Exploratory practice for teacher professional development in Indonesia

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
TESOL Journal Pub Date : 2023-11-09 DOI:10.1002/tesj.775
Junjun Muhamad Ramdani, Xuesong (Andy) Gao
{"title":"Exploratory practice for teacher professional development in Indonesia","authors":"Junjun Muhamad Ramdani, Xuesong (Andy) Gao","doi":"10.1002/tesj.775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research brief reports on emerging findings from a larger project examining Indonesian university English language teachers' professional development in implementing technology-enhanced task-based language teaching (TBLT) through exploratory practice (EP). Many studies have focused on the effectiveness of TBLT in promoting students' language development through pedagogical intervention (East, 2019). In Indonesia, relevant research has examined the issue of materials development for TBLT (Widodo, 2015) and the use of technology (digital storytelling) to develop university students' writing (Azis & Husnawadi, 2020). However, few studies to date have focused on the role of language teachers' professional development in TBLT, which should receive more attention due to the critical role teachers play in implementing TBLT (Van den Branden, 2016). To address this gap, our study explored English language teachers' professional development in designing and implementing technology-enhanced TBLT in Indonesian universities. To develop professional capacity in implementing technology-enhanced TBLT (TETBLT), language teachers may undertake a variety of activities, such as participating in in-service teacher training, attending conferences and seminars, and conducting practitioner research (Van den Branden, 2016; Ziegler, 2016). This study focused on language teachers' participation in a particular form of practitioner research, namely exploratory practice (Allwright & Hanks, 2009). What motivated English language teachers to join EP for designing and implementing TETBLT? We conducted this qualitative study to examine Indonesian university teachers' motivation to participate in EP during the pandemic. Ten English language teachers (two male and eight female) from three Indonesian universities participated in the study. The participants' teaching experiences varied, from 2 to more than 20 years of teaching. They also taught different courses: ESP-related courses, Grammar in Written discourse, Academic Writing, and Public Speaking courses. In this report, we use pseudonyms to anonymize the participants. During the study, the participants were provided with a series of professional development activities (EP workshop series). In the activities, they were introduced to the concept of EP and its principles as well as how to undertake collaborative inquiries with students with the help of potentially exploitable pedagogic activities (PEPAs). These PEPAs aimed to help the participants in achieving shared understandings with their students. The participants were encouraged to use various PEPAs to collect data and explore significant issues in language teaching; these include, but are not limited to, discussion, student–teacher conference, reflective journals, and diaries. Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews from the participants on an online platform (i.e., Zoom). We collected two semi-structured interviews (40 minutes up to an hour) for each participant. These interviews focused on participants' initial experiences in conducting practitioner research before doing EP. In the interviews, they were also invited to share why they became interested in participating in EP to support their professional development. Data were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA; Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2014) in three main phases including multiple reading and making notes, transforming notes into emerging themes, and seeking relationship and clustering themes. Analysis of the interview data revealed that the participants' motivation to participate in EP for TETBLT were related to a variety of factors including their past experiences (of undertaking classroom-based research) and developmental goals (e.g., improving technology-enhanced pedagogical practices). These factors are elaborated in the following subsections. Data analysis revealed that the five participants' prior experiences were the catalyst for their decision to join EP. One participant, Alice, was motivated to participate in EP because of her experience of conducting classroom-based intervention study in her bachelor program. In the project, she implemented cartoon movies in her teaching practicum program to address the identified problems in relation to students' learning motivation. When deciding to participate in this study, she found EP offered her diverse ways of investigating classroom life. She realized that there seemed to be a missing component in her prior practitioner research practice where her pedagogical intervention (the use of cartoon movie) was based on her point of view (without engaging her students as co-investigators). Her decision to engage in this study was related to her understanding of EP through which the purpose of EP is to work for understanding (action for understanding), rather than problem solving, by integrating research into pedagogy (using everyday pedagogic activities). Alice's account resonates with that of another participant, Dilan, whose prior research practice was influenced by a problem-solving mindset that merely focused on coping with his classroom issues, but did not help him understand his classroom better. He reported that “I could not decide directly to solve the classroom problems without further understanding why these problems occurred.” Dilan's view was in line with EP principles, as Hanks (2017) argues that “solving the problem may be successful but will not necessarily yield an explanation of why the problem happened in the first place” (p. 6). Before knowing EP, what I tried to focus on when facing problems in the class was solving them without engaging students, listening their voices … other practitioner research tended to lead me to give intervention based on my own assumption. …EP is like bridging before thinking solution by exploring puzzles to understand classroom life. (January 2021) Analysis of the interview data revealed that eight participants (out of 10) were motivated to undertake EP because it helped them pursue their developmental goals. These goals refer to their interest in doing practitioner research and integrating tasks and technology, so that they become what they aspire to become in teaching (Qiao & Hu, 2021; Tao & Gao, 2017). Four participants (Lady, Junaedi, Noe, Dilan) reported that they were interested in participating in EP because they could use pedagogical practices in their classroom as a tool of investigation or integrating research into pedagogy. Junaedi believed that his participation would help him use TETBLT to improve the teaching of speaking (a course he teaches) and engage his students in speaking practices while doing collaborative inquiries through EP with him. Pinner (2021) argues that “within an EP framework, everything done for research must also be done for learning, and research must be a by-product of learning” (p. 501). In other words, Junaedi believed he could engage students in collaborative inquiry through EP while his students also learned and developed their speaking skills via classroom activities such as role playing and online speaking tasks. He said in the interview that “conducting practitioner research or my purpose of doing and participating in this EP is to develop my teaching practices.” Two participants, Alice and Kira, were enthusiastic because their engagement in EP would help them respond to the online teaching imposed by the pandemic and improve their practice of TETBLT. Due to the global pandemic, the participants were required to teach online or run hybrid courses. Many language teachers faced challenges in adapting to online teaching because of communication issues in an online environment (e.g., teacher–student and student–student communication), observing students' participation, internet access, and lack of technological pedagogical competences (Baker et al., 2022; Kohnke & Moorhouse, 2021). Thus, the participants found their participation in this EP would help to understand online or hybrid teaching better. What attracted me to join this research is because your study focused on technology-enhanced task-based language teaching. I think I still lack technological literacy to support my English language teaching and also online teaching delivery. So, it will be useful for my everyday teaching practices. (December 2020) I also knew that there were two things I could learn when participating in this EP, like task-based and exploratory practice. I directly reflected in my teaching practice that teaching in the pandemic situation tended to be dominated by tasks and projects to support students' learning. (January 2021) We examined the motivation of English language teachers to conduct EP as a means for enhancing their professional development in TETBLT. This study shows that the participants' prior experiences and developmental aspirations were a significant driver for their motivation to engage in EP for pedagogical enhancement. The participants' previous research practices (e.g., teacher research) led them to explore pedagogical issues through EP with students as co-investigators or collaborators using everyday teaching practices (e.g., student–teacher conferences, students' reflective journals). EP also provided them opportunities to understand their classroom life with students without making premature pedagogical decisions like “fools [teachers] rush in to capture the stupidity of undertaking action too precipitously” (Allwright, 2001, p. 103), as reported by Alice and Dilan. This collaborative work would create a more dialogic teaching condition to help both teachers and students understand their classroom situation and better address any emerging pedagogical issues in the process. Other findings show that the participants decided to engage in EP because they regard it as an important means to achieve professional development (i.e., TETBLT) and their practitioner research skills by integrating research into curricular activities without creating extra work. Their motivation to engage in this EP is also associated with the need to integrate technologies in language teaching as compelled by the COVID-19 pandemic. In other words, the pandemic created a crisis for teaching, but it also presents an opportunity for teachers to adapt and learn to teach online through EP (Ramdani et al., 2023). The findings of this study offer certain implications for English language teacher educators and policymakers. The use of EP can be an innovative approach to promoting collaborative reflection among practitioners (teachers, students, and researchers) for educational improvement. In this regard, all practitioners may engage in a collaborative endeavor for mutual development to support the development of English teachers' professional capacity for TETBLT. In such a collaborative EP process, teachers and students can share and discuss what puzzles them related to TETBLT implementation so that they can develop better local understandings of their classroom life (Gieve & Miller, 2006). In turn, these understandings will lead language teachers to make informed pedagogical decisions with better support from students. We believe that EP will provide language teachers with collegial professional communities to sustain their professional development in achieving better classroom experience for both students and teachers (Benson et al., 2018; Soomro, 2018). Open access publishing facilitated by University of New South Wales, as part of the Wiley - University of New South Wales agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians. Junjun Muhamad Ramdani is currently a PhD candidate at the School of Education, University of New South Wales, Australia. He is also a faculty member of the English Education Department of Universitas Siliwangi, Indonesia. His research interests are language teacher professional development, teaching English speaking, Technology enhanced language learning (TELL), and qualitative research in English language teaching. Xuesong (Andy) Gao is a language teacher educator at the School of Education, Faculty of Arts, Design and Architecture, University of New South Wales, Australia. His research interests include international students' educational experiences, language learner agency, language and literacy education, language education policy, and language teacher education.","PeriodicalId":51742,"journal":{"name":"TESOL Journal","volume":" 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TESOL Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This research brief reports on emerging findings from a larger project examining Indonesian university English language teachers' professional development in implementing technology-enhanced task-based language teaching (TBLT) through exploratory practice (EP). Many studies have focused on the effectiveness of TBLT in promoting students' language development through pedagogical intervention (East, 2019). In Indonesia, relevant research has examined the issue of materials development for TBLT (Widodo, 2015) and the use of technology (digital storytelling) to develop university students' writing (Azis & Husnawadi, 2020). However, few studies to date have focused on the role of language teachers' professional development in TBLT, which should receive more attention due to the critical role teachers play in implementing TBLT (Van den Branden, 2016). To address this gap, our study explored English language teachers' professional development in designing and implementing technology-enhanced TBLT in Indonesian universities. To develop professional capacity in implementing technology-enhanced TBLT (TETBLT), language teachers may undertake a variety of activities, such as participating in in-service teacher training, attending conferences and seminars, and conducting practitioner research (Van den Branden, 2016; Ziegler, 2016). This study focused on language teachers' participation in a particular form of practitioner research, namely exploratory practice (Allwright & Hanks, 2009). What motivated English language teachers to join EP for designing and implementing TETBLT? We conducted this qualitative study to examine Indonesian university teachers' motivation to participate in EP during the pandemic. Ten English language teachers (two male and eight female) from three Indonesian universities participated in the study. The participants' teaching experiences varied, from 2 to more than 20 years of teaching. They also taught different courses: ESP-related courses, Grammar in Written discourse, Academic Writing, and Public Speaking courses. In this report, we use pseudonyms to anonymize the participants. During the study, the participants were provided with a series of professional development activities (EP workshop series). In the activities, they were introduced to the concept of EP and its principles as well as how to undertake collaborative inquiries with students with the help of potentially exploitable pedagogic activities (PEPAs). These PEPAs aimed to help the participants in achieving shared understandings with their students. The participants were encouraged to use various PEPAs to collect data and explore significant issues in language teaching; these include, but are not limited to, discussion, student–teacher conference, reflective journals, and diaries. Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews from the participants on an online platform (i.e., Zoom). We collected two semi-structured interviews (40 minutes up to an hour) for each participant. These interviews focused on participants' initial experiences in conducting practitioner research before doing EP. In the interviews, they were also invited to share why they became interested in participating in EP to support their professional development. Data were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA; Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2014) in three main phases including multiple reading and making notes, transforming notes into emerging themes, and seeking relationship and clustering themes. Analysis of the interview data revealed that the participants' motivation to participate in EP for TETBLT were related to a variety of factors including their past experiences (of undertaking classroom-based research) and developmental goals (e.g., improving technology-enhanced pedagogical practices). These factors are elaborated in the following subsections. Data analysis revealed that the five participants' prior experiences were the catalyst for their decision to join EP. One participant, Alice, was motivated to participate in EP because of her experience of conducting classroom-based intervention study in her bachelor program. In the project, she implemented cartoon movies in her teaching practicum program to address the identified problems in relation to students' learning motivation. When deciding to participate in this study, she found EP offered her diverse ways of investigating classroom life. She realized that there seemed to be a missing component in her prior practitioner research practice where her pedagogical intervention (the use of cartoon movie) was based on her point of view (without engaging her students as co-investigators). Her decision to engage in this study was related to her understanding of EP through which the purpose of EP is to work for understanding (action for understanding), rather than problem solving, by integrating research into pedagogy (using everyday pedagogic activities). Alice's account resonates with that of another participant, Dilan, whose prior research practice was influenced by a problem-solving mindset that merely focused on coping with his classroom issues, but did not help him understand his classroom better. He reported that “I could not decide directly to solve the classroom problems without further understanding why these problems occurred.” Dilan's view was in line with EP principles, as Hanks (2017) argues that “solving the problem may be successful but will not necessarily yield an explanation of why the problem happened in the first place” (p. 6). Before knowing EP, what I tried to focus on when facing problems in the class was solving them without engaging students, listening their voices … other practitioner research tended to lead me to give intervention based on my own assumption. …EP is like bridging before thinking solution by exploring puzzles to understand classroom life. (January 2021) Analysis of the interview data revealed that eight participants (out of 10) were motivated to undertake EP because it helped them pursue their developmental goals. These goals refer to their interest in doing practitioner research and integrating tasks and technology, so that they become what they aspire to become in teaching (Qiao & Hu, 2021; Tao & Gao, 2017). Four participants (Lady, Junaedi, Noe, Dilan) reported that they were interested in participating in EP because they could use pedagogical practices in their classroom as a tool of investigation or integrating research into pedagogy. Junaedi believed that his participation would help him use TETBLT to improve the teaching of speaking (a course he teaches) and engage his students in speaking practices while doing collaborative inquiries through EP with him. Pinner (2021) argues that “within an EP framework, everything done for research must also be done for learning, and research must be a by-product of learning” (p. 501). In other words, Junaedi believed he could engage students in collaborative inquiry through EP while his students also learned and developed their speaking skills via classroom activities such as role playing and online speaking tasks. He said in the interview that “conducting practitioner research or my purpose of doing and participating in this EP is to develop my teaching practices.” Two participants, Alice and Kira, were enthusiastic because their engagement in EP would help them respond to the online teaching imposed by the pandemic and improve their practice of TETBLT. Due to the global pandemic, the participants were required to teach online or run hybrid courses. Many language teachers faced challenges in adapting to online teaching because of communication issues in an online environment (e.g., teacher–student and student–student communication), observing students' participation, internet access, and lack of technological pedagogical competences (Baker et al., 2022; Kohnke & Moorhouse, 2021). Thus, the participants found their participation in this EP would help to understand online or hybrid teaching better. What attracted me to join this research is because your study focused on technology-enhanced task-based language teaching. I think I still lack technological literacy to support my English language teaching and also online teaching delivery. So, it will be useful for my everyday teaching practices. (December 2020) I also knew that there were two things I could learn when participating in this EP, like task-based and exploratory practice. I directly reflected in my teaching practice that teaching in the pandemic situation tended to be dominated by tasks and projects to support students' learning. (January 2021) We examined the motivation of English language teachers to conduct EP as a means for enhancing their professional development in TETBLT. This study shows that the participants' prior experiences and developmental aspirations were a significant driver for their motivation to engage in EP for pedagogical enhancement. The participants' previous research practices (e.g., teacher research) led them to explore pedagogical issues through EP with students as co-investigators or collaborators using everyday teaching practices (e.g., student–teacher conferences, students' reflective journals). EP also provided them opportunities to understand their classroom life with students without making premature pedagogical decisions like “fools [teachers] rush in to capture the stupidity of undertaking action too precipitously” (Allwright, 2001, p. 103), as reported by Alice and Dilan. This collaborative work would create a more dialogic teaching condition to help both teachers and students understand their classroom situation and better address any emerging pedagogical issues in the process. Other findings show that the participants decided to engage in EP because they regard it as an important means to achieve professional development (i.e., TETBLT) and their practitioner research skills by integrating research into curricular activities without creating extra work. Their motivation to engage in this EP is also associated with the need to integrate technologies in language teaching as compelled by the COVID-19 pandemic. In other words, the pandemic created a crisis for teaching, but it also presents an opportunity for teachers to adapt and learn to teach online through EP (Ramdani et al., 2023). The findings of this study offer certain implications for English language teacher educators and policymakers. The use of EP can be an innovative approach to promoting collaborative reflection among practitioners (teachers, students, and researchers) for educational improvement. In this regard, all practitioners may engage in a collaborative endeavor for mutual development to support the development of English teachers' professional capacity for TETBLT. In such a collaborative EP process, teachers and students can share and discuss what puzzles them related to TETBLT implementation so that they can develop better local understandings of their classroom life (Gieve & Miller, 2006). In turn, these understandings will lead language teachers to make informed pedagogical decisions with better support from students. We believe that EP will provide language teachers with collegial professional communities to sustain their professional development in achieving better classroom experience for both students and teachers (Benson et al., 2018; Soomro, 2018). Open access publishing facilitated by University of New South Wales, as part of the Wiley - University of New South Wales agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians. Junjun Muhamad Ramdani is currently a PhD candidate at the School of Education, University of New South Wales, Australia. He is also a faculty member of the English Education Department of Universitas Siliwangi, Indonesia. His research interests are language teacher professional development, teaching English speaking, Technology enhanced language learning (TELL), and qualitative research in English language teaching. Xuesong (Andy) Gao is a language teacher educator at the School of Education, Faculty of Arts, Design and Architecture, University of New South Wales, Australia. His research interests include international students' educational experiences, language learner agency, language and literacy education, language education policy, and language teacher education.
印尼教师专业发展的探索性实践
本研究简要报告了一项大型项目的新发现,该项目考察了印度尼西亚大学英语教师通过探索性实践(EP)实施技术增强型任务型语言教学(TBLT)的专业发展。许多研究都关注任务型教学通过教学干预促进学生语言发展的有效性(East, 2019)。在印度尼西亚,相关研究考察了任务型教学的材料开发问题(Widodo, 2015)和利用技术(数字讲故事)来培养大学生的写作能力(Azis & Husnawadi, 2020)。然而,迄今为止,很少有研究关注语言教师的专业发展在任务型教学中的作用,由于教师在实施任务型教学中发挥着关键作用,这一点应该得到更多的关注(Van den Branden, 2016)。为了解决这一差距,我们的研究探讨了印度尼西亚大学英语教师在设计和实施技术增强型任务型教学方面的专业发展。为了培养实施技术增强型任务型教学的专业能力,语言教师可以参加各种活动,如参加在职教师培训、参加会议和研讨会、进行实践者研究(Van den Branden, 2016;齐格勒,2016)。本研究侧重于语言教师参与一种特殊形式的实践者研究,即探索性实践(Allwright & Hanks, 2009)。是什么促使英语教师加入EP来设计和实施TETBLT?我们进行了这项定性研究,以检验印度尼西亚大学教师在大流行期间参与EP的动机。来自印尼三所大学的10名英语教师(2男8女)参与了这项研究。参与者的教学经验从2年到20年以上不等。他们还教授不同的课程:esp相关课程、书面话语语法、学术写作和公共演讲课程。在本报告中,我们使用假名来使参与者匿名。在研究期间,为参与者提供了一系列专业发展活动(EP工作坊系列)。在活动中,他们被介绍了EP的概念和原则,以及如何在潜在可利用的教学活动(PEPAs)的帮助下与学生进行合作探究。这些PEPAs旨在帮助参与者与他们的学生达成共识。鼓励参与者使用各种PEPAs来收集数据并探索语言教学中的重要问题;这些包括但不限于讨论、师生会议、反思日志和日记。通过在线平台(即Zoom)对参与者进行半结构化访谈,收集数据。我们为每位参与者收集了两次半结构化访谈(40分钟至1小时)。这些访谈集中于参与者在进行EP之前进行从业者研究的初步经验。在访谈中,他们也被邀请分享为什么他们对参与EP感兴趣,以支持他们的专业发展。数据分析采用解释现象学分析(IPA;Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2014)分为三个主要阶段,包括多次阅读和做笔记,将笔记转化为新兴主题,寻找关系和聚类主题。对访谈数据的分析显示,参与者参与TETBLT EP的动机与多种因素有关,包括他们过去的经历(进行课堂研究)和发展目标(例如,改进技术增强的教学实践)。这些因素将在以下小节中详细阐述。数据分析显示,五名参与者之前的经历是他们决定加入EP的催化剂。其中一位参与者,爱丽丝,因为她在本科课程中进行课堂干预研究的经验而被激励参加EP。在这个项目中,她将卡通电影运用到她的教学实习项目中,以解决与学生学习动机相关的问题。当她决定参与这项研究时,她发现EP为她提供了多种调查课堂生活的方式。她意识到,在她之前的实践者研究实践中,她的教学干预(使用卡通电影)似乎缺失了一个组成部分,她的教学干预(使用卡通电影)是基于她的观点(没有让她的学生作为共同调查者)。她决定参与这项研究与她对EP的理解有关,EP的目的是通过将研究与教育学(使用日常教学活动)结合起来,为理解而努力(以行动为理解),而不是解决问题。 Alice的描述与另一位参与者Dilan的描述产生了共鸣,Dilan之前的研究实践受到了一种解决问题的心态的影响,这种心态只关注如何应对课堂问题,而没有帮助他更好地了解课堂。他报告说:“在没有进一步了解这些问题发生的原因之前,我无法直接决定解决课堂问题。”Dilan的观点与EP原则是一致的,因为Hanks(2017)认为“解决问题可能会成功,但并不一定能解释问题最初发生的原因”(第6页)。在了解EP之前,我在课堂上面对问题时试图关注的是解决问题,而不是让学生参与,倾听他们的声音……其他实践者的研究倾向于让我根据自己的假设进行干预。……EP就像在思考解决方案之前的桥梁,通过探索谜题来理解课堂生活。(2021年1月)对访谈数据的分析显示,8名参与者(10人中)有动力参加EP,因为它有助于他们追求自己的发展目标。这些目标是指他们有兴趣做实践者研究,整合任务和技术,从而成为他们在教学中渴望成为的人(Qiao & Hu, 2021;Tao & Gao, 2017)。四位参与者(Lady, Junaedi, Noe, Dilan)报告说,他们对参与EP感兴趣,因为他们可以将课堂上的教学实践作为调查或将研究整合到教学法中的工具。Junaedi认为,他的参与将帮助他使用TETBLT来改善口语教学(他教授的一门课程),并让他的学生在通过EP与他进行协作探究的同时参与口语练习。Pinner(2021)认为,“在EP框架内,为研究所做的一切也必须为学习而做,研究必须是学习的副产品”(第501页)。换句话说,Junaedi相信他可以通过EP让学生参与合作探究,同时他的学生也可以通过角色扮演和在线演讲任务等课堂活动来学习和发展他们的口语技能。他在采访中说:“进行实践者研究或者我做和参与这个EP的目的是为了发展我的教学实践。”两位参与者Alice和Kira非常热情,因为他们参与EP将有助于他们应对疫情带来的在线教学,并改善他们的TETBLT实践。由于全球大流行,参与者被要求在线授课或开设混合课程。许多语言教师在适应在线教学方面面临挑战,因为在线环境中的交流问题(例如,师生和学生之间的交流)、观察学生的参与、互联网接入以及缺乏技术教学能力(Baker et al., 2022;Kohnke & Moorhouse, 2021)。因此,参与者发现他们参与这个EP将有助于更好地理解在线或混合教学。吸引我加入这项研究的原因是您的研究侧重于技术增强的任务型语言教学。我认为我仍然缺乏技术素养来支持我的英语教学和在线教学交付。因此,它将对我的日常教学实践很有用。(2020年12月)我也知道,在参加这个EP的过程中,我可以学到两件事,即任务型和探索性实践。我在教学实践中直接反映出,疫情下的教学往往以支持学生学习的任务和项目为主。(2021年1月)我们调查了英语教师将EP作为加强其TETBLT专业发展的手段的动机。本研究表明,参与者的先前经历和发展愿望是他们参与教学强化的动机的重要驱动因素。参与者以前的研究实践(例如,教师研究)使他们通过EP与学生作为共同调查者或合作者使用日常教学实践(例如,学生-教师会议,学生反思日志)来探索教学问题。正如Alice和Dilan所报道的那样,EP还为他们提供了了解课堂生活的机会,而不会做出过早的教学决定,比如“傻瓜(教师)急于捕捉采取行动过于草率的愚蠢行为”(Allwright, 2001,第103页)。这种协作工作将创造一个更具对话性的教学条件,以帮助教师和学生了解他们的课堂情况,并更好地解决过程中出现的任何教学问题。其他调查结果显示,参与者决定从事专业进修,是因为他们认为这是实现专业发展的重要手段(即专业进修)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
TESOL Journal
TESOL Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: TESOL Journal (TJ) is a refereed, practitioner-oriented electronic journal based on current theory and research in the field of TESOL. TJ is a forum for second and foreign language educators at all levels to engage in the ways that research and theorizing can inform, shape, and ground teaching practices and perspectives. Articles enable an active and vibrant professional dialogue about research- and theory-based practices as well as practice-oriented theorizing and research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信