Validating a Continuing Professional Development Scale among Iranian EFL Teachers

Document Type: Research Paper


Department of English, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maybod, Yazd


Some EFL teachers have tragically fossilized in their career and have reluctantly participated in teachers' in-service classes. Teachers Continuous Professional Development (CPD) is an indispensable part of teaching career. Accordingly, the current study was to design, develop, and validate items for an effective scale for CPD programs in Iranian English foreign language context. In fact, factor analysis was the main concern in this study. Initially, the tentative model with 55 items was piloted and tested through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis on a sample of 400 English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers. This level resulted in the removal of 8 items in the sample loaded and led to the final CPD inventory with 47 items. Convergent validity of the CPD variable was derived from the output of confirmatory factor analysis in the Lisrel Software. The significant score of all model parameters was larger than 1.96. Therefore, the validity of the construct of measuring the relevant variables was substantiated and confirmed at a significant level of 0.05. Furthermore, the result indicated that the research model was in the domain of acceptance. Also, convergent validity was confirmed and validated. The fitting indexes of the model also revealed that the measurement models were substantiated in terms of external validity. The findings of this study can offer pedagogical implications to English teaching and learning stakeholders, educational policy makers, officials, and those involved in second language teacher education as well as English language teachers in EFL contexts.


Article Title [Persian]

اعتبار سنجی پرسشنامه پیشرفت حرفه ای مستمر در بین معلمین زبان انگلیسی در ایران

Authors [Persian]

  • انیس بهزادی
  • محمد گلشن
  • سیما صیادیان
Abstract [Persian]

برخی از معلمان زبان انگلیسی در حرفه خود متحجر شده و برای شرکت در کلاس های ضمن خدمت ویژه معلمین اکراه دارند. با وجود اینکه پیشرفت حرفه ای مستمرمعلمان (CPD) بخشی ضروری از آموزش حرفه ای آنها می باشد، هنوز در مورد روش های متفاوت پیشرفت حرفه ای معلمین تصویر کاملی در دست نیست. بر این اساس، مطالعه حاضر، طراحی و اعتبار سنجی یک ابزار (پرسشنامه) مقیاس موثر برای برنامه های پیشرفت حرفه ای مستمر معلمین زبان انگلیسی را انجام داده است. ابتدا مدل آزمایشی با 55 بخش با استفاده از تجزیه و تحلیل داده های اکتشافی و تاییدی بر روی نمونه ای از 400 معلم EFL زبان انگلیسی آزمایش تایید شد.که 8 ایتم از ادامه کار حذف شدند و 47 ایتم باقی ماندند. روایی همگرا با استفاده از تحلیل عامل تایید کننده متغیر CPD از خروجی نرم افزار Lisrel مشتق شده است . نمره قابل توجهی از همه پارامترهای مدل بزرگتر از 1.96 است؛ بنابراین اعتبار سازه های اندازه گیری متغیرهای مربوطه در سطح معنی داری 05/0 تأیید و تأیید شده است. همچنین شاخص AVE نشان می دهد که مدل تحقیق در حوزه پذیرش این شاخص (AVE> 0.5) و روایی همگرا بر روی سطح ساختار تایید شده است. شاخص های مناسب مدل نیز نشان می دهد که مدل های اندازه گیری تایید شده اند. در واقع، مدل های اندازه گیری دارای اعتبار خارجی هستند. یافته های این تحقیق می تواند نکات آموزشی و کاربردی را برای مسئولان امر آموزش زبان که مشغول توسعه برنامه آموزشی برای مدرسین زبان هستند و همچنین برای معلمان زبان انگلیسی ارایه میدهد.

Keywords [Persian]

  • پیشرفت حرفه ای مستمر
  • معلمین زبان انگلیسی
  • اعتبار سنجی
Abell, S. K., & Lee, M. H. (2008). Making the most of professional development. Science and Children, 45(8), 62-69.

Asmari, A. A. (2016). Continuous Professional Development of English Language Teachers: Perception and Practices. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, Australia, 7(3),147-158.

Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(6), 10-20.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Some practical thoughts about student-sensitive critical pedagogy. Journal of the Language Teacher, 28 (7),23-27.

Chenge, Y. S. (2017). Development and preliminary validation of four brief measures of L2 language-skill-specific anxiety. System. 1-11.   

Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Dornyei, Z. (2007). Questionnaires in Second Language Research. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data.

Ermeling, B. A. (2010). Tracing the effects of teacher inquiry on classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3),377-388.

Freeman, D. (2001). Second language teacher education. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 72-79). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Freeman, D. & Johnson, K.E. (2005). Response to “Language teacher learning and student language learning: Shaping the knowledge base”. In D. J. Tedick (Ed.) Language teacher education: International perspectives on research and practice (pp. 25–32). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2009). Using common formative assessments as a source of professional development in an urban American elementary school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(5),674-680.

Guay, F., Valois, P., Falardeau, E. & Lessard, V. (2016). Examining the effects of a professional development program on teachers' pedagogical practices and students' motivational resources and achievement in written French. Learning and Individual Differences, 45(4), 291-298.

Guskey, T. R. (2003). Analyzing lists of the characteristics of effective professional development to promote visionary leadership. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 87(637),4-21.

Habibpour, K. & Safari, R. (2012). Comprehensive SPSS Application Guide in Survey Research. Tehran university.

Harris, D. N., & Sass, T. R. (2007). Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement. Unpublished manuscript, Grant R305M04121 from US Department of Education.

Hoewook, C., & Hyunjin, K. (2010). Implementing professional standards in teacher preparation programs in the United States: Preservice teachers' understanding of teaching standards. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 7(2), 355-377.

Hooks, L. S. (2015). Towards more effective teacher professional development initiatives. Walden university, dissertations and doctoral studies.

Koellner, K. & Jacobs, J. (2015). Distinguishing models of professional development: the case of an adaptive model’s impact on teachers’ knowledge, instruction, and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education. SAGE, 2015, Vol. 66(1)51-67.

Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4),575-614.

Levine, T. H. & Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focus of teachers’ collaborative activities facilitate and constrain teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 389-398.

Lovett, M. W., Lacerenza, L., de Palma, M., Benson, N. J., Steinbach, K. A. & Frijters, J. C. (2008). Preparing teachers to remediate reading disabilities in high school: what is needed for effective professional development? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(5),1083-1097.

Luke, A., & McArdle, F. (2009). A model for research-based state professional development policy. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 37(3), 231-251.

Lustick, D. S. (2011). Experienced secondary science teachers' perceptions of effective professional development while pursuing National Board certification. Teacher Development, 15(2), 219-239.

Morais, A. M., Neves, I. F. & Alfonso, M. (2005). Teacher training processes and teachers competence: A sociological study in the primary school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 415-437.

Morgado, F. F., Meireles, J. F., Neves, C. M., Amaral, A. C., & Ferreira, M. E. (2017). Scale development: Ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica/Psychology: Research and Review, 30(3), 71-89.

Mpho, M. Dichaba., & Matseliso L. Mokhele. (2012). Does the Cascade Model Work for Teacher Training? Analysis of Teachers’ Experiences. Int J Edu Sci, 4(3),249-254.

Richards, J. C. & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stes, A., Min-Leliveld, M., Gijbels, D. & Van Petegem, P. (2010). The impact of instructional development in higher education: The state-of-the-art of the research. Educational Research Review, 5, 25-49.

Seymour, J. R. & Osana, H. P. (2003). Reciprocal teaching procedures and principles: two teachers developing understanding. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(3),325-344.

Topolinski, C.C. (2014). The Influence of Teacher Leadership and Professional Learning on Teachers’ Knowledge and Change of Instructional Practices in Low Performing Schools. Western Michigan University, Scholar Works at WMU, Dissertations Graduate College.

Vogt, F., & Rogalla, M. (2009). Developing adaptive teaching competency through coaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8), 1051-1060.

Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N. & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council.

Zoller, K. (2015). Teachers’ perception of professional development. PedActa, 5, 27-35.