Instructors’ Perceived Effectiveness of Current Professional Development Programs at Taif University English Language Center
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<p>The present paper aimed to explore the EFL instructors perceived effectiveness of current professional development programs run at Taif University English Language Center (TUELC) in Saudi Arabia, and to provide suggestions to improve the current situation of these programs. To achieve these purposes, the researcher tried to answer three questions. The first question investigated instructors’ perceptions of current professional development programs offered at the end of each semester, and the second and third questions examined the instructors’ possible reasons for agreement and disagreement with the items proposed in the questionnaire distributed to them, and the instructors’ suggestions to improve the current situation of professional development programs. A questionnaire of 4- Likert Scale and open-ended questions were used to gather data from seventy six teachers. The collected data were analyzed in the form of descriptive statistics, and content analysis was used for the open-ended questions. The results of the first question indicated that instructors in general have a negative attitude towards the current professional development programs run at the English Language Center. They only expressed their positive attitude towards the domains of professional knowledge and assessment strategies on the ground that they were given the opportunity to be interactive participants during discussing these two domains. Other possible reasons for agreement indicated that instructors shared knowledge and experience during the sessions of the program. However, their possible reasons for disagreement with the other domains showed that their actual needs were not considered when developing the program; they were mainly passive listeners, and the presenters were not professional enough to handle certain topics. Also, there was not enough focus on practice where learners could seek solutions to problems relevant to their classroom situations. They suggested that a needs assessment should be carried out and electronic professional development would be a good alternative to traditional meetings. Based on the results, the researcher drew certain conclusions and recommendations.</p>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».