SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics / 2018 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1

Turkish EFL Instructors’ Engagement in Professional Development

AYFER TANIŞ
Kenan DİKİLİTAŞ
Pages
27–47
DOI
—
🏛️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)

In this context, AR as an on-going PD activity is seen as highly effective for fostering teachers’ practical knowledge.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:While the beliefs and practices of teachers on professional development (PD) are generally considered to promote quality in education and raise teachers’ awareness regarding teaching strategies, there is still limited research available into different PD models’ effectiveness in providing teachers with practical knowledge.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This research aims to explore the role of AR in Turkish EFL instructors’ beliefs, and compare action research (AR), as a transformative model, with transmissive and transitional PD models.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this context, AR as an on-going PD activity is seen as highly effective for fostering teachers’ practical knowledge.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Action research · observation · reflection

Abstract

While the beliefs and practices of teachers on professional development (PD) are generally considered to promote quality in education and raise teachers’ awareness regarding teaching strategies, there is still limited research available into different PD models’ effectiveness in providing teachers with practical knowledge. This research aims to explore the role of AR in Turkish EFL instructors’ beliefs, and compare action research (AR), as a transformative model, with transmissive and transitional PD models. Qualitative data collected by means of semi-structured in-depth interviews were analysed by using constant comparative data analysis procedure. The participants were nine Turkish EFL instructors from a state university, selected according to purposive criterion-based sampling. The results revealed that the PD beliefs of Turkish EFL instructors conducting AR were different from those engaging in transmissive PD models in terms of access to and reflection on knowledge. The beliefs of the former group indicated strong evidence of a lifelong learning PD process, collaboration-based PD practices with intrinsic motivation, integration of inquiry based, experiential knowledge with reflective practice experiences, and a bottom up approach to PD. In contrast, the latter group showed short-term learning, and a theoretical knowledge transmission model depending on extrinsic motivation, presenting non-reflective, passive roles, with a top down approach. In this context, AR as an on-going PD activity is seen as highly effective for fostering teachers’ practical knowledge.

🔖

Cite This Article

TANIŞ, A., DİKİLİTAŞ, K. (2018). Turkish EFL Instructors’ Engagement in Professional Development. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1, 27–47. https://ajindex.com/articles/284931

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Atay, D. (2006). Teachers' professional development: Partnerships in research. TESLEJ, 10(2), 1-15.
  2. Atay, D. (2008). Teacher research for professional development. ELT Journal, 62, 139- 47. Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.
  3. Borg, S. (2015). Overview – beyond the workshop: CPD for English language teachers. In S. Borg (Ed.), Professional development for English language teachers: Perspectives from higher education in Turkey (pp. 5-12). Ankara:
  4. British Council. Bracey, G. W. (2009). “Some Thoughts as ‘Research’ Turns 25.” Phi Delta Kappan 90(7), 530–531.
  5. Burns, A. (2005). Action research: An evolving paradigm? Language Teaching, 38, 57-74.
  6. Burns, A. (2009). Action research in second language teacher education. In A. Burns &s J. Richards (Eds.), Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 289-297). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research for English language teachers. A guide for practitioners. New York: Routledge. Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509–536).
  8. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Choi, T., & Andon, N. (2014). Can a teacher certification scheme change ELT classroom practice? ELT Journal, 68(1), 12-21.
  9. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Grounded theory designs. In J. W. Creswell (Ed.), Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (pp. 422-500). Boston: Pearson Education. Cullen, R. (1997). Transfer of training assessing the impact of INSET in Tanzania. In D. Hayes (Ed.), Inservice teacher development: International perspectives. London: Prentice Hall. Darling-Hammond, L. (1990). Instructional policy into practice: the power of the bottom over the top. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 233-241.
  10. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 300-314.
  11. Dikilitaş, K. (2015). Teacher researchers in action. In K. Dikilitaş, R. Smith, & W. Trotman, (Eds.), Professional development through teacher research, (pp. 47-55). UK: IATEFL. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers’ College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.
  12. Freeman, D. (1998). Doing teacher research: From inquiry to under