The current status of In-service Trainings for teachers and expectations? Do they match?

Author(s):

Şerife Kalaycı(presenting / submitting)Ramazan Yirci İbrahim Kocabaş

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

01. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations

Format:

Paper

Session Information

01 SES 02 A, National Approaches to Professional Development

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-22

15:15-16:45

Room:

K3.17

Chair:

Rauno Huttunen

Contribution

In-service training is regarded as an effective method of increasing the knowledge, skills and positive beliefs of teachers. The Education Information Network in the European Union (EURYDICE) defines in-service training as ‘a variety of activities and practices in which teachers become involved in order to broaden their knowledge, improve their skills and assess and develop their professional approach’ (Perron, 1991). It is an important organized program to improve the performance of the personnel who are already in school setting and it has an important role in effecting the professional development of teachers by improving their knowledge. In-service trainings are reported to have positive effects on teachers’ professional and personal development by increasing positive attitudes and self-confidence; broadening teachers’ knowledge about new theories and curriculum content; and improving their skills and teaching practices (Freeman, 1989; Joyce & Showers, 1980). Furthermore, INSET courses are often reported to improve the quality of education and successful implementation of curriculum innovations (Hayes, 2000; Lieberman & Pointer-Mace, 2008; Odabașı-Çimer, Çakır & Çimer, 2010).

The existing literature in European context also indicates the similar problems and results regarding INSET programs that they can play an important role but need to be included within a larger educational policy model which necessitates the active involvement and cooperation of key educational agents (Nicolaidis & Mattheoudakis,2008; Gökdere and Çepni, 2004; Sandholtz, 2002).

In Turkey it is recognized that the in-service teacher training is just as important as pre-service teacher training and in-service teacher training programs have been mainly organized and financially supported by In-service Teacher Training Department of MoNE since 1960 in Turkey. In this sense, the Turkish Ministry of National Education (MoNE)’s role is to provide teachers education which they need through the in-service training. The purposes of the in-service teacher trainings are to empower individuals to be successful in their professionals, to develop professionalism and skills of lifelong learning, to make their adaptation to the changes and to improve their required performance (MoNE, 2011).

Gültekin and Çubukcu (2008) identified primary education teachers’ opinions on in-service training via survey and recommended that qualitative research should be done about this topic to understand and make connections about different aspects of the issue. Aiming to provide deeper insight about in-service trainings in Turkey, this paper specifically analyzes the latest statistics of in-service trainings in Turkey with holistic and critical approach and it was aimed to determine teachers’ opinions about in -service training activities and their proposed solutions of what can be done to improve the effectiveness of the in-service training activities via the semi- structured and in-depth interviews. It addresses the following questions:

1) What is the current situation of INSETs in Turkey regarding statistics released by MoNE?

2) What are the strengths and weaknesses of INSET according to teachers’ opinions?

3) What are the teachers’ suggestions about ideal INSET program?

Method

The data will be collected through semi-structured and in-depth interviews. The interview schedules consisted of demographical and open-ended questions (e.g., what are your suggestions regarding in-service trainings’ improvement?). Having taken the opinions of experts, the instrument was revised and then piloted. All the interviews will be transcribed verbatim. The data will be analyzed through content analysis by searching for patterns and synthesizing them. The transcriptions will be coded through NVivo 8 and then will be grouped together to derive broader themes shaped around core meanings (Miles & Huberman, 1994). In addition to the interviews, the latest statistics of in-service trainings will also be analyzed and inferences will be made with reference to existing literature and the results of this study. Lastly, the reliability of the study will be ensured by using multiple strategies for the credibility (e.g. expert opinions), transferability (e.g., purposive sampling), which will be explained further.

Expected Outcomes

The collected data was not analyzed completely so it is too early to make clear conclusions. However, we expect that the study will have implications for improving the in-service trainings mainly by addressing several factors (e.g., qualifications of the trainers and their practices, university-school partnership, design of the in-service trainings, teacher admission, evaluation of in-service trainings and teacher certification) which have an effect on improving quality teachers. Also previous studies pointed out the lack of connection between the teachers’ own realities and the INSET which causes low impact on classroom practices (Uysal, 2012; Fullan, 2001; Hayes; 2000) and similar result may occur in this study. Another problem that is pointed out in the previous studies is that teachers should actively be involved in not only planning process but also during the courses and “participant- centered” approach should be followed in a way that teachers should feel they are valued and involved in the process ( Fullan, 1982). The result may be consistent with some of the findings that primary school teachers and managers have moderately positive opinions about trainings and they only complain about social-cultural activities and catering service in-service teacher trainings (Ozer, 2004). Also interesting and inspiring analysis may be inferred from the latest statistics of INSETs released by MoNE which may support or contrast the previous studies and the qualitative part of this study. The results of this study may provide a useful source in planning process of INSETs to meet the needs of teachers regarding INSETs. It may give a deeper insight about the missing part of INSET programs by comparing both the general current status of INSETs and teachers’ opinions at individual level.

References

Bayrakcı, Mustafa (2010) "In-Service Teacher Raining in Japan and Turkey: a Comparative Analysis of Institutions and Practices," Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), Article 2. Bozkurt, E., Kavak, N., Yamak, H., Bilici, S. C., Darici, O., & Ozkaya, Y. (2012). Secondary school teachers’ opinions about in-service teacher training: a focus group interview study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3502-3506. Freeman, D. (1989). Teacher training, development, and decision making: A model of teaching related strategies for language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 23 (1), 27-45. Fullan, M. (1982). The meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press. Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gökdere, M., & Çepni, S. (2004). Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Fen Öğretmenlerinin Hizmet İçi İhtiyaçlarının Değerlendirilmesine Yönelik Bir Çalışma Bilim Sanat Merkezi Örneklemi. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2). Gültekin, M., & Çubukçu, Z. (2008). İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin hizmet içi eğitime ilişkin görüşleri. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19, 185-201. Hayes, D. (2000). Cascade training and teachers’ professional development. ELT Journal, 54 (2), 135-145. Joyce, B. R. & Showers, B. (1980). Improving in-service training. Educational Leadership, 37 (5), 379-385. Katerina Nicolaidis & Marina Mattheoudakis (2008) Utopia vs. reality: the effectiveness of in‐service training courses for EFL teachers, European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), 279-292. Kavak, N., Yamak, H., Bilici, S. C., Bozkurt, E., Darici, O., & Ozkaya, Y. (2012). The evaluation of primary and secondary teachers’ opinions about in-service teacher training. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3507-3511. Liberman, A. &Pointer-Mace, D. H. (2008). Teacher learning: the key to educational reform. Journal of Teacher Education, 59 (3), 226-234. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage. Odabașı-Çimer, S., Çakır, İ ., & Çimer, A. (2010). Teachers’ views on the effectiveness of in ., & Çimer, A. (2010). Teachers’ views on the effectiveness of in- service courses on the new curriculum in Turkey. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33 (1), 31-41. Ozer, B. (2004). In-service teacher training of teachers in Turkey at the beginning of the 2000s. Journal of In-service Education, 30(1), 89-100. Perron, M. (1991). Vers un Continuum de Formation des Enseignants: Elements D’Analyse. Recherche et Formation, 10, 137-152. Sandholtz, J.H. 2002. Inservice training or professional development: Contrasting opportu- nities in a school/university partnership. Teaching and Teacher Education 18, (7), 815–30. 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), n7.

Author Information

Şerife Kalaycı (presenting / submitting)

Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University

School of Foreign Languages

Kahramanmaraş

Ramazan Yirci

Sutcu Imam University

Faculty of Education

Kahramanmaras

İbrahim Kocabaş

Yıldız Teknik University,Education Faculty, Turkey

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.