Exploring Professional Development from Brief Experiences: Case Studies of Secondary EFL Teachers in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current situation of educational reforms since 1990s has brought up a booming demand of competent EFL teachers because of economic globalization and further opening-up policy in China. So it’s vital and significant to explore EFL teachers’ professional development in order to promote English language teaching. Based on the Constructivism Perspective in educational psychology and new trends in Second Language Teacher Education, this research focuses on six secondary EFL teachers’ critical incidents and narrates their brief experiences by deep interview and field notes. After categorized analysis through recurring themes, the discussions about four domains (i.e. learning experiences, knowledge & beliefs, teaching practice and social context) are summarized below. These teachers have experienced pre-service & in-service and formal & informal learning that has different features. Secondly, they hold some common knowledge & beliefs, which are always developing but fluctuate with realities. Next, their language teaching develops from initial to survival then to mastery and personalization, but each stage is distinctive in different situations. Social context facilitates or constrains their professional development, but their responses to it are various to seek personal and professional balance. In conclusion, it interprets five interactive factors in the process of teacher professional development: Normal education and professional programs play essential roles; Self-directed teaching & school-based activities provide diverse paths; Perfection of language & teaching serves as peculiar professional qualities; Love for students & love for teaching functions as original driving force; Chinese social context works as potential external stimuli. Finally, it presents some feasible suggestions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".