ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Original Research

Authors

Bakhtiyar Nasrabadi   H.A. (1 )
Najafi   M. (1)
Nosrati Heshi   K. (*)
Beirami Pour   A. (2)
Cheraghyan Radi   A. (3 )






(*) Education & Training Philosophy Department, Educational Sciences & Psychology Faculty, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran
(1 ) Education & Training Philosophy Department, Educational Sciences & Psychology Faculty, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran
(2) Educational Programming Department, Educational Sciences & Psychology Faculty, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran
(3 ) Education Planning Department, Education & Psychology Faculty, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran

Correspondence

Address: Room No. 349, Shahid Fahmide Dormitory, Isfahan University, Hezar Jarib St., Shiraz Gate, Isfahan, Iran. Postal Code: 8174673441
Phone: +984524823504
Fax: +983117932342
kamalnosrati1367@yahoo.com

Article History

Received:  March  9, 2013
Accepted:  July 22, 2013
ePublished:  March 17, 2014

BRIEF TEXT


Teachers are the main element in education institution [1]. Today, Teachers’ professionalism, empowerment and education quality improvement are noticed, and teachers’ education is continued during professional period [2, 3].It is important to determine the effective issues for teachers [4]. Teachers participate in the in-service training according to their need about learning of these programs [5, 6]. Failure of the in-service training may be due to the inappropriate designed programs according to the needs and experiences of teachers [7]. According to the theory of ‘experience’, since teachers’ needs are related to implementation of the theories and learning, new teachers need to improve their own abilities, and experienced due to lack of up to date knowledge, need to update their skills and abilities [8].

Some studies show that the in-service training has no effect on some teaching items, but it is effective on job satisfaction [9, 10, 11, 12, 13]. Some studies emphasis on the need for in-service training, while other studies rejected this at least about some courses [14, 15]. In-service training helps teachers to recognize their own main problems and find out appropriate solutions. [16, 17, 18, 19, 20].

The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between capabilities and needs of Educational Affairs Teachers.

The method is descriptive-survey.

The study was done on educational affairs teachers of Isfahan.

128 persons from the 850 educational affairs teachers were selected using stratified sampling proportional to the volume. To achieve the aims of the study, based on work experience, teachers were divided into 3 groups including inexperienced (less than 10 years, 64 persons), experienced (11 to 20 years, 32 persons) and experts (more than 20 years, 32 persons) groups.

A researcher-made questionnaire containing 21 items was used to collect data.‏ Reliability of the questionnaire was estimated as 0.88, using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The questionnaire was consisted of some parts. The first part evaluated the capabilities of the educational affairs teachers based on five-point Likert scale from “inability” (one score) to “full ability” (five scores). The second part evaluated the educational affairs teachers needs regarding in-service training based on of five-point Likert scale from “I have no need” (one score) to “I need severely ”(five scores). Data were analyzed, using ANOVA (to examine the differences between the average level of the groups) and Sheffe (to investigate the disputed point or the difference between the studied groups) tests. SPSS 16 software was used.

Correlation between capabilities and needs of the instructors was significant only in 9 items the, which was low totally. (Negative correlative means the excess of needs than capabilities.) The scores of each item showed that the educational affairs instructors evaluate their own capabilities less than the mean level (average of 3) in ‘planning and management of educational activities’, ‘identification of psychological, social and adolescence’s problems’, ‘growth and social conflicts’, ‘advice and guidance’ and ‘preparation and optimal applying of available resources in educational activities’ items. There is no difference between comments of the instructors, according to their own work experiences, about ‘the need for in-service training’. The higher mean score belonged to ‘using the new methods of education’ that its value was more than 4 in all the three groups of the instructors. Inexperienced instructors who were evaluate themselves as able and skilled in the item of ‘new methods of education’, also found themselves in the need of in-service educations in this item. In ‘the use of information technology for teaching’ and ‘using the new methods of education’, inexperienced instructors found themselves more able than expert instructors. Expert instructors found themselves more able than experienced and inexperienced instructors in ‘effective communication with colleagues’, ‘identification of psychological, social and adolescence’s problems’, ‘educational assessment of students’, ‘book and library’ and ‘school councils and student organizations’ items.

According to the results, teachers with no work experience put emphasis on performing such educations, which is consistent with studies by Hargreaves and Goodson, Williams, and Sabar.

Non-declared

Expansion of the results must be done cautiously due to the small population and samples

Determination of the content of the in-service training programs for the state educational affairs teachers cannot be accountable only based on their abilities or their needs; and their abilities and needs have to be considered together.

Researchers feel grateful towards the lecturers of Educational Affairs Staff of Isfahan University and experts of educational affairs at Isfahan Education Bureau.

There is no conflict between the results of this study with interests of any organization.

Non-declared

All finance resources are only provided by the writers, and no support has been received from any organization.

TABLES and CHARTS

Show attach file


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Mahrmohammadi M. Rethinking teaching-learning process and teacher education. Tehran: School Publication; 2000. [Persian]
[2]Cheryl R, Johana JF. Enhancing environmental education teaching skills through in-service education and training. J Educ Teach. 2005;31(1):3-14.
[3]Morant RW. In-service education within the school. London: George Allen and Unwin; 1981.
[4]Jorger RM. A comparison of the service education needs of two cohort of beginning Minnesota Agriculture Education teachers. J Agr Educ. 2002;43(3):11-24.
[5]Hargreaves A, Goodson IF. Teachers` professional lives. New prospects series 3. Washington DC: Falmer; 2005.
[6]Williams GL. Staff development in education: A guide to theory and a checklist for improving current practice. Sheffield: PAVIC; 1982.
[7]Day C. The challenge to be the best: reckless curiosity and mischievous motivation. Teachers Teach. 2002;8(3):421-34.
[8]Fickel LH. Quality professional development: suggestion about process and content. Educ Forum. 2002;67(1):47-54.
[9]Orangi Abdul Majeedandet. Impact on the performance of professional training of teachers Shiraz city: A new approach in the Quarterly. J Educ Manag. 2011;5(1):95-114. [Persian]
[10]Karroubi M, Methane M. Strategies for empowering employees through in-service training. Basirat. 2011;49(4):119-38. [Persian]
[11]Mirzamohammadi M. Ghazizadeh M. Attitude of teachers on the factors affecting their attitudes to education in-service training courses. Modern Educ Thought. 2008;4(1-2):43-48. [Persian]
[12]Hosseinian S. Tabatabai Sh. Effectiveness of training teachers and trainers, technical service-oriented professional with exceptional business and pleasure in Tehran on their professional capabilities. Modern Educ Thought. 2009;1(5):51-5. [Persian]
[13]Raufi M, Tarikhi Ghoochani Daroos A. Impact in-service training on efficiency and productivity of school administrators and staff. Educ Stud Psychol. 2009;1(5):67-80. [Persian]
[14]Naderi N, Salimi GH, Jamshidian A. Empowering employees through training and service. J Hum Soc Sci. 2007;20(2):1-20. [Persian]
[15]Salmani Dastjerdi I, Hemmati Nejad MA, Rahmaninia F. Relation In-service training of teachers of physical education with automatic to their effectiveness. Dep J. 2008;37(3):193-204. [Persian]
[16]Sabar P. curriculum development at school level. International encyclopedia of education, supplement1; 2000.
[17]Valcke M, Rots I, Verbeke M, van Braak J. ICT teacher training: evaluation of the curriculum and training approach in Flanders. Teach Teacher Educ. 2007;23(6):795-808.
[18]Edmonds C. Continuous quality improvement: Integration best practice in to teacher education. J Educ Manag. 2007;21(3):232-7.
[19]Günes T, Demir SE, Hoplan M, Çelikolu M, Günes O. The perceptions and needs of science and primary school teachers about in-service training. Soc Behav Sci. 2011;15:1102-9.
[20]Kavak N, Yamak H, Bilici SC, Bozkurt E, Darici O, Ozkaya Y. The evaluation of primary and secondary teachers’ opinions about in-service teacher training. Soc Behav Sci. 2012;46:3507-11.