2.3. Studies on teacher professional development
2.3.1. Studies on teacher professional development in other countries
2.3.2.1 Activities for teacher professional development
Like many other countries, Vietnam has been taking notice of teacher professional development, especially when the curriculum reform has been under globalization and internationalization forces (Nguyen & Tran, 2017). Accordingly, a large number of studies have devoted to effective models of professional development and
45
contextual factors shaping teacher learning. The very first highlight of research on teacher professional development in Vietnam is that it much focuses on pre-service teachers’ teaching practice or practicum (Dang, Nguyen, & Le, 2013; Dang &
Marginson, 2013; Dang, 2013; Hudson, Nguyen, & Hudson, 2009; Le, 2013;
Nguyen, 2013; Tran & Huynh, 2017; Vo, Pang, & Wah, 2018; to name but a few).
This trend implies an attempt for teacher education reform, including field experiences (i.e. teaching practice or practicum) with the aim of enhancing the quality of teachers (Le, 2007; Nguyen & Hudson, 2012). However, in order to address the educational changes, it does not seem to be sufficient if only pre-service teacher development is drawn focus on. When discussing “sustainable professional development of EFL teachers in Vietnam”, Le (2002) recommended a more focus on in-service teacher professional development. Up to now, with the implementation of the National Foreign Languages Project 2008-2020, more attention has been directed to teacher development at workplace; however, the amount of research on this issue is still limited.
Secondly, in order to address the needs of enhancing teachers’ quality, the primary focus has been placed on building effective models of professional development or evaluating the professional development activities. Vu (2011) postulated a form for the teachers to report the professional development activities they attended. The teachers can also summarize the contents or provide additional related information as suggested in the report form. She argued that professional development should be made teacher-friendly instead of being understood as formal activities. The findings from her survey show that many teachers did not regard team teaching, teaching journals, and reading as learning opportunities and such inadequate knowledge of professional development forms contributed to their low motivation for participation.
Along with the report form, Vu (2011) connected extrinsic and intrinsic motivations with professional development with teacher standards (i.e. knowledge of subject matter and curriculum, knowledge of teaching, and knowledge of learners) and teacher values (i.e. lifelong learning). By doing so, she hoped to remind the teachers
46
that they were professionals with qualities and responsibilities, hence motivation enhancement for professional development. The report form worked well with two cases in her research, but none of the factors that might affect the successful use of the form was mentioned. Moreover, there seemed to be no evidence that teachers filling in the form meant developing professional knowledge and skills. It was possible that they remembered the major contents delivered in the professional development activities and had certain feelings about them, whereas whether they would apply them to their work was still questionable. Vu (2011) also pointed out the challenges of employing such a form, for example, what was the evidence of teachers’
change in behaviors, and how the motivation would be maintained once it was created. Many other professional development forms have also been investigated by Vietnamese researchers, including training (Vo, 2017; Vu & Pham, 2014), mentoring (Hudson, Nguyen, & Hudson, 2009), professional learning community (Ho, Nakamori, Ho, & Ho, n.d.; Vo & Nguyen, 2009), team-teaching (Dang, 2013; Le &
Nguyen, n.d.), online learning modes (Ho, Nakamori, Ho, & Lim, 2014, Mai &
Ocriciano, 2017). Pham and Roberts (2012) and Tran (2018) even propose classroom performance evaluation as a strategy for professional development as long as its purpose is for better teacher quality. However, none of the reviewed studies in Vietnam were done on curriculum development as a professional activity for teacher learning; there only exists studies on curriculum innovation or implementation (e.g.
Le, Christopher, & Barnard, 2009; Nguyen & Tran, 2017; Tran, Le, & Nguyen, 2014;
Tran, Phan, & Marginson, 2018)
Unlike the other researchers, Tran (2016) did not focus on any specific professional development activity. She proposed a model of professional development that raises awareness of institutions and policy makers of supportive environment to foster teachers’ capacity. She employed multiple methods to collect data, including questionnaires, interviews, observations, and document analysis, to have in-depth understanding of the participants’ perceptions and experiences of professional development, the professional development activities in practice, and the
47
sociocultural factors that influenced the participants. Then, she analyzed these data with the use of the second and the third generations of cultural-historical activity theory. Tran (2016) came to a conclusion that a professional development activity, either formal or informal, is effective when it has the following qualities: “(1) needs- based, relevant and meaningful for their learning and applicable to their teaching contexts, (2) encouraging them to be active and self-regulated learners, (3) promoting reflective and experiential learning, and (4) based on negotiated understandings of the purpose and function of professional learning and development among all involved stakeholders.” (p.i).