KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2

Öğretmen Yeterliliklerindeki Küresel Eğilimlerin Haritalanması

Mapping Global Trends in Teacher Competencies

Ömer Cem Karacaoğlu(AYDIN ADNAN MENDERES ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2474-5106
Abdulkadir Özkaya(Hatay Mustafa Kemal University)0000-0002-6962-4597
Renan Şeker(NECMETTIN ERBAKAN UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-0953-1177
Aysun Yilmaz(NECMETTIN ERBAKAN UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-3758-1692
Sayfa
594–622
Yayın Tarihi
2025-12-27
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Amerika Birleşik Devletleri başı çekerken, Almanya, İspanya, Çin ve Türkiye'den gelen katkılar küresel katılımı göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimini etkileyen önemli bir unsur olan Öğretmen Yeterlikleri (ÖY), son yıllarda öğretmen eğitimi araştırmalarında önem kazanmıştır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Web of Science (WoS) veri tabanından (2000-2023) Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) veri tabanındaki 1117 makale incelenerek araştırma alanları, dergiler, ülkeler, bağlantılar, yazarlar, atıflar ve anahtar kelimeler araştırılarak bibliyometrik bir analiz yapılmıştır.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Amerika Birleşik Devletleri başı çekerken, Almanya, İspanya, Çin ve Türkiye'den gelen katkılar küresel katılımı göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:2000-2023 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Öğretmen Yeterlikleri Araştırmaları · Eğitim Politikaları · Bibliyometrik Analiz

Özet

Öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimini etkileyen önemli bir unsur olan Öğretmen Yeterlikleri (ÖY), son yıllarda öğretmen eğitimi araştırmalarında önem kazanmıştır. Bu makale, ÖY araştırmalarının mevcut durumunu ve gelecekteki yönelimlerini inceleyerek, bir literatür taraması yoluyla ÖY’yi tanımlamayı amaçlamaktadır. Web of Science (WoS) veri tabanından (2000-2023) Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) veri tabanındaki 1117 makale incelenerek araştırma alanları, dergiler, ülkeler, bağlantılar, yazarlar, atıflar ve anahtar kelimeler araştırılarak bibliyometrik bir analiz yapılmıştır. Mann-Kendall eğilim testi ile desteklenen sonuçlar, özellikle 2021-2022 yıllarında yayınlarda kayda değer bir artışla birlikte, artan ilgiyi gösteren sağlam ve etkili bir ÖY literatürünü vurgulamaktadır. Amerika Birleşik Devletleri başı çekerken, Almanya, İspanya, Çin ve Türkiye'den gelen katkılar küresel katılımı göstermektedir. Bulgular, alanın dinamizmini, küresel işbirliğini ve sağlam temelini vurgulayarak sürdürülebilir büyümeyi teyit etmektedir. Etkili yazarlar arasında Pantic, Krueger, Pekrun, Blömeke ve Kaiser öne çıkarken; ‘Sustainability’, ‘Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft’ ve ‘Teaching and Teacher Education’ en üretken dergiler olarak dikkat çekmiş, en fazla atıf ise ‘Teaching and Teacher Education’ dergisinde yoğunlaşmıştır. Önde gelen kurumlar arasında ise ‘Nanyang Teknoloji Üniversitesi’, ‘Humboldt Üniversitesi’ ve ‘Hong Kong Üniversitesi’ yer almaktadır. Farklı anahtar kelimeler, alanın çok boyutluluğunu yansıtan kapsamlı uzmanlığa işaret etmektedir. VOSviewer ile yapılan tematik kümeleme analizi sonucunda, ‘COVID-19 bağlamında yükseköğrenim ve öğretmen eğitimi’, ‘sürdürülebilir STEM ve yaratıcılık için öğretmen eğitimi ve mesleki gelişim’, ‘hizmet öncesi öğretmenlerde yeterliliklerin değerlendirilmesi’, ‘matematik öğretmeni gelişiminde biçimlendirici değerlendirme’, ‘fen eğitiminde öğretmen yeterliliği ve hazırlığı’ ile ‘teknolojide motivasyon ve öz yeterlilik’ olmak üzere altı anahtar kelime kümesi belirlenmiştir. Özetle, bu çalışma ÖY araştırmalarının dinamik ve küresel işbirliğine dayalı doğasını teyit etmekte ve gelecekteki araştırmalar için içgörüler sunmaktadır.

Abstract

Teacher Competencies (TC), as a pivotal dimension of teacher effectiveness influencing teachers' professional growth, has gained prominence in recent teacher education research. This article aims to define TC through literature review, examine the current status and future directions of TC research. Analyzing 1117 SSCI-indexed articles from the Web of Science database (2000-2023), a bibliometric analysis was conducted, exploring research areas, journals, countries, affiliations, authors, citations and keywords. The results, corroborated by the Mann-Kendall trend test, highlight a robust and influential Teacher Competencies literature indicating growing interest, with a notable increase in publications, especially in 2021-2022. While the United States of America leads the way, contributions from Germany, Spain, China, and Turkey show global participation. The findings affirm sustained growth, emphasizing the field's dynamism, global collaboration and a solid foundation. Among the influential authors, Pantic, Krueger, Pekrun, Blömeke and Kaiser stand out; “Sustainability”, “Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft” and “Teaching and Teacher Education” stand out as the most prolific journals, and the most citations are mainly concentrated in “Teaching and Teacher Education”. Leading institutions include ‘Nanyang Technological University’, ‘Humboldt University’ and ‘Hong Kong University’. Diverse keywords signify comprehensive expertise, reflecting the field's multidimensionality. As a result of the thematic clustering analysis conducted with VOSviewer, six keyword clusters were identified: ‘higher education and teacher training in the context of COVID-19’, ‘teacher education and professional development for sustainable STEM Teaching and creativity’, ‘assessment of competencies in preservice teachers’, ‘formative assessment in mathematics teacher professional development’, ‘teacher competence in science education and preparation’ and ‘motivation and self-efficacy in technology’. In summary, this study affirms Teacher Competencies research's dynamic and globally collaborative nature, offering insights for future exploration.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Karacaoğlu, Ö. C., Özkaya, A., Şeker, R., Yilmaz, A. (2025). Öğretmen Yeterliliklerindeki Küresel Eğilimlerin Haritalanması. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 594–622. https://ajindex.com/articles/1532040

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (92)

  1. Albareda-Tiana, S., Vidal-Raméntol, S., Pujol-Valls, M., & Fernández-Morilla, M. (2018). Holistic approaches to develop sustainability and research competencies in pre-service teacher training. Sustainability, 10(10), 3698.
  2. Ali, W. (2020). Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher education studies, 10(3), 16-25.
  3. Alkharusi, H., Kazem, A. M., & Al-Musawai, A. (2011). Knowledge, skills, and attitudes of preservice and inservice teachers in educational measurement. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2011.560649
  4. Almazova, N., Krylova, E., Rubtsova, A., & Odinokaya, M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for Russian higher education amid COVID-19: Teachers’ perspective. Education Sciences, 10(12), 368.
  5. Altan, M.Z., Özmusul, M. (2022). Teacher well-being in the future of Turkey: missing part of the teaching professional law. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (AKEF) Dergisi, 4(1), 24-42.
  6. Ananin, D., & Lovakov, A. (2022). Teacher education research in the global dimension: Bibliometric perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 118, 103801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103801
  7. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  8. Avcı, Ü., & Çulha, V. (2024). 21st century professionalising teachers' technology proficiency self-assessment and metaverse awareness levels. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 25-45, doi.org/10.51119/ereegf.2024.70
  9. Balıkçı, H. C., Alpsülün, M., & Hayoğlu, G. (2024). Determination of teachers' perceptions of artificial intelligence concept: A metaphor analysis. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 14 (Special Issue-AI in Education), 179-193. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.1433360
  10. Baser, D., Kopcha, T. J., & Ozden, M. Y. (2016). Developing a technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) assessment for preservice teachers learning to teach English as a foreign language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 749-764. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1047456
  11. Birkle, C., Pendlebury, D. A., Schnell, J., & Adams, J. (2020). Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00018
  12. Blanton, L. P., Sindelar, P. T., & Correa, V. I. (2006). Models and measures of beginning teacher quality. The Journal of Special Education, 40(2), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669060400020201
  13. Bleicher, R. E., & Lindgren, J. (2005). Success in science learning and preservice science teaching self-efficacy. Journal of science teacher education, 16(3), 205-225.
  14. Bloxham, S., Boyd, P., & Orr, S. (2011). Mark my words: The role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 655-670. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075071003777716
  15. Bolat, A. G. B. A., & Bolat, Ö. Ü. Y. İ. (2023). Öğretmen eğitiminde teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi yeterliliği (TPAB): Bir bibliyometrik analiz çalışması. Tam Metin Bildiri Kitabı, 246.
  16. Bustamante, R. M., Skidmore, S. T., Nelson, J. A., & Jones, B. E. (2016). Evaluation of a cultural competence assessment for preservice teachers. The Teacher Educator, 51(4), 297-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2016.1186767
  17. Caena, F. (2011). Literature review Teachers’ core competences: requirements and development. European Commission Thematic Working Group ‘Professional Development of Teachers.
  18. Castillo-Allendes, A., Cantor-Cutiva, L. C., & Hunter, E. J. (2023). Mapping the landscape of voice complaints among teachers: A bibliometric investigation. Journal of Voice.
  19. Chiu, T. K., Chai, C. S., Williams, P. J., & Lin, T.-J. (2021). Teacher professional development on self-determination theory–based design thinking in STEM education. Educational technology & society, 24(4), 153-165.
  20. Corry, M., & Stella, J. (2018). Teacher self-efficacy in online education: A review of the literature. Research in Learning Technology, 26. https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21251
  21. Creemers, B., & Kyriakides, L. (2015). Process-product research: A cornerstone in educational effectiveness research. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 50(2), 107–119.
  22. Cretu, D. M., & Morandau, F. (2020). Initial teacher education for inclusive education: A bibliometric analysis of educational research. Sustainability, 12(12), 4923. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124923
  23. Darling‐Hammond, L., Newton, X., & Wei, R. C. (2010). Evaluating teacher education outcomes: A study of the Stanford Teacher Education Programme. Journal of Education for Teaching, 36(4), 369-388. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2010.513844
  24. Davis, B., & Simmt, E. (2006). Mathematics-for-teaching: An ongoing investigation of the mathematics that teachers (need to) know. Educational studies in mathematics, 61, 293-319.
  25. Delandshere, G., & Arens, S. A. (2003). Examining The Quality Of The Evidence In Preservice Teacher Portfolios. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 57-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487102238658
  26. Evcimik, S., Gökçen, E., Alpsülün, M., Barut, M., Akpınar, E. N., & Balıkçı, H. C. (2025). Scientific publication trends in green education and digital sustainability: A bibliometric analysis. Veredas do Direito, 22(3), e223373-e223373. https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v22.n3.3373
  27. Fryer, L. K., & Bovee, H. N. (2016). Supporting students’ motivation for e-learning: Teachers matter on and offline. The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 21-29.
  28. Gong, Y., Lyu, B., & Gao, X. (2018). Research on teaching Chinese as a second or foreign language in and outside mainland China: A bibliometric analysis. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27(4), 277–289.
  29. Gökdaş, İ., Karacaoğlu, Ö. C., & Özkaya, A. (2024). COVID-19 and teachers’ digital competencies: a comprehensive bibliometric and topic modeling analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-04335-0
  30. Granberg, C., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2021). A case study of a formative assessment practice and the effects on students’ self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, 100955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100955
  31. Hallinger, P., & Kulophas, D. (2022). The evolving knowledge base on leadership and teacher professional learning: a bibliometric analysis of the literature, 1960-2018. Leadership for professional learning, 6-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1623287
  32. Hasanah, S. S., Permanasari, A., & Riandi. (2021). The effectiveness of the teacher professional development program in implementing curriculum 2013 in the framework of STEM education. 5th Asian Education Symposium 2020 (AES 2020), Bandung, Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210715.081
  33. Hill, H. C., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Learning mathematics for teaching: results from California’s mathematics professional development institutes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(5), 330-351. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034819
  34. Hill, H. C., Schilling, S. G., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 105(1), 11-30. https://doi.org/10.1086/428763
  35. Huang, C., Yang, C., Wang, S., Wu, W., Su, J., & Liang, C. (2020). Evolution of topics in education research: A systematic review using bibliometric analysis. Educational Review, 72(3), 281–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1566212
  36. Kaiser, G., Busse, A., Hoth, J., König, J., & Blömeke, S. (2015). About the complexities of video-based assessments: theoretical and methodological approaches to overcoming shortcomings of research on teachers’ competence. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 369-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9616-7
  37. Karacaoğlu, Ö. C. (2008). Teachers' perceptions of competence. Yüzüncü Yıl University Faculty of Education Journal, 5(1), 70-97. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/146326
  38. Karacaoğlu, Ö. C. (2018). Curriculum evaluation in online education: the case of teacher candidates preparing online for public personnel selection examination. International Journal of Higher Education, 7(2), 107-120. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v7n2p107
  39. Karacaoğlu, Ö. C. (2025). Basic skills of 21st century teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 50(1). https://doi.org/10.14221/1835-517X.6455
  40. Karacaoğlu, D., & Karacaoğlu, Ö. C. (2023). Proje okulu öğretmenlerinin yeterlilik algıları: Karşıyaka 15 Teşal örneği [Project school teachers' competency perceptions: Karşıyaka 15 Tesal example]. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 12(4).
  41. Kerr, D. H. (1983). Teaching Competence and Teacher Education in the United States. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 84(3), 525-552. h https://doi.org/10.1177/016146818308400314
  42. Klassen, R. M., Al-Dhafri, S., Hannok, W., & Betts, S. M. (2011). Investigating pre-service teacher motivation across cultures using the Teachers’ Ten Statements Test. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 579-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.012
  43. Koster, B., Brekelmans, M., Korthagen, F., & Wubbels, T. (2005). Quality requirements for teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2), 157-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.004
  44. Krueger, K., Hansen, L., & Smaldino, S. (2000). Preservice teacher technology competencies. TechTrends, 44(3), 47–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02778227
  45. Kumar, R. (2025). Bibliometric analysis: comprehensive insights into tools, techniques, applications, and solutions for research excellence. Spectrum of Engineering and Management Sciences, 3(1), 45-62. https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1536-8081
  46. Lamote, C., & Engels, N. (2010). The development of student teachers’ professional identity. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760903457735
  47. Lázaro-Cantabrana, J., Usart-Rodríguez, M., & Gisbert-Cervera, M. (2019). Assessing teacher digital competence: the construction of an instrument for measuring the knowledge of pre-service teachers. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research (NAER Journal), 8(1), 73-78.
  48. Lee, M.-H., Chai, C. S., & Hong, H.-Y. (2019). STEM education in Asia Pacific: challenges and development. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0424-z
  49. Lemon, N., & Garvis, S. (2016). Pre-service teacher self-efficacy in digital technology. Teachers and Teaching, 22(3), 387-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1058594
  50. Lingbiao, G., & Watkins, D. (2001). Identifying and assessing the conceptions of teaching of secondary school physics teachers in China. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(3), 443-469. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158613
  51. Loreman, T., Sharma, U., & Forlin, C. (2020). Do pre-service teachers feel ready to teach in inclusive classrooms? A four country study of teaching self-efficacy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education (Online), 38(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.722261048050552
  52. Maderick, J. A., Zhang, S., Hartley, K., & Marchand, G. (2016). Preservice teachers and self-assessing digital competence. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(3), 326-351. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115620432
  53. Meusen-Beekman, K. D., Joosten-ten Brinke, D., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2015). Developing young adolescents’ self-regulation by means of formative assessment: A theoretical perspective. Cogent Education, 2(1), 1071233. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2015.1071233
  54. Mincu, M. E. (2015). Teacher quality and school improvement: What is the role of research? Oxford Review of Education, 41(3), 253–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.1023013
  55. Mohamad Hasim, S., Rosli, R., Halim, L., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2022). STEM professional development activities and their impact on teacher knowledge and instructional practices. Mathematics, 10(7), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071109
  56. Mohamed, Z., Valcke, M., & De Wever, B. (2017). Are they ready to teach? Student teachers’ readiness for the job with reference to teacher competence frameworks. Journal of Education for Teaching, 43(2), 151-170. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2016.1257509
  57. Nguyen, T. P. L., Nguyen, T. H., & Tran, T. K. (2020). STEM Education in secondary schools: teachers’ perspective towards sustainable development. Sustainability, 12(21), Article 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218865
  58. Noroozi, O., Kirschner, P. A., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2018). Promoting argumentation competence: extending from first- to second-order scaffolding through adaptive fading. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 153-176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9400-z
  59. Pan, X. (2020). Technology acceptance, technological self-efficacy, and attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning: learning motivation as a mediator. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.564294
  60. Pan, H. L. W., Wiens, P. D., & Moyal, A. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of the teacher leadership scholarship. Teaching and Teacher Education, 121, 103936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103936
  61. Pantić, N., & Wubbels, T. (2010). Teacher competencies as a basis for teacher education – Views of Serbian teachers and teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 694-703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.005
  62. Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, Aik. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computers & Education, 50(3), 1084-1091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.006
  63. Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315-341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9
  64. Pence, H. M., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The impact of an international field experience on preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 14-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.003
  65. Pham, H. T., Vu, T. C., Nguyen, L. T., Vu, N.-T. T., Nguyen, T. C., Pham, H.-H. T., Lai, L. P., Le, H.-C. T., & Ngo, C. H. (2023). Professional development for science teachers: A bibliometric analysis from 2001 to 2021. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19, em2260. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13153
  66. Philipp, R. A. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and affect. Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning.
  67. Posnanski, T. J. (2002). Professional development programs for elementary science teachers: an analysis of teacher self-efficacy beliefs and a professional development model. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 189-220. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016517100186
  68. Puzziferro, M. (2008). Online technologies self-efficacy and self-regulated learning as predictors of final grade and satisfaction in college-level online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 72-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640802039024
  69. Ramey-Gassert, L., & Shroyer, M. G. (1992). Enhancing science teaching self-efficacy in preservice elementary teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 4(1), 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173752
  70. Ramey-Gassert, L., Shroyer, M. G., & Staver, J. R. (1996). A qualitative study of factors influencing science teaching self-efficacy of elementary level teachers. Science Education, 80(3), 283-315. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199606)80:3 3.0.CO;2-A
  71. Reddig, N., & VanLone, J. (2022). Pre-service teacher preparation in trauma-informed pedagogy: a review of state competencies. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2022.2066547
  72. Rodrigues, M., Silva, R., & Franco, M. (2021). Teaching and researching in the context of COVID-19: an empirical study in higher education. Sustainability, 13(16), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168718
  73. Roelofs, E., & Sanders, P. (2007). Towards a Framework for Assessing Teacher Competence. European Journal of Vocational Training, 40(1), 123-139.
  74. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (tpack): the development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
  75. Settlage, J., Southerland, S. A., Smith, L. K., & Ceglie, R. (2009). Constructing a doubt‐free teaching self: Self‐efficacy, teacher identity, and science instruction within diverse settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 102-125. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20268
  76. Sharma, U., & Sokal, L. (2015). The impact of a teacher education course on pre‐service teachers’ beliefs about inclusion: An international comparison. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 15(4), 276-284. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12043
  77. Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M., & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0068-1
  78. Sulaiman, J., & Ismail, S. N. (2020). Teacher competence and 21st century skills in transformation schools 2025 (ts25). Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3536-3544. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080829
  79. Tack, H., Valcke, M., Rots, I., Struyven, K., & Vanderlinde, R. (2018). Uncovering a hidden professional agenda for teacher educators: A mixed method study on Flemish teacher educators and their professional development. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 86-104. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1393514
  80. Thi To Khuyen, N., Van Bien, N., Lin, P.-L., Lin, J., & Chang, C.-Y. (2020). Measuring teachers’ perceptions to sustain STEM education development. Sustainability, 12(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041531
  81. Tondeur, J., Aesaert, K., Pynoo, B., Van Braak, J., Fraeyman, N., & Erstad, O. (2017). Developing a validated instrument to measure preservice teachers’ ICT competencies: Meeting the demands of the 21st century. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 462-472. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12380
  82. Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the covid-19 pandemic: The Philippine Context. Pedagogical Research, 5(4). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1263557
  83. Van der Kleij, F. M. (2019). Comparison of teacher and student perceptions of formative assessment feedback practices and association with individual student characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 85, 175-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.06.010
  84. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2022). Crossref as a source of open bibliographic metadata [Preprint]. MetaArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/smxe5
  85. Velthuis, C., Fisser, P., & Pieters, J. (2014). Teacher training and pre-service primary teachers’ self-efficacy for science teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(4), 445-464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9363-y
  86. Vogt, F., & Rogalla, M. (2009). Developing adaptive teaching competency through coaching. teaching and teacher education, 25(8), 1051-1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.04.002
  87. Wang, C.-H., Shannon, D. M., & Ross, M. E. (2013). Students’ characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, and course outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 302-323. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.835779
  88. Wang, D., & Jia, Q. (2023). Twenty years of research development on teachers’ critical thinking: Current status and future implications—A bibliometric analysis of research articles collected in WOS. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 48, 101252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101252
  89. Wang, L., Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2004). Increasing preservice teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 231-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2004.10782414
  90. Wong, J. L. N. (2010). Searching for good practice in teaching: A comparison of two subject‐based professional learning communities in a secondary school in Shanghai. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 40(5), 623-639. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920903553308
  91. Wubbels, T. (1992). Taking account of student teachers’ preconceptions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(2), 137-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(92)90004-M
  92. Zhu, C., Wang, D., Cai, Y., & Engels, N. (2013). What core competencies are related to teachers’ innovative teaching? Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2012.753984