Perception of the Part-Time Teachers’ Professional Development Needs, Barriers, Feedback, and Job Satisfaction: Case of Serbia from Talis 2013 Sample

• Authors: Predrag Živković

Abstracts

EN

The research aimed to determine significant relationships between selected dimensions of professional life and the work of part-time teachers in a sample of respondents in the Republic of Serbia. In testing the model on a sample from the TALIS 2013 (Teaching and Learning International Survey), which consisted of dimensions of professional development (general and specific), barriers to professional development, evaluation and job satisfaction, showed statistically significant relationships between feedback, specific needs of professional development, and less significant links between the general needs of professional development and the barriers to this development with job satisfaction. Quantitative methods were followed to report the results of the cross-sectional study. Partial least square structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was utilised to assess the quantitative data. Research with this sample of surveyed teachers has not been done so far.

Keywords

EN

part-time teachers; professional development needs; feedback; Serbia; job satisfaction

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: The New Educational Review
• Year: 2022
• Volume: 68
• Pages: 150-161

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Predrag Živković

• University of Kragujevac, Jagodina, Serbia

• https://orcid.org/0000000158740165

References

• Badri, M., Al Qubaisi, A., Mohaidat, J., Al Dhaheri, H., Yang, G., Al Rashedi, A., & Greer, K. (2016). An Analytic Hierarchy Process for School Quality and Inspection: Model Development and Application. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(3), 437-459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2014-0123
• Beak-Kyoo, J., & Insuk, L. (2016). Workplace happiness: Work engagement, career satisfaction, and subjective well-being. Evidence-based HRM a Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship, 5(2), 206-221.
• Bontempo, B. T., & Deay, A. M. (1986). Substitute teachers: An analysis of problem situations. Contemporary Education, 57, 85-89.
• Carey, R. (1960). The other side of the substitute-teacher coin. Peabody Journal of Education, 37(4), 211-215.
• Clifton, R., & Rambaran, R. (1987). Substitute teaching: Survival in a marginal situation. Urban Education, 22(3), 310-327.
• Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Learning Policy Institute.
• Dede, C., Ketelhut, D. J., Whitehouse, P., & McCloskey, E. M. (2008). A Research Agenda for Online Teacher Professional Development. Journal of Teacher Education. 60(1), 8-19. DOI: 10.1177/0022487108327554
• Duggleby, P., & Badali, S. (2007). Expectations and Experiences of Substitute Teachers. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 53(1), 22-33.
• Fang, G., Chan, P. W. K., & Kalogeropoulos, P. (2021, July-September). Secondary School Teachers’ Professiona Development in Australia and Shanghai: Needs, Support, and Barriers. SAGE Open, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211026951
• Finley A., & McNair, T. B. (2013). Assessing underserved students’ engagement in high-impact practices. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
• Galloway, S. (1993). “Out of Sight, out of Mind”: A Response to the Literature on Supply Teaching. Educational Research, 35(2), 159-169.
• Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
• Henderson, K. A., Hodges, S., & Kivel, B. (2002). Context and dialogue in research on women and leisure. Journal of Leisure Research, 34, 253-262.
• Jennings, B. (2001). Supply is demanding. Times Educational Supplement. http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=Scotland&id=343792&Type=0
• Jenkins, S., Smith, H., & Maxwell, T. (2009). Challenging experiences faced by beginning casual teachers: here one day and gone the next! Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 63-78.
• Jones, K. (1999). Managing substitute teaching: Here’s How. Principal, 18(2), 1-4.
• Karlberg, M., & Bezzina, C. (2020). The professional development needs of beginning and experienced teachers in four municipalities in Sweden. Professional Development in Education. DOI: 10.1080/19415257.2020.1712451
• Koelling, C. H. (1983). Substitute teachers - school policies and procedures in the North Central Region. Education, 104, 155-171.
• Lofthouse, R. M., & Hall, E. (2014). Developing practices in teachers’ professional dialogue in England: using Coaching Dimensions as an epistemic tool. Professional Development in Education, 40(5), 758-778. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.886283
• Mizell, H. (2010). Why Professional Development Matters. Learning Forward.
• Morgan, D., & Bates, C. (2018). Seven Elements of Effective Professional Development. The Reading Teacher, 71(5), 623-626. DOI: 10.1002/trtr.1674
• Norton, B. (2013). Identity and Language Learning. Multilingual Matters.
• O’Connor, K. (2009, September/October). No substitute leftbehind. Principal, 32-36.
• Ostapczuk, E. D. (1994). What makes effective secondary education substitute teachers? Literature review. ERIC ED, 374 075.
• Pietsch, M., & Williamson, J. (2009). “I’m tentatively teaching”: Crossing the border from student of teaching to teacher of students. Teacher education crossing borders: Cultures, contexts, communities and curriculum, conference of the Australian Teacher Education Association (ATEA), Albury, 28 June-1 July.
• Rawson, D. V. (1981). Evaluation, feedback necessary - increasing the effectiveness of substitute teachers. NASSP Bulletin, 45, 81-84.
• Reeves, S., Lewin, S., Espin, S., & Zwarenstein, M. (2010). Interprofessional teamwork for health and social care. Blackwell-Wiley.
• Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS GmbH. http://www.smartpls.com
• Sheehy, K. (2012). States, districts require online ed for high school graduation. https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/high-school-notes/2021/10/22/states-districts-requireonline-ed-for-high-school-graduation
• Shreeve, W., Nicely-Leach, J., Radebaugh, M., Morrill, C., & Slatton, S. (1987). Substitute teachers: The professional contradiction. Early Child Developmental Care, 29, 313-319.
• Sprague, D. (2006). Research agenda for online teacher professional development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(4), 657-661.
• Thessin, R. A., & Starr, J. P. (2011). Supporting the Growth of Effective Professional Learning Communities Districtwide. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 48-54. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F003172171109200611
• Tracy, S. B. (1988). Improve substitute teaching with staffdevelopment. NASSP Bulletin, 72(508), 85-88.
• Toropova, A., Myrberg, E., & Johansson, S. (2021). Teacher job satisfaction: the importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review, 73(1), 71-97. DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247
• Vu, Cao, & Vu, Cepero. (2014). Factors Driving Learner Success in Online Professional Development. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(3). 120-139.
• Weems, L. (2003). Representations of Substitute Teachers and the Paradoxes of Professionalism. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(3), 254-265. DOI: 10.1177/0022487103252007
• Williams, G. (2010). Research into Part-time Higher Education Supply and Demand. Social Research Report No. 08/2010. Welsh Assembly Government.
• Zubrzyck, J. (2012). Substitute teaching undergoes new scrutiny. Education Week. http://www.joycefdn.org/assets/1/7/EdWeek36substitutes.pdf

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/tner.22.68.2.12

Biblioteka Nauki

2057082