perspektive in der Unterrichtsqualitätsforschung: (bisher) ignoriert, implizit enthalten oder nicht relevant? [The subject didactic perspective in teaching quality research: (so far) ignored, implicitly included or not relevant?]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, (Suppl. 66), 255–268.

* Lipowsky, F., Rakoczy, K., Pauli, C., Drollinger-Vetter, B., Klieme, E., & Reusser, K. (2009). Quality of geometry instruction and its short-term impact on students’ understanding of the Pythagorean Theorem. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 527–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.11.001

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The prisma statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

Ni, Y., Li, Q., Li, X., & Zhang, Z.-H. (2011). Influence of curriculum reform: An analysis of student mathematics achievement in Mainland China. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 100–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.06.005

* Ni, Y., Zhou, D. ‑H. R., Cai, J., Li, X., Li, Q., & Sun, I. X. (2018). Improving cognitive and affective learning outcomes of students through mathematics instructional tasks of high cognitive demand. Journal of Educational Research, 111(6), 704–719. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2017.1402748

Nilsen, T., & Gustafsson, J. ‑E. (Eds.). (2016). Teacher quality, instructional quality and student outcomes (Vol. 2). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-4122-8

Nilsen, T., Gustafsson, J.‑E., & Blömeke, S. (2016). Conceptual framework and methodology of this report. In T. Nilsen & J.-E. Gustafsson (Eds.), Teacher quality, instructional quality and student outcomes (pp. 1–20). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41252-8

Nückles, M., & Wittwer, J. (2014). Lernen und Wissenserwerb [Learning and knowledge acquisition]. In T. Seidel & A. Krapp (Eds.), Psychologie 2014. Pädagogische Psychologie: Mit Online-Materialien (6th ed., pp. 225–252). Julius Beltz.

* Ozberk, E. B. U., Findik, L. Y., & Ozberk, E. H. (2018). Investigation of the variables affecting the math achievement of resilient students at school and student level. Education and Science/ Egitim ve Bilim, 43(194), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7153

* Ozdemir, A. S., & Sahal, M. (2018). The effect of teaching integers through the problem posing approach on students’ academic achievement and mathematics attitudes. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, (78), 117–137. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2018.78.6

* Pauli, C., Drollinger-Vetter, B., Hugener, I., & Lipowsky, F. (2008). Cognitive activation and mathematics instruction. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 22(2), 127–133. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.22.2.127

Perry, B., Wong, N. ‑Y., & Howard, P. (2006). Comparing primary and secondary mathematics teachers’ beliefs about mathematics, mathematics learning and mathematics teaching in Hong Kong and Australia. In F. K. S. Leung, K.-D. Graf, & F. J. Lopez-Real (Eds.), New ICMI study series: Vol. 9. Mathematics education in different cultural traditions - a comparative study of East Asia and the West: The 13^th ICMI study (Vol. 9, pp. 435–448). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-29723-5_26

Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09332374

Pigott, T. D., & Polanin, J. R. (2020). Methodological guidance paper: High-quality meta-analysis in a systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 90(1), 24–46. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319877153

* Pinger, P., Rakoczy, K., Besser, M., & Klieme, E. (2018). Implementation of formative assessment - effects of quality of programme delivery on students’ mathematics achievement and interest. Assessment in Education-Principles Policy & Practice, 25(2), 160–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1170665

Praetorius, A.‑K., Herrmann, C., Gerlach, E., Zülsdorf-Kersting, M., Heinitz, B., & Nehring, A. (2020). Unterrichtsqualität in den Fachdidaktiken im deutschsprachigen Raum – zwischen Generik und Fachspezifik [Teaching quality in subject didactics in German-speaking countries - between generics and subject specifics]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 48(3), 409–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42010-020-00082-8

Praetorius, A.‑K., Klieme, E., Herbert, B., & Pinger, P. (2018). Generic dimensions of teaching quality: The German framework of three basic dimensions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50(3), 407–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4

Praetorius, A.‑K., Klieme, E., Kleickmann, T., Brunner, E., Lindmeier, A., Taut, S., & Charalambous, C. Y. (2020). Towards developing a theory of generic teaching quality: origin, current status, and necessary next steps regarding the three basic dimensions model. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, (Suppl. 66), 15–36.

Praetorius, A.‑K., Pauli, C., Reusser, K., Rakoczy, K., & Klieme, E. (2014). One lesson is all you need? Stability of instructional quality across lessons. Learning and Instruction, 31, 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.002

Praetorius, A.-K., Rogh, W., & Kleickmann, T. (2020). Blinde Flecken des Modells der drei Basisdimensionen von Unterrichtsqualität? Das Modell im Spiegel einer internationalen Synthese von Merkmalen der Unterrichtsqualität [Blind spots of the model of the three basic dimensions of quality of teaching? The model in light of an international synthesis of characteristics of quality of teaching]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 48, 303–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42010-020-00072-w

Praetorius, A.‑K., Vieluf, S., Saß, S., Bernholt, A., & Klieme, E. (2016). The same in German as in English? Investigating the subject-specificity of teaching quality. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 19(1), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-015-0660-4

Randler, C., & Bogner, F. (2002). Comparing methods of instruction using bird species identification skills as indicators. Journal of Biological Education, 36(4), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2002.9655830

* Reusser, K., & Pauli, C. (2013). Verständnisorientierung in Mathematikstunden erfassen: Ergebnisse eines methodenintegrativen Ansatzes [Measuring comprehension orientation in mathematics lessons: Results of a method-integrative approach]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 59(3), 308–335. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:11940

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. J. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness (1st ed.). Pergamon.

Scheerens, J., Witziers, B., & Steen, R. (2013). A meta-analysis of school effectiveness studies. Revista De Educación, (361), 619–645. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2013-361-235

Schlesinger, L., & Jentsch, A. (2016). Theoretical and methodological challenges in measuring instructional quality in mathematics education using classroom observations. ZDM Mathematics Education, 48(1-2), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0765-0

Schlesinger, L., Jentsch, A., Kaiser, G., König, J., & Blömeke, S. (2018). Subject-specific characteristics of instructional quality in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50(3), 475–490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0917-5

Schratz, M. (2009). „Lernseits“ von Unterricht: Alte Muster, neue Lebenswelten - was für Schulen? [Paradigm shift in learning culture]. Lernende Schule, 12(46-47), 16–21.

* Seidel, T., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 454–499. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307310317

* Stronge, J. H., Ward, T. J., & Grant, L. W. (2011). What makes good teachers good? A cross-case analysis of the connection between teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487111404241

Toste, J. R., Didion, L., Peng, P., Filderman, M. J., & McClelland, A. M. (2020). A meta-analytic review of the relations between motivation and reading achievement for k–12 students. Review of Educational Research, 90(3), 420–456. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320919352

van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Drijvers, P. (2014). Realistic mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (Vol. 1, pp. 521–525). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8_170

* Vanlaar, G., Kyriakides, L., Panayiotou, A., Vandecandelaere, M., McMahon, L., de Fraine, B., & van Damme, J. (2015). Do the teacher and school factors of the dynamic model affect high- and low-achieving student groups to the same extent? a cross-country study. Research Papers in Education, 31(2), 183–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2015.1027724

von Elm, E., Schreiber, G., & Haupt, C. C. (2019). Methodische Anleitung für Scoping Reviews (JBI-Methodologie) [Methodological manual for scoping reviews]. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen, 143, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2019.05.004

Walkowiak, T. A., Berry, R. Q., Meyer, J. P., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Ottmar, E. R. (2014). Introducing an observational measure of standards-based mathematics teaching practices: Evidence of validity and score reliability. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(1), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9499-x

Walshaw, M., & Anthony, G. (2008). The teacher’s role in classroom discourse: A review of recent research into mathematics classrooms. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 516–551. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308320292

Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89–122. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543073001089

Weinert, F. E., Schrader, F. ‑W., & Helmke, A. (1989). Quality of instruction and achievement outcomes. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(8), 895–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90072-4

* Yi, H. S., & Lee, Y. (2017). A latent profile analysis and structural equation modeling of the instructional quality of mathematics classrooms based on the PISA 2012 results of Korea and Singapore. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9455-4

* Zepeda, C. D., Hlutkowsky, C. O., Partika, A. C., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2019). Identifying teachers’ supports of metacognition through classroom talk and its relation to growth in conceptual learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(3), 522–541. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000300