SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Baskent University Journal of Education / 2026 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: Özel Sayı Özel Sayı

Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: A Critical Review of Frameworks for EFL Teacher Professional Development

İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin Mesleki Gelişimine Yönelik Çatıların Eleştirel İncelemesi: Tek Tip Anlayışın Ötesinde

Yasemin Turan Aydın(IZMIR DEMOCRACY UNIVERSITY, INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES)0009-0001-1335-5594
Vasfiye Geckin(IZMIR DEMOCRACY UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF EDUCATION)0000-0001-8532-8627
Pages
146–163
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Implications are made for policymakers, teachers, and stakeholders looking to build more integrated and efficient TPD strategies in Türkiye and comparative contexts.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This critical review explores emergent paradigms in teacher professional development (TPD) with a focus on in-service English language teachers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Drawing on recent research, the study examines dominant frameworks such as TPACK, Lesson Study, Communities of Practice (CoP), self-directed models, and blended learning designs.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Implications are made for policymakers, teachers, and stakeholders looking to build more integrated and efficient TPD strategies in Türkiye and comparative contexts.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:öğretmen mesleki gelişimi · hizmetiçi öğretmen eğitimi · yabancı dil olarak İngilizce öğretimi

Abstract

This critical review explores emergent paradigms in teacher professional development (TPD) with a focus on in-service English language teachers. Drawing on recent research, the study examines dominant frameworks such as TPACK, Lesson Study, Communities of Practice (CoP), self-directed models, and blended learning designs. While each system is beneficial in aiding teacher learning, the review shows a persistent lack of a comprehensive, context-sensitive, and sustainable TPD system suiting the EFL teachers' realities. The critique points to the fragmentation of current practices, which are typical in their episodic, top-down training, barely practical for classroom teaching, teachers' agency, or teacher well-being. Informal and hybrid approaches, though more reflective and collaborative, are underdeveloped due to systemic constraints. The review concludes by summoning flexible, modular, and teacher-centered professional learning spaces responsive to institutional facilitation, local context, and evolving pedagogical needs. Implications are made for policymakers, teachers, and stakeholders looking to build more integrated and efficient TPD strategies in Türkiye and comparative contexts.

Özet

Bu eleştirel derleme, hizmetiçi İngilizce öğretmenlerine odaklanarak öğretmen mesleki gelişimi (ÖMG) alanında yeni ortaya çıkan paradigmaları incelemektedir. Güncel araştırmalardan yola çıkan bu çalışma, TPAB (Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi), Ders İmecesi (Lesson Study), Uygulama Toplulukları (Communities of Practice - CoP), öz-yönelimli modeller ve harmanlanmış öğrenme tasarımları gibi yaygın çerçeveleri ele almaktadır. Her bir sistem öğretmen öğrenimini desteklemede faydalı olsa da, bu derleme, İngilizcenin yabancı dil olarak öğretildiği ortamdaki öğretmenlerin gerçeklerine uygun, kapsamlı, bağlama duyarlı ve sürdürülebilir bir ÖMG sisteminin süregelen eksikliğini göstermektedir. Eleştiri, dönemsel ve yukarıdan aşağıya eğitimleriyle tipikleşen, sınıf içi öğretim, öğretmen özerkliği veya esenliği için pratik olmaktan uzak mevcut uygulamaların parçalılığına işaret etmektedir. Daha yansıtıcı ve işbirlikçi olmalarına rağmen, gayri resmi ve hibrit yaklaşımlar, sistemsel kısıtlamalar nedeniyle yeterince gelişmemiştir. Derleme, kurumsal desteğe, yerel bağlama ve değişen pedagojik ihtiyaçlara duyarlı; esnek, modüler ve öğretmen merkezli mesleki öğrenme alanları oluşturulması çağrısıyla son bulmaktadır. Türkiye ve benzer bağlamlarda daha bütünleşik ve verimli ÖMG stratejileri oluşturmayı amaçlayan politika yapıcılar, öğretmenler ve paydaşlar için çıkarımlarda bulunulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Aydın, Y. T., Geckin, V. (2026). Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: A Critical Review of Frameworks for EFL Teacher Professional Development. Baskent University Journal of Education, Cilt: 13 Sayı: Özel Sayı Özel Sayı, 146–163. https://doi.org/10.67306/bujoe.1755171

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (91)

  1. Abdallah, M. M. S. & Waer, H. (2024). Exploring the Informal Online practices of In-service English Language Teachers on Facebook as part of their Continuing Professional Development. CDELT Occasional Papers in the Development of English Education, Vol 87.
  2. AbdulRab, H. (2023). Teacher professional development in the 21st century. African Journal of Education and Practice, 9, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.47604/ajep.2237
  3. Acar, S. P., Akgün Özpolat, E., & Çomoğlu, İ. (2023). Teacher-tailored classroom observation for professional growth of EFL instructors: An exploratory case study. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 16(1), 26–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2023.160103
  4. Aga, F. J. (2024). Teachers’ doing action research, learning and changing: Claims and practicality. Inquiry in Education, 16(1), Article 2. https://digitalcommons.nl.edu/ie/vol16/iss1/2
  5. Ahmad, H., & Shah, S. R. (2022). Teacher agency and professional development: A study on Cambridge English teacher program in the Arabian Gulf. Cogent Education, 9(1), Article 2080352. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2080352
  6. Akçor, G., & Ergül, H. (2025). A needs analysis study of novice EFL teachers’ professional development in Türkiye. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 19(1), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15210710
  7. Alzankawi, M. A., & Alenezi, Y. M. (2021). English language teachers' perceptions of PAAET's professional development programs: Implications on guideline formulation for training programs. International Education Studies, 14(9), 90–107.
  8. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007
  9. Ayar, Z. (2023). Reflections of Turkish instructors on a six-week online professional development course in the work-from-home era. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 12–31. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8186471
  10. Balaman, U. (2023). Conversation Analytic Language Teacher Education in Digital Spaces. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19127-5
  11. Baluchzada, S. (2023). Effectiveness of reflective teaching on professional development of English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers. MEXTESOL Journal, 47(3).
  12. Bangs, J., & Frost, D. (2012). Teacher self-efficacy, voice and leadership: Towards a policy framework for Education International. University of Cambridge, Faculty of Education.
  13. Barrientos-Moncada, M. I., Carvajal-Castaño, N. A., & Aristizabal-Cardona, H. S. (2023). EFL teacher professional development needs: Voices from the periphery. HOW, 30(2), 92–109. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.30.2.761
  14. Başar, S., & Çomoğlu, İ. (2024). A review of critical pedagogy-informed collaborative professional development practices in English language teaching. Profile: Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 26(2), 163–179. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v26n2.110341
  15. Bhandari, B. L. (2025). Exploring Reflective Practices for In-service English Language Teachers’ Professional Development. Journal of Research in Education, 1(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.3126/jore.v1i1.78704
  16. Bon, S., & Inpin, B. (2024). Roles of two PD modes in technology integration for EFL classes: Training and professional learning communities. Issues in Educational Research, 34(1), 1–18. http://www.iier.org.au/iier34/bon.pdf
  17. Borg, S. (2018). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. Bloomsbury Academic.
  18. Brinton, D. M., Chilmonik, K., Echelberger, A., Koi, B., & Monh, S. (2020–2021). Establishing and sustaining a community of practice. CATESOL Journal, 32(1), 133–143.
  19. British Council. (2015). Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Framework for teachers. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/CPD_framework_for_teachers_WEB.PDF
  20. Bubb, S., & Earley, P. (2007). Leading and managing continuing professional development: Developing people, developing schools. Sage.
  21. Canaran, Ö. (2023). Teacher educators’ professional development through online peer-coaching. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 15(2), 892–911. https://ijci.net/index.php/IJCI/article/view/1240/623
  22. Carpenter, J. P., & Linton, J. N. (2018). Educators’ perspectives on the impact of Edcamp unconference professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.014
  23. Çetin, C., & Bayrakcı, M. (2019). Teacher professional development models for effective teaching and learning in schools. The Online Journal of Quality in Higher Education, 6(1), 32–38.
  24. Chandra, R. (2023). Professional development approaches for teachers. In Singh, B. & Singh, K. (Eds.), Professional Development of Teacher Educators in Current Perspective (pp. 38–45). Bluerose Publishers.
  25. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report
  26. Dehghani, E., Rezvani, E., & Hadian, B. (2025). Collaborative inquiry in EFL teachers’ professional development. Professional Development in Education, 51(2), 245–263. https://eurokd.com/doi/10.32038/ltrq.2025.47.05
  27. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140
  28. Dikilitaş, K., & Göktürk Sağlam, A. L. (2023). Exploring the practical impacts of research engagement on English language teaching: Insights from an online community of practice. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 16(1), 46–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2023.160105
  29. Dogan, C., & Kirkgoz, Y. (2022). Promoting continuous professional development of English teachers through action research. International Journal of Educational Reform, 31(3), 246–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879211062224
  30. DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Solution Tree Press.
  31. Dyosini, T. (2024). Professional development of teachers: Perceptions and challenges of foundation phase teachers. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v14i1.1572
  32. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.
  33. Fernandez, K. V. (2019). Critically reviewing literature: A tutorial for new researchers. Australasian Marketing Journal, 27(3), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2019.05.001
  34. Freeman, D., & Johnson, K. E. (1998). Reconceptualizing the knowledge‐base of language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 397–417.
  35. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
  36. Gudeta, D. (2022). Professional development through reflective practice: The case of Addis Ababa secondary school EFL in-service teachers. Cogent Education, 9(1), Article 2030076. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2030076
  37. Gülşen, E., & Atay, D. (2022). The impact of dialogic reflections on teacher autonomy. Teacher Development, 26(5), 609–626. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2022.2121747
  38. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 45–51.
  39. Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512
  40. Hiew, W., & Murray, J. (2021). Enhancing Huber’s evaluation framework for teacher professional development programme. Professional Development in Education, 50(4), 669–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1901236
  41. Karabuga, F. (2021). Analysis of teachers as researchers in the classrooms: Lesson study experience from EFL teachers’ perspectives. TESL-EJ, 25(3). https://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume25/ej99/ej99a7/
  42. Karatay, H., & Hegelheimer, V. (2021). CALL Teacher Training: Considerations for Low-Resource Environments. Language Learning & Technology, 25(2), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.20159
  43. Kennedy, A. (2014). Understanding continuing professional development: The need for theory to impact on policy and practice. Professional Development in Education, 40(5), 688–697.
  44. Kennedy, A. (2016). Designing professional development for teachers: A literature review. European Commission.
  45. Kennedy, E. (2021). Blended learning in teacher education & training: Findings from research and practice. British Council.
  46. Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980.
  47. Khan, Z., & Umrani, S. (2023). Continuous professional development needs for in-service English language teachers (INSELTs) at tertiary level: An integrative review. Journal of Social Sciences and Media Studies, 7(1), 34–43.
  48. Kim, H., & Lee, J. H. (2022). SMART Teacher Lab: A learning platform for the professional development of EFL teachers. Language Learning & Technology, 26(2), 25–37. https://doi.org/10125/73475
  49. Koşar, G., Dolapçıoğlu, S., & Akbana, Y. E. (2022). Identifying professional development practices and needs of the English language teachers teaching at Anatolian high schools in the county of Antakya, Turkey. Participatory Educational Research, 9(5), 243–261. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.113.9.5
  50. Kristiawan, D., Carter, C., & Picard, M. (2022). Impact of CALL professional development for EFL materials on teacher agency and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in Indonesian Islamic schools. Teaching English with Technology, 22(3–4), 20–42.
  51. Lai, C., Wang, Q., & Huang, X. (2022). The differential interplay of TPACK, teacher beliefs, school culture and professional development with the nature of in-service EFL teachers' technology adoption. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(5), 1389–1411. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13200
  52. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
  53. Lee, Y.-J., & Davis, R. (2022). English teachers’ experiences of participating in a long‑term professional development for teaching English through English. MEXTESOL Journal, 46(2), 1–18. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1357773.pdf
  54. Lowe, R. J., Turner, M. W., & Schaefer, M. Y. (2021). Dialogic research engagement through podcasting as a step towards action research: A collaborative autoethnography of teachers exploring their knowledge and practice. Educational Action Research, 29(3), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2021.1908905
  55. Marisa, R., Rachmajanti, S., & Anugerahwati, M. (2024). Investigating the digital proficiency of English as a foreign language (EFL) educators in association with their professional identity. JALT CALL Journal, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v20n2.1315
  56. McConnochie, M., & González, E. M. (2023). Developing teacher critical language awareness through narrative (funds of) knowledging. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 22(4), 308–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2023.2202585
  57. Mercer, S., Farrell, C., & Freeman, D. (2022). Self-directed professional development in ELT. Oxford University Press. https://www.oup.com/elt/expert
  58. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
  59. Moorhouse, B. L., Kohnke, L., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). Developing a context- and subject-specific professional digital competence framework for beginning English language teachers in Hong Kong. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 33, 1105–1115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-023-00778-2
  60. Nazim, M., & Alzubi, A. A. F. (2025). EFL teachers’ perspectives of online and in-person professional development practices: Vision 2030 and Saudi education reforms in focus. SAGE Open, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251325596
  61. Nguyen, A. T., Nguyen, H. T., Phuong, H. Y., Le, T. T., Pham, T. T., & Huynh-Thi, T. A. T. (2024). Teachers’ continuous professional development through lesson study: Voices of Vietnamese EFL teachers at university. Qualitative Research in Education, 13(1), 64–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.17583/qre.12154
  62. Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609
  63. Pak, K., Desimone, L. M., & Parsons, A. (2020). An integrative approach to professional development to support college- and career- readiness standards. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 28(111). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.28.4970
  64. Paré, G., & Kitsiou, S. (2017). Methods for literature reviews. In F. Lau & C. Kuziemsky (Eds.), Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach (pp. 157–179). University of Victoria.
  65. Philipsen, B., Tondeur, J., Roblin, N. P., Vanslambrouck, S., & Zhu, C. (2019). Improving teacher professional development for online and blended learning: A systematic meta-aggregative review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 1145–1174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09645-8
  66. Pineda, H., Lorca, A., Cortes, S., Gador, S., Mangompit, R. M., Pacaldo, F. J., & Lorca, E. (2022). Development and evaluation of a professional development program on designing participatory action research projects for basic education teachers. Advanced Education, 21, 161–184. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.266663
  67. Poonpon, K. (2021). Professional development needs of in-service English language teachers in Thailand. THAITESOL Journal, 34(2), 1–25.
  68. Puentedura, R. (2010) SAMR and TPCK: Intro to Advanced Practice. http://hippasus.com/resources/sweden2010/SAMR_TPCK_IntroToAdvancedPractice.pdf
  69. Rauf, M., Ali, T., & Noor, N. A. M. (2017). The relationship between models of teachers professional development and teachers’ instructional practices. International Journal, 2(5), 120–132.
  70. Reed, M., & Chappell, P. (2021). Teachers driving their own professional development: Theory and practice. English Australia Journal, 37(1), 5–26.
  71. Sachs, J. (2016). Teacher professionalism: Why are we still talking about it? Teachers and Teaching, 22(4), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1082732
  72. Sadeghi, K., & Thomas, M. (2023). Second language teacher professional development: Technological innovations for post-emergency teacher education. Palgrave Macmillan.
  73. Sancar, H., Atal, D., & Deryakulu, D. (2021). A New Framework for Teachers’ Professional Development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 95, 103127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103305
  74. Sari, Y. R., Drajati, N. A., So, H.-J., & Sumardi, S. (2021). Enhancing EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) competence through reflective practice. TEFLIN Journal, 32(1), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v32i1/117-133
  75. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
  76. Sepulveda-Escobar, P. (2022). ESOL teacher educators’ learning initiatives and perceived learning needs: Still a pending task. Journal of Education for Teaching, 49(2), 280–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2022.2038517
  77. Shin, J. K., Borup, J., Barbour, M. K., & Quiroga Velasquez, R. V. (2022). Webinars for English language teachers during the pandemic: Global perspectives on transitioning to remote online teaching. AERA Open, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221083976
  78. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
  79. Tafazoli, D. (2022). CALL teacher education and professional development: A retrospective synthesis of the two decades of Teaching English with Technology. Teaching English with Technology, 22(3–4), 1–19. http://www.tewtjournal.org
  80. Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45.
  81. Thumvichit, A., Tangkiengsirisin, S., & Vathanalaoha, K. (2024). Making sense of collective leadership in English teacher associations: Insights from Thailand TESOL’s committees. English in Education, 58(4), 346–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2024.2358752
  82. Tran, T. T., Pham, T. T., & Le, T. T. (2024). Transformative interactions: ChatGPT’s role in facilitating professional development among Vietnamese English as a foreign language teachers. Higher Learning Research Communications, 14(2), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v14i2.1558
  83. Uştuk, Ö. (2022). How massive open online courses constitute digital learning spaces for EFL teachers: A netnographic case study. Teaching English with Technology, 22(3–4), 43–62.
  84. Uysal, H. H. (2012). Evaluation of an in-service training program for primary-school language teachers in Turkey. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(7). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n7.4
  85. Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: An international review of the literature. Paris: UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning.
  86. Yasar, M. Ö., & Polat, M. (2021). The potential and prospect for a MOOC-based flipped classroom model in Turkish higher education in relation to professional teacher development. International TESOL Journal, 16(7), 51–85.
  87. Yeo, M. A. (2021). “Experiencing theory first-hand was delightful and informative”: Bridging the theory–practice gap in online language assessment training. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 93–116.
  88. Yücedağ, Z., & Şevik, M. (2021). Perceptions of EFL teachers from Turkey, Germany, and Spain on professional development and their professional development activities. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 13(2), 1389–1426.
  89. Zahran, F. A. (2023). The impact of ASSURE model-based program on EFL in-service preparatory teachers’ teaching skills and digital literacy skills. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 9(4), 937–950. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.3279
  90. Zeichner, K. (1999). The new scholarship in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(9), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028009004
  91. Zhou, X., Padron, Y., & Waxman, H. (2024). English as a Foreign Language Teachers’ Technology Professional Development Needs. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 11(1), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.52380/ijcer.2024.11.1.631