The use of coding instruments in the Productive Pedagogies Research, alongside semi-structured interviews, served a number of purposes. First, the instruments were configured to respond directly to the Queensland context, in which both academic and social student outcomes are explicitly valued in schooling. Second, the multidimensional nature of the study opened up the possibility of analysing empirically unanswered questions in the history of school reform—namely, what forms of classroom practice contribute to more equitable student outcomes, and what forms of classroom practice contribute to improved student outcomes for all students. While a substantial body of research has been devoted to analysing these two questions, the Productive Pedagogies Research was one of the first attempts to examine these questions in the context of systemic school reform. Third, the productive pedagogies framework formed the basis of productive assessment. Analysis of student work samples enabled an examination of the extent to which pedagogies and assessment were aligned to produce high-quality outcomes.
It is important to recall that our intention in creating the observation instrument was for the purpose of coding classrooms, in order to examine in a systematic way the link between teachers' classroom practices and students' academic and social outcomes. Semi-structured interviews were designed to accompany the coding schedule. Coding instruments, of necessity, limit what is observed and said about classrooms: their checklist structure does not register events beyond its descriptive boundaries, and