The IRMA Community
Newsletters
Research IRM
Click a keyword to search titles using our InfoSci-OnDemand powered search:
|
The Features of a Standard INSET: Drawbacks in Key Components
Abstract
Adopting a qualitative descriptive methodology, the current study aims to explore whats and hows of planning, delivery, and follow-up in in-service teacher training. While doing this, together with presenting the general picture of in-service teacher trainings in Turkey, the study also makes use of a delivered in-service teacher training program so as to find how issues regarding planning, delivery, and follow-up were dealt with. The data collected through semi-structured written interview and supported with informal dialogues and telephone conversations revealed what was done and how was done for the three components. However, similar to many other trainings, the findings showed that lack of needs assessment, hands-on practice, and follow-up unfortunately makes the training to be restricted to what is known as traditional and top-down. For this reason, the findings shed light on the reality to consider teachers' needs, their active involvement, and on-going practice for effective in-service teacher trainings.
Related Content
|
Serra De Arment, Taryn Goodwin Traylor.
© 2024.
24 pages.
|
|
Kara Rosenblatt, Adriana Frates, Haidee Jackson.
© 2024.
29 pages.
|
|
Sarah Southey, Todd Simkover.
© 2024.
25 pages.
|
|
Tori Jesse.
© 2024.
21 pages.
|
|
Laura K. Sibbald, Carol Rogers-Shaw, Karen Krainz-Edison, Sara Sanders Gardner, Cindy Lowman-Stieby.
© 2024.
23 pages.
|
|
Marilyn Keller, Ambra E. Sherrod.
© 2024.
22 pages.
|
|
Gretchen Stewart, Elizabeth Doone.
© 2024.
35 pages.
|
|
|