Presentation on theme: "Gilada Avissar, Ph.D.Rivka Reichenberg, Ph.D. Mofet Institute, Tel Aviv Beit Berl Academic College."— Presentation transcript:
Gilada Avissar, Ph.D.Rivka Reichenberg, Ph.D. Mofet Institute, Tel Aviv Beit Berl Academic College
‘Professional development activities are hard work’ (Swennen & Bates, 2010. pp.7): An exploratory study of the actions taken by teacher educators in Israel toward their professional development.
What prompted our study? The claim made in the editorial of the latest issue of Professional Development in Education (36(1-2), 2010) by Anja Swennen and Tony Bates: “professional development activities are hard work” (P.2)
Potential contribution To facilitate a probe in an attempt to identify what are the specific activities taken by teacher educators that are aimed at professional development.
Research Questions A. What activities are considered by teacher educators in Israel to promote their P.D.? B. To what extent is engagement in research considered a way to promote P.D.? C. To what extent are the activities related to background variables?
A few comments about the methodology: Participants Questionnaire
Participants Table 1: Background variables of the participants: N (of respondents) rangeMSD Age3942-6654.796.79 Tenure in education398-4429.117.71 Tenure in teacher training 402-3417.288.66
Professional experience Out of 36 respondents, 25 (70%) have had previous professional experience in teaching, mostly in the upper grades, 6 (1.6%) have taught in university and the professional background of 4 (1.4%) was in areas other than education.
Table 2: Area of expertise/schooling (N=40) Table 3: Role in college (N=40) Education sciences; Pedagogy 61% Social science2.2% Humanities7.3% Natural science7.8% Lecturer in education43.9% Lecturer in a disciplinary area22.9% Pedagogic instructor9.8% Academic position – middle management 9.8% Other12.2%
Questionnaire Part 1: Background data i.e., tenure, academic degree and area of expertise. Part 2: Area and type of teaching role. Part 3: Activities taken for the purpose of P.D.: The first question in this part asked to specify the different activities undertook in order to promote P.D. and to rank them on a 1-6 Likert scale in reference to possible contribution toward P.D. The second question in this part asked the participants to rank, on a 1-6 Likert scale, different P.D. activities that they would recommend to their colleagues. Part 4: Engagement in research (6 questions). The last question asked the participants to rank, on a 1-10 scale, where they see themselves as far as P.D. is concerned.
An important comment: As we ourselves are veteran T.E.s we were under the impression that external factors are first and foremost in motivating T.E.s in Israel to engage in P.D. Among these are the demands to obtain a Ph.D. degree as a prerequisite for positions, tenure and over-all professional status. Our findings here seem to indicate that first and foremost is internal motivation.
Role perception The academic staff in teacher training colleges in Israel is comprised of four different groups: (a)pedagogic instructors and mentors of the practicum; (b)lecturers in the areas of education, psychology and sociology; (c)lecturers in different disciplinary areas; (d)instructors in the area of research, assessment and measurement methodologies. The first two perceive themselves as teacher educators whereas the latter perceive themselves as disciplinary lecturers who happen to find a job in teacher training.
Type and essence of activities that promote P.D. Differentiation between structured, formal study programs and non- structured, informal activities and to take into account whether engagement in P.D. activity is motivated by external or internal factors.
Table 4: Motivating factors in choosing P.D. activities 1+23+45+6MSD A recommendation made by a colleague 47.825.029.13.171,76 Personal interest 2.897.25.830.44 A recommendation made by my superior 44.016.040.03.242.06 Possible contribution to tenure40.024.036.03.281.90
A.The activities considered by teacher educators in Israel to promote their P.D. Table 5: P.D. activities presented by type (structured/non-structured) and source of motivation (N=40): Internal motivationExternal motivation StructuredStudy programs Research Writing and Publishing 47.5% 15% 10% Ph.D.25% Non- Structured Various short- term, non- credit courses 2.5%
Table 6: P.D. activities as recommended by the respondents (N=40) Highest rank (5+6)MSD Ph.D.87.55.550.87 Study programs taken at Mofet64.74.691.14 Research95.450.65 Writing and publishing87.55.500.84 Non-credit courses188.8.131.52
B. To what extent is engagement in research considered a way to promote P.D.? Table : Engagement in research (N=35) Current involvement in research82.9% Area of latest research0.0% Type of research: Qualitative Quantitative 65.9% 34.1% Research was sponsored by: College Mofet 36.6% 31.6% Group research Individual research 53.7% 24.4% Publication in peer-reviewed journal: Yes no 61.1%
C. To what extent are the activities related to background variables ? No relationships were found between background variables and P.D. activities.
Future research: (1)The questionnaire needs to be revised. (2)The next sample should be planned in an effort to include a more varied sample. (3)These questions could be used for a comparative international study in order to contribute to policy and practice with regard to T.E.P.D. (4)Engagement in research by T.Es should be investigated in depth. (5)The contribution of studies toward a Ph.D. of T.Es should also be looked into more carefully.