Abstract As language teachers play a pivotal role in the betterment of language education, teacher-training programs, pre-service and in-service training programs alike, have been in place to enable teachers to accomplish the important roles expected of them. However, not due attention has been paid to the effectiveness and practicality of these programs. Among those who can pass informed judgments on the effectiveness of such programs are language teachers themselves. However, their perceptions are not consistently taken into account while deciding on these programs. Accordingly, the current study aimed to scrutinize in-service training programs for EFL teachers and to develop a model which is hoped to be practical and effective. To this end, seven English teachers were interviewed. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and were subjected to qualitative content analysis. In addition, based on the results of the semi-structured interview and the related literature, an In-Service Teacher Training Programs Questionnaire (ISTTPQ) was developed by the researcher to evaluate the current in-service teacher training programs. Following the validation of the instrument through a pilot study, the questionnaire was administrated to 290 state high school teachers in Yasouj and Shiraz, who were selected through cluster sampling. The qualitative data analysis revealed that teachers were not satisfied with the current in-service training programs. They stated that these programs could not bring about any real changes in their performance and did not have any effective impact on them. Drawing on the ideas expressed by the interviewees and an extensive review of literature a questionnaire was developed which could serve as a framework for evaluating teacher training programs. In addition, the questionnaire was administered to the teachers to decide to evaluate the programs they had attended and come up with an optimum model of in-service teacher training program. Keywords: Training, Evaluation, Teachers’ perceptions, In-service teacher training Table of Contents Contents Page ACKNOWLEGMENTS………………………………………………………………………………. I ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………………………………… II TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………………. III LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………………… V LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………………… VI CHAPTER ONE: PRELIMINARIEE 1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………………………. 5 1.3 Significance of the Study……………………………………………………………………. 6 1.4 Research Questions …………………………………………………………………………… 7 1.5. Definition of Key Terms…………………………………………………7 1.6. Organization of the thesis……………………………………………….9 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….. 11 2.2 Teaching and Learning English …………………………………………………………. 11 2.3 The Need for Teacher Training…………………………………………………………… 12 2.4. Teacher Training Programs Scrutinized…………………………………………………… 14 2.5. Models of Teacher Training…………………………………………………………………… 14 2.5.1 Wallace’s Models……………………………………………………….14 2.5.1.1 The craft model……………………………………………………………………….. 15 2.5.1.2 The applied science model………………………………………………………… 15 2.5.2. Day’s Model…………………………………………………………….17 Contents Page 2.5.2.1. The Apprentice – Expert Model……………………………………17 2.5.2.2. The Rationalist Model………………………………………………17 2.5.2.3. The Case Studies Model……………………………………………17 2.5.2.4. The Integrative Model………………………………………………17 2.5.3. Bramley’s Model………………………………………………………….18 2.6. Evaluating Educational Programs…………………………………………….18 2.6.1. Ornstein and Hunkins’ Model…………………………………………….21 2.7 Evaluating Teacher Training Programs……………………………………26 2.7.1 Hamblin’s Model……………………………………………………..28 2.7.2 Brinkerhoff’s Six-Stage Evaluation Model…………………………..29 2.7.3 Kirkpatrick’s Model………………………………………………….29 2.7.4 Woodward’s Model…………………………………………………..30 2.7.4.1 The evaluation of trainees: the objectives model………………30 2.7.4.2 The evaluation of trainees: the process model…………………30 2.7.4.3 The evaluation by trainees………………………………………31 2.8 Experimental Studies on In-service Training Programs………………….31 2.9 The Summary……………………………………………………………..35 CHAPTER THREE: METHOD 3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………..………37 3.2Design of the Study…………………………………………………………37 3.3 Sample………………………………………………………………….…38 Contents Page 3.3.1 Sampling procedure……………………………………………………………………. 38 3.3.2 Participants……………………………………………………………………………….. 39 3.4 Instrumentation ……………………………………………………………………………….. 39 3.4.1 Teachers’ semi-structured Interviews………………………………..40 3.4.2 In-Service Teacher Training Programs Questionnaire………………..41 3.4.2.1 Development of the Questionnaire……………………………..41 3.5 Data Collection Procedure ………………………………………………………………… 41 3.6 Data Analysis Procedure …………………………………………………………………… 42 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….. 43 4.2 Findings…………………………………………………………………..43 4.2.1 Findings of the Qualitative Data Collection (teachers’ interviews)…….43 4.2.1.1 Codification of the Data…………………………………………….44 4.2.1.1.1 Open Coding……………………………………………………44 4.2.1.1.2 Axial Coding……………………………………………………47 4.2.1.1.3 Selective Coding………………………………………………..48 4.2.2. Development of the ISTTPQ……………………………………………49 4.2.2.1 Development of the Questionnaire Items …………………………50 4.2.2.2 Content and Face Validity……………………………….………..50 4.2.2.3 Pilot Study…………………………………………………………51 4.2.2.4 Reliability………………………………………………………….52 4.2.2.5 Construct Validity…………………………………………………54 4.2.2.5.1 Factor Analysis…………………………………………………..54 4.2.2.6 Reassessment of Internal Consistency of the Questionnaire………60 4.2.3 Findings of the Quantitative Data Collection (Questionnaire)…………60 4.2.3.1 Demographic information of the participants……………………..60 4.2.3.2 Descriptive analysis of the data……………………………61 Contents Page 4.3.1 Needs Analysis………………………………………………………….67 4.3.2 Planning…………………………………………………………………67 4.3.3 The Content of the In-service Program………………………………..68 4.3.4 The Process of the In-service Training Program……………………….69 4.3.5 Evaluation of the In-Service Training Program……………………….69 4.4 Discussion………………………………………………………………………69 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND IMPLICATIONS 5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….. 74 5.2 Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………… 74 5.3 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………. 74 5.4 Pedagogical Implications ………………………………………………………………….. 75 5.5 Limitations of the Study …………………………………………………………………… 75 5.6 Suggestions for Further Research ………………………………………………………. 76 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………………… 77 APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………………………. 86 List of Tables Contents Page Table 2.1 Provus’s Discrepancy Evaluation Model………………………………….21 Table 3.1 Demographic Information of the participants…………………………………….. 39 Table 4.1 Item-total Statistics………………………………………………………..53 Table 4.2 Item-total Statistics………………………………………………………..53 Table 4.3 Reliability Analysis of the ISTTPQ……………………………………….54 Table 4.4 KMO and Bartlett’s Test………………………………………………….55 Table 4.5 Total Variance Explained for ISTTPQ……………………………………55 Table 4.6 Rotated Component Matrix of the ISTTPQ……………………………….56 Table 4.7 The Summary Table of Items Belonging to Each Factor………………….59 Table 4.8 Reliability Analysis of ISTTPQ…………………………………………..60 Table 4.9 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 1of the analysis……………………..61 Table 4.10 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 2 of the analysis……………………..63 Table 4.11 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 3 of the analysis………………………64 Table 4.12 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 4 of the analysis………………….65 Table 4.13 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 5 of the analysis………………………. 65 Table 4.14 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 6 of the analysis………………….66 Table 4.15 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 7 of the analysis………………….66 List of Figures Contents Page Figure 2.1The craft model of professional education………………………………………… 15 Figure 2.2 Applied science model…………………………………………………………………… 15 Figure 2.3 Reflective model…………………………………………………………16 Figure 2.4The difference between Formative and Summative evaluation………….20 Figure 2.5 Provus’s Discrepancy Evaluation Model………………………………..22 Figure 2.6 Stake’s Congruence – Contingency Model………………………………23 Figure 2.7 Stufflebeam’s Context, Input, Process, Product Model…………………24 Figure 2.8 Expressions of levels used in training evaluation models by different authors…………………………………………………….……………28 Figure 2.9 The Six-Stage Model as a Cycle…………………………….…………..29 Figure 2.10 Comparison of terms used in different training program evaluation Models…………………………………………………………31 Figure 4.1 Categories and Subcategories emerging from the Content Analysis……49 CHAPTER ONE PRELIMINARIES Introduction Learning a foreign language, especially English, has increasingly become more vital the world over. This is appreciable when we consider that we live in a globalized world where English is used as a lingua franca. Over the course of time, teaching English as a foreign language has gained considerable significance so much so that it has established itself as an educational field that is worth researching within the general educational system. Since the human life has been changed radically by the development of the technologies and the improvement of the knowledge, the need for qualified teachers can be felt even more. Therefore, teachers should improve their knowledge and skills and adjust themselves to the new technology. Thus, to keep up with these changes, teachers need to be trained continuously and become more efficient in their jobs. For the last two decades, there have been a lot of debates on the teacher’s preparation and teacher’s development. According to Lanier and Little (1986), teacher education as a field of study has not found its right place in the academy. In teacher education field, teacher educators play highly important roles; however, most of the time, they are not taken into account in the research conducted into their work. However, this situation has changed since the 1990s as university researchers, law makers, and policy analysts have paid increasing attention to what teacher educators do. From that time, teacher education has been recognized as an object of academic research. Yet, it is difficult for teachers to be self-sufficient due to the need for specialization of the new education-teaching programs, new teaching strategies and new technologies. As a result, according to Saban (2000), teachers can develop their qualifications and achieve professional identity through both pre- and in-service training programs, hence, the notion of lifelong learning. It is obvious that the quality of education is influenced by the quality of teachers and their teaching. Teachers first gain an ‘entry-level proficiency’ in teacher education institutions in pre-service training programs, and ‘mastery-level proficiency’ is obtained after a Abstract As language teachers play a pivotal role in the betterment of language education, teacher-training programs, pre-service and in-service training programs alike, have been in place to enable teachers to accomplish the important roles expected of them. However, not due attention has been paid to the effectiveness and practicality of these programs. Among those who can pass informed judgments on the effectiveness of such programs are language teachers themselves. However, their perceptions are not consistently taken into account while deciding on these programs. Accordingly, the current study aimed to scrutinize in-service training programs for EFL teachers and to develop a model which is hoped to be practical and effective. To this end, seven English teachers were interviewed. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and were subjected to qualitative content analysis. In addition, based on the results of the semi-structured interview and the related literature, an In-Service Teacher Training Programs Questionnaire (ISTTPQ) was developed by the researcher to evaluate the current in-service teacher training programs. Following the validation of the instrument through a pilot study, the questionnaire was administrated to 290 state high school teachers in Yasouj and Shiraz, who were selected through cluster sampling. The qualitative data analysis revealed that teachers were not satisfied with the current in-service training programs. They stated that these programs could not bring about any real changes in their performance and did not have any effective impact on them. Drawing on the ideas expressed by the interviewees and an extensive review of literature a questionnaire was developed which could serve as a framework for evaluating teacher training programs. In addition, the questionnaire was administered to the teachers to decide to evaluate the programs they had attended and come up with an optimum model of in-service teacher training program. Keywords: Training, Evaluation, Teachers’ perceptions, In-service teacher training Table of Contents Contents Page ACKNOWLEGMENTS………………………………………………………………………………. I ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………………………………… II TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………………. III LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………………………… V LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………………… VI CHAPTER ONE: PRELIMINARIEE 1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………… 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………………………. 5 1.3 Significance of the Study……………………………………………………………………. 6 1.4 Research Questions …………………………………………………………………………… 7 1.5. Definition of Key Terms…………………………………………………7 1.6. Organization of the thesis……………………………………………….9 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….. 11 2.2 Teaching and Learning English …………………………………………………………. 11 2.3 The Need for Teacher Training…………………………………………………………… 12 2.4. Teacher Training Programs Scrutinized…………………………………………………… 14 2.5. Models of Teacher Training…………………………………………………………………… 14 2.5.1 Wallace’s Models……………………………………………………….14 2.5.1.1 The craft model……………………………………………………………………….. 15 2.5.1.2 The applied science model………………………………………………………… 15 2.5.2. Day’s Model…………………………………………………………….17 Contents Page 2.5.2.1. The Apprentice – Expert Model……………………………………17 2.5.2.2. The Rationalist Model………………………………………………17 2.5.2.3. The Case Studies Model……………………………………………17 2.5.2.4. The Integrative Model………………………………………………17 2.5.3. Bramley’s Model………………………………………………………….18 2.6. Evaluating Educational Programs…………………………………………….18 2.6.1. Ornstein and Hunkins’ Model…………………………………………….21 2.7 Evaluating Teacher Training Programs……………………………………26 2.7.1 Hamblin’s Model……………………………………………………..28 2.7.2 Brinkerhoff’s Six-Stage Evaluation Model…………………………..29 2.7.3 Kirkpatrick’s Model………………………………………………….29 2.7.4 Woodward’s Model…………………………………………………..30 2.7.4.1 The evaluation of trainees: the objectives model………………30 2.7.4.2 The evaluation of trainees: the process model…………………30 2.7.4.3 The evaluation by trainees………………………………………31 2.8 Experimental Studies on In-service Training Programs………………….31 2.9 The Summary……………………………………………………………..35 CHAPTER THREE: METHOD 3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………..………37 3.2Design of the Study…………………………………………………………37 3.3 Sample………………………………………………………………….…38 Contents Page 3.3.1 Sampling procedure……………………………………………………………………. 38 3.3.2 Participants……………………………………………………………………………….. 39 3.4 Instrumentation ……………………………………………………………………………….. 39 3.4.1 Teachers’ semi-structured Interviews………………………………..40 3.4.2 In-Service Teacher Training Programs Questionnaire………………..41 3.4.2.1 Development of the Questionnaire……………………………..41 3.5 Data Collection Procedure ………………………………………………………………… 41 3.6 Data Analysis Procedure …………………………………………………………………… 42 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULT AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….. 43 4.2 Findings…………………………………………………………………..43 4.2.1 Findings of the Qualitative Data Collection (teachers’ interviews)…….43 4.2.1.1 Codification of the Data…………………………………………….44 4.2.1.1.1 Open Coding……………………………………………………44 4.2.1.1.2 Axial Coding……………………………………………………47 4.2.1.1.3 Selective Coding………………………………………………..48 4.2.2. Development of the ISTTPQ……………………………………………49 4.2.2.1 Development of the Questionnaire Items …………………………50 4.2.2.2 Content and Face Validity……………………………….………..50 4.2.2.3 Pilot Study…………………………………………………………51 4.2.2.4 Reliability………………………………………………………….52 4.2.2.5 Construct Validity…………………………………………………54 4.2.2.5.1 Factor Analysis…………………………………………………..54 4.2.2.6 Reassessment of Internal Consistency of the Questionnaire………60 4.2.3 Findings of the Quantitative Data Collection (Questionnaire)…………60 4.2.3.1 Demographic information of the participants……………………..60 4.2.3.2 Descriptive analysis of the data……………………………61 Contents Page 4.3.1 Needs Analysis………………………………………………………….67 4.3.2 Planning…………………………………………………………………67 4.3.3 The Content of the In-service Program………………………………..68 4.3.4 The Process of the In-service Training Program……………………….69 4.3.5 Evaluation of the In-Service Training Program……………………….69 4.4 Discussion………………………………………………………………………69 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND IMPLICATIONS 5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………….. 74 5.2 Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………… 74 5.3 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………. 74 5.4 Pedagogical Implications ………………………………………………………………….. 75 5.5 Limitations of the Study …………………………………………………………………… 75 5.6 Suggestions for Further Research ………………………………………………………. 76 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………………… 77 APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………………………. 86 List of Tables Contents Page Table 2.1 Provus’s Discrepancy Evaluation Model………………………………….21 Table 3.1 Demographic Information of the participants…………………………………….. 39 Table 4.1 Item-total Statistics………………………………………………………..53 Table 4.2 Item-total Statistics………………………………………………………..53 Table 4.3 Reliability Analysis of the ISTTPQ……………………………………….54 Table 4.4 KMO and Bartlett’s Test………………………………………………….55 Table 4.5 Total Variance Explained for ISTTPQ……………………………………55 Table 4.6 Rotated Component Matrix of the ISTTPQ……………………………….56 Table 4.7 The Summary Table of Items Belonging to Each Factor………………….59 Table 4.8 Reliability Analysis of ISTTPQ…………………………………………..60 Table 4.9 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 1of the analysis……………………..61 Table 4.10 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 2 of the analysis……………………..63 Table 4.11 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 3 of the analysis………………………64 Table 4.12 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 4 of the analysis………………….65 Table 4.13 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 5 of the analysis………………………. 65 Table 4.14 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 6 of the analysis………………….66 Table 4.15 Percentage, Mean, and Sig. in Factor 7 of the analysis………………….66 List of Figures Contents Page Figure 2.1The craft model of professional education………………………………………… 15 Figure 2.2 Applied science model…………………………………………………………………… 15 Figure 2.3 Reflective model…………………………………………………………16 Figure 2.4The difference between Formative and Summative evaluation………….20 Figure 2.5 Provus’s Discrepancy Evaluation Model………………………………..22 Figure 2.6 Stake’s Congruence – Contingency Model………………………………23 Figure 2.7 Stufflebeam’s Context, Input, Process, Product Model…………………24 Figure 2.8 Expressions of levels used in training evaluation models by different authors…………………………………………………….……………28 Figure 2.9 The Six-Stage Model as a Cycle…………………………….…………..29 Figure 2.10 Comparison of terms used in different training program evaluation Models…………………………………………………………31 Figure 4.1 Categories and Subcategories emerging from the Content Analysis……49 CHAPTER ONE PRELIMINARIES Introduction L این مطلب را هم بخوانید : این مطلب را هم بخوانید : earning a foreign language, especially English, has increasingly become more vital the world over. This is appreciable when we consider that we live in a globalized world where English is used as a lingua franca. Over the course of time, teaching English as a foreign language has gained considerable significance so much so that it has established itself as an educational field that is worth researching within the general educational system. Since the human life has been changed radically by the development of the technologies and the improvement of the knowledge, the need for qualified teachers can be felt even more. Therefore, teachers should improve their knowledge and skills and adjust themselves to the new technology. Thus, to keep up with these changes, teachers need to be trained continuously and become more efficient in their jobs. For the last two decades, there have been a lot of debates on the teacher’s preparation and teacher’s development. According to Lanier and Little (1986), teacher education as a field of study has not found its right place in the academy. In teacher education field, teacher educators play highly important roles; however, most of the time, they are not taken into account in the research conducted into their work. However, this situation has changed since the 1990s as university researchers, law makers, and policy analysts have paid increasing attention to what teacher educators do. From that time, teacher education has been recognized as an object of academic research. Yet, it is difficult for teachers to be self-sufficient due to the need for specialization of the new education-teaching programs, new teaching strategies and new technologies. As a result, according to Saban (2000), teachers can develop their qualifications and achieve professional identity through both pre- and in-service training programs, hence, the notion of lifelong learning. It is obvious that the quality of education is influenced by the quality of teachers and their teaching. Teachers first gain an ‘entry-level proficiency’ in teacher education institutions in pre-service training programs, and ‘mastery-level proficiency’ is obtained after a wide understanding of teaching and acquiring skills based on practical experience in in-service training programs. Each teacher needs to pass in-service education and training (commonly abbreviated as INSET) programs for the initial professional training. In-service training programs are the major elements in solving the difficulties facing teachers’ development (Craft, 2000; Day, 1999; Hammadou, 2004; Lee 2007; Sugrue, 2001). All EFL teachers concede that the profession of teaching English entails a persistent development and innovation on their behalf. There are wide understanding of teaching and acquiring skills based on practical experience in in-service training programs. Each teacher needs to pass in-service education and training (commonly abbreviated as INSET) programs for the initial professional training. In-service training programs are the major elements in solving the difficulties facing teachers’ development (Craft, 2000; Day, 1999; Hammadou, 2004; Lee 2007; Sugrue, 2001). All EFL teachers concede that the profession of teaching English entails a persistent development and innovation on their behalf. There are