Journals / Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

Continuing professional development process: English language teachers’ views on the role of teacher research

Pages
61–75
Publication Date
2018-06-15
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)

The findings of the study have implications for English teachers, teacher trainers, curriculum developers, and policy-makers.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Twenty-seven English language teachers (19 females, 8 males) working in state schools were interviewed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings of the study have implications for English teachers, teacher trainers, curriculum developers, and policy-makers.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler Teacher Research · Professional Development · Teachers' Research Engagement

Özet

Öz Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt. Continuing professional development process: English language teachers’ views on the role of teacher research The changing needs of learners drive teachers to improve themselves in terms of professional development (PD). To achieve that, teachers apply to programs such as in-service training (INSET) programs. However, these programs may sometimes fail to respond to the needs of teachers; therefore, “teacher research” (TR) gains importance. A researcher teacher is expected to both engage IN (doing) TR as well as engage WITH (reading) it. Although TR contributes to teachers’ PD, only few studies are available in the Turkish context. Therefore, the current study aimed to reveal English language teachers’ views and practices on TR in the PD process. Twenty-seven English language teachers (19 females, 8 males) working in state schools were interviewed. Data collected through semi-structured interviews were analyzed via content analysis. From Richards and Farrell’s (2009) list of eleven tools for PD, only workshop was mentioned to be applied for their PD, meaning that teachers adopted input transfer activities although they saw themselves responsible for their PD. Additionally, although the majority of teachers favored the benefits of TR, none of them was found to do research, justifying Borg’s (2006) ten conditions for TR. The findings of the study have implications for English teachers, teacher trainers, curriculum developers, and policy-makers.

🔖

Cite This Article

YEŞİLÇINAR, S., ÇAKIR, A. (2018). Continuing professional development process: English language teachers’ views on the role of teacher research. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 61–75. https://ajindex.com/articles/29146

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Allison, D. & Carey, J. (2007). What do university language teachers say about language teaching research? TESL Canada Journal, 24(2), 61 81. Atay, D. (2007). Teacher research for professional development. ELT Journal, 62(2), 139-147.
  2. Barber, M. & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world's best-performing school systems come out on top, McKinsey & Co. Bayrakçı, M. (2009). In-service teacher training in Japan and Turkey: A comparative analysis of institutions and practices. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34, 10-22.
  3. Borg, S. (2006). Conditions for teacher research. English Teaching Forum, 44(4), 22-27.
  4. Borg, S. (2007). Research engagement in English language teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 731–747.
  5. Borg, S. (2008). English language teachers‟ beliefs about research: Perspectives from the Netherlands. Levende Talen Tijdschrift, 9(3), 3-13.
  6. Borg, S. (2009). English Language Teachers‟ Conceptions of Research. Applied Linguistics 30(3), 358–388. doi:10.1093/applin/amp007. Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Craig, D.V. (2009). Action Research Essentials. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Çelik, S., & Dikilitaş, K. (2015). Action research as a professional development strategy. In International perspectives on teacher research (pp. 125-138).
  8. Palgrave Macmillan UK. Farrell, T.S.C. & Jacobs, G (2010). Essentials in Language Teaching. London: Continuum Press.
  9. Francis, S., Hirsh, S., & Rowland, E. (1994). Improving school culture through study groups. Journal of Staff Development, 15, 12-12.
  10. Furlong, J., & Salisbury, J. (2005). Best practice research scholarships: An evaluation. Research Papers in Education, 20(1), 45–83.
  11. Genç, G. (2010). İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin Mesleki Gelişim Sürecinin Önünde Algıladıkları Başlıca Engeller: Malatya İli Örneği. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(31), 103-117.
  12. Ganz, J. (2008). Self-monitoring across age and ability levels: Teaching students to implement their own positive behavioral interventions. Preventing School Failure, 53(1), 39–48.
  13. Gu, L. & Wang, J. (2006). School-based research and professional learning: An innovative model to promote teacher professional development in China. Teaching Education, 17, 59-73.
  14. Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. & Yanowitz, C. L. (2009). Who is conducting teacher research? The Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 415-424.
  15. Hiep, P. H. (