Determination of Teacher’s Competencies in online Teaching

Subject Areas : Education

sara ebrahimi ¹

1 - Faculty member of Organization for Educational Research and Planning (OERP), Tehran, Iran

Received: 2021-02-05 Accepted : 2021-05-19 Published : 2022-06-22

Keywords: Competencies, online teaching, activity theory, teaching process,

Abstract :

Introduction: Although identifying online teaching process-oriented competencies can be a guide for teachers and teacher interns, there are still many unknowns about competencies based on the online teaching process of teachers. Then, the aim of this study was to identify online teaching competencies and their relationship with teachers’ demographic factors.
Research Methodology: The mixed research method, a sequential exploratory design of instrument making type was used. In the qualitative part, the research method was content analysis and the statistical population were all middle and secondary school teachers in Tehran and theoretical and research resources in the field of online education and teacher’s professional competencies that 30 teachers with online teaching and learning experiences and resources related to online teaching were selected using the targeted sampling method of the type of theoretical. The sample size was determined based on the principle of theoretical saturation. In or9der to collect data, semi-structured interviews with teachers were used and to extract the factors, interview coding and theoretical and research resources and data alignment were used. In the next step, the online teaching competency questionnaire was designed using the extracted factors and based on the activity theory. In the quantitative part, the research method was survey and the statistical population included all middle and secondary school teachers in Tehran (1399-1400) which 261 teachers with online teaching and learning experiences were selected using the virtual snowball sampling method based on Krejcie and Morgan table. In order to analyse the data, exploratory factor analysis and multiple regression analysis were used.
Findings: Findings showed that the online teaching competency questionnaire based on activity theory is well compatible with exercises and class assignments and is reliable and valid in terms of psychometric properties. In the study of demographic characteristics, gender, age and level of education of teachers did not have a significant effect on online teaching competencies, but the effect of online teaching and learning experience was significant.
Conclusion: These findings can be used in purposeful provision of student teachers’ preparation programs based on active topics of online teaching and design of educational in-service programs to empower teachers.

References:

1. Ahmed, M. A., Moradeyo, I., & Abimbola, I. O. (2016). Assesment of perceived academic and incentive needs of Senior Secondary School Biology Teachers in Kwara State, Nigeria. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(3), 12–23.


2. Akiri, A. A., & Ugborugbo, N. M. (2009). Analytic examination of teachers’ career satisfaction in public secondary schools. Studies on Home and Community Science, 3(1), 51–56.


3. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. ERIC.


4. Barbour, M. K., Siko, J., Gross, E., & Waddell, K. (2013). Virtually unprepared: Examining the preparation of K-12 online teachers Teacher education programs and online learning tools: Innovations in teacher preparation (pp. 60–81). Pennsylvania: IGI Global.


5. Bigatel, P. M., Ragan, L. C., Kennan, S., May, J., & Redmond, B. F. (2012). The identification of competencies for online teaching success. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(1), 59–77.


6. Coman, C., Tiru, L. G., Mesesan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C., Bularca, M. C. (2020). Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education during the Coronavirus Pandemic: Students’ Perspective. Sustainability, 12(24), 1-24.


7. Davis, N., & Roblyer, M. (2005). Preparing teachers for the “Schools that technology built” Evaluation of a program to Train teachers for virtual schooling. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(4), 399–409.


8. Dong, Y., Chai, C. S., Sang, G.-Y., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2015). Exploring the profiles and interplays of pre-service and in-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in China. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 158–169.


9. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


10. Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and higher education, 13(1–2), 31–36.


11. González-Sanmamed, M., Muñoz-Carril, P.-C., & Sangrà, A. (2014). Level of proficiency and professional development needs in peripheral online teaching roles. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(6), 162–187.


12. Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211–229.


13. Jonassen, D. H., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development, 47(1), 61–79.


14. Kim, Y. (2018). Revisiting classroom practices in East Asian Countries: Examination of within-country variations and effects of classroom instruction. Teachers College Record, 120(7), 7.


15. Klein, J. D., Spector, J. M., Grabowski, B., De, I., & Teja, L. (2004). Teaching competencies instructor competencies: Standards for face-to-face, online & blended settings. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(2), 195.


16. Klug, J., Krause, N., Schober, B., Finsterwald, M., & Spiel, C. (2014). How do teachers promote their students’ lifelong learning in class? Development and first application of the LLL Interview. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37, 119–129.


17. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Examining the technological pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore pre-service teachers with a large-scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 563–573.


18. Kopp, B., Matteucci, M. C., & Tomasetto, C. (2012). E-tutorial support for collaborative online learning: An explorative study on experienced and inexperienced e-tutors. Computers & Education, 58(1), 12–20.


19. Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W., (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.


20. Lektorsky, V. A. (1999). Activity theory in a new era. Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 65–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


21. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.


22. Liu, Q., Zhang, S., & Wang, Q. (2015). Surveying Chinese in-service K12 teachers’ technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(1), 55–74.


23. McAllister, L., & Graham, C. (2016). An analysis of the curriculum requirements for K-12 online teaching endorsements in the US. Journal of Online Learning Research, 2(3), 247–282.


24. Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12–21.


25. Michaelowa, K., & Wittmann, E. (2007). The cost, satisfaction, & achievement of primary Education-Evidence from Francophone Sub-Saharan Africa. The Journal of Developing Areas, 41(1), 51–78.


26. Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension- monitoring activities. Cognition and instruction, 1(2), 117–175.


27. Paquette, G. (2007). An ontology and a software framework for competency modeling and management. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 1–21.


28. Patrick, P. K. S., & Yick, A. G. (2005). Standardizing the interview process and developing a faculty interview rubric: An effective method to recruit and retain online instructors. Internet & Higher Education, 8(3), 199–212.


29. Peechapol, C., Na-Songkhla, J., Sujiva, S., & Luangsodsai, A. (2018). An exploration of factors influencing self-efficacy in online learning: A systematic review. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 13(09), 64–86.


30. Planar, D., & Moya, S. (2016). The effectiveness of instructor personalized and formative feedback provided by instructor in an online setting: Some unresolved issues. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 14(3), 196–203.


31. Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A Literature Review on Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Teaching and Learning. 8(1), 133-141.


32. Rezaa’ee, M. (2020). Identification and Validation of Teachers’ Professional Competencies based on Educational Reform Documents. Journal of education, 36(1), 63-82. [in Persian]


33. Richter, S. L., & Ware, L. J. (2016). Nurse educator self-assessed technology competence and online teaching efficacy: A pilot study.


34. Roberts, J. (2018). Future and changing roles of staff in distance education: A study to identify training and professional development needs. Distance Education, 39(1), 37–53.


35. Savery, J. R. (2005). BE VOCAL: Characteristics of successful online instructors. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 4(2), 141–152.


36. Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) the development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123–149.


37. Sogillo, R. R. O., Guimba, W. D., & Alico, J. C. (2016). Assessment of mathematics teachers in a public and a private School: Implications to the quality of teaching secondary mathematics. Advances in Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 7–16.


38. Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Stein, D., Liu, Q., & Chen, W. (2019). Examining Chinese beginning online instructors’ competencies in teaching online based on the Activity theory. J. Comput. Educ., 1-22.


39. Whitaker, J. P. (2015). Traditional faculty in transition: theory, change, and preparation for the online paradigm. Alabama: The University of Alabama.


40. Xiao, X. (2018). Supporting the construction of College Teachers’ Information-based teaching ability with online open course system. University Teaching in China, 09, 70–73.


41. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2010). A conceptual framework based on Activity Theory for mobile CSCL. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 211–235.