A Q Methodological Study on the Professional Identities of Academic Staff of the Faculties of Education

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the professional identities of the academic staff of the faculties of education in Turkey. The study employed the Q methodology, in which both quantitative and qualitative data can be used. The qualitative data were collected and analysed by interviewing seven academics working in the faculty of education in the first stage of the study, which was conducted in two sequential stages. The analysis of the qualitative data showed that the academic staff of the faculty of education defined their professional identities as a "Practitioner", "Researcher", "Instructor", "Coach", "Counsellor" and a "Preparer". In the second stage of the study, the Q measurement tool was developed by the researchers based on the specified definitions for professional identities. The quantitative data were collected from 21 academics working in the faculty of education and analysed with the Q measurement tool. According to the analysis of the quantitative data, the academic staff of the faculties of education were seen to adopt six professional identities defined in general. In addition, the professional identity as a “Researcher” was found to be the most preferred, while the professional identity as a “Preparer” was the least preferred of the given identities. According to the findings obtained in the study, it was concluded that the educational experience of the academic staff of education faculties significantly differentiate the preferences and attitudes towards professional identities. Based on the findings and results obtained in this study, it is highly recommended to examine the role of the educational experience of the academic staff of education faculties in the change and transformation of their professional identities.

Keywords

• Faculty of Education
• Academic Staff
• Professional Identity
• Q Methodology

References

1. Association of Teacher Education (ATE) (2007). Quality standards for teacher educators. Retrieved from http://www.ate1.org/pubs/Standards.cfm
2. Amott, P. (2018). Identification – a process of self-knowing realised within narrative practices for teacher educators during times of transition, Professional Development in Education, 44(4), 476-491, doi:0.1080/19415257.2017.1381638
3. Ataünal, A. (2003). Niçin ve nasıl bir öğretmen?. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Vakfı Yayınları.
4. Bayram, N. (2015). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS ile veri analizi (5th ed.). Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P., & Verloop, N. (2004) Reconsidering research on teachers’ Professional identity, Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128.
5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2). 77-101.
6. Brown, S. R. (1993). A primer on Q methodology. Operant subjectivity, 16(3/4), 91-138.
7. Brown, S. R. (1996). Q methodology and qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 6(4), 561-567.
8. Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Learning and unlearning: The education of teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 5–28, doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00091-4

9. Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). Teacher educators as researchers: multiple perspectives. Teaching and teacher education, 21, 219–225.
10. Davey, R. L. (2010). Career on the cusp: The professional identity of teacher educators (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
11. Demir, F. ve Kul, M. (2011). Algı, tutum, karakteristik özellikler, tipoloji içerik analiz ve araştırmaları için modern bir araştırma yöntemi: Q metodu. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi.
12. Dinkelman, T. (2011). Forming a teacher educator identity: uncertain standards, practice and relationships, Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(3), 309-323, doi:10.1080/02607476.2011.588020
13. Dinkelman, T., Margolis, J., & Sikkenga, K. (2006). “From Teacher to Teacher Educator: Experiences, Expectations, and Expatriation.” Studying Teacher Education: A Journal of Self-study of Teacher Education Practices, 2(1), 5–23.
14. Gee, J. P. (2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99–125.
15. Izadinia, M. (2014). Teacher educators’ identity: a review of literature, European Journal of Teacher Education, 37:4, 426-441, doi:10.1080/02619768.2014.947025
16. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning—legitimate peripheral participation Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
18. Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: understanding teaching and learning about teaching. London: Routledge.
19. Loughran, L. (2011). On becoming a teacher educator, Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(3), 279-291, doi:10.1080/02607476.2011.588016
20. Mayer, D., Mitchell, J.,Santoro, N., & White, S. (2011). Teacher educators and ‘accidental’ careers in academe: an Australian perspective, Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(3), 247-260, doi:10.1080/02607476.2011.588011
21. McKeon, F., & Harrison, J. (2010). Developing pedagogical practice and professional identities of beginning teacher educators. Professional development in education, 36, 25–44, doi:10.1080/19415250903454783
22. Merriam, S. B. (2015). Nitel Araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber. (S. Turan, Trans.). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık (Original work published 2009).
23. Murray, J., Czerniawski, G., & Barber, P. (2011). Teacher educators’ identities and work in England at the beginning of the second decade of the twenty-first century, Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(3), 261-277, doi:10.1080/02607476.2011.588014
24. Murray, J., Davison, J., & John, P. (2006). Teacher educators’ constructions of identity and knowledge in pre-service teacher education. Paper presented at the American Education Research Conference, San Francisco, 2006
25. Murray, J., & Male, T. (2005). Becoming a teacher educator: Evidence from the field. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 125–142, doi:10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.006
26. Murray, J., Swennen, A., & Shagrir, L. (2009). Understanding teacher educators’ work and identities, A. Swennen & M. van der Klink (Ed.) Becoming a teacher educator: theory and practice for teacher educators içinde (pp. 29-43), Dordrecht NL: Springer.
27. Özdamar, K. (2016). Eğitim, sağlık ve davranış bilimlerinde ölçek ve test geliştirme yapısal eşitlik modellemesi: IBM SPSS, IBM SPSS AMOS ve MINITAB uygulamalı. Eskişehir: Nisan Kitabevi.
28. Sethi, R., & Compeau, L. D., (2002). Social Construction Organizational Identity and Market Orientation of the Firm. American Marketing Association Proceeding, 13, 183-184.
29. Skorikov, V. B., & Vondracek, F. W. (2011). Occupational identity. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 693–714). New York, NY: Springer.
30. Snoek, M., & Zogla, I. (2009). Teacher education in Europe; Main characteristics and developments, A. Swennen, & M. van der Klink (Ed.), Becoming a teacher educator: Theory and practice for teacher educators içinde (pp. 11-27). Dordrecht NL: Springer. Stephenson, W. (1935). Technique of factor analysis. Nature, 136, 297, doi: 10.1038/136297b0
31. Stephenson, W. (1952). Some observations on Q technique. Psychological Bulletin, 49(5), 483-498, doi:10.1037/h0057171
32. Swennen, J. M. H., Jones, K., & Volman, M. L. L. (2010). Teacher educators: their identities, sub-identities and implications for professional development. Professional Development in Education, 36(1&2), 131-148, doi:10.1080/19415250903457893
33. Timmerman, G. (2009). Teacher educators modelling their teachers?, European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 225-238, doi:0.1080/02619760902756020
34. Vloet, K., & van Swet, J., (2010). ‘I can only learn in dialogue!’ exploring professional identities in teacher education. Professional development in teacher education, 36, 149–168. doi:10.1080/19415250903457083
35. Wong, Z. Y., & Kaur, D. (2018). The role of vocational identity development and motivational beliefs in undergraduates’ student engagement, Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 31(3), 294-316, doi:10.1080/09515070.2017.1314249
36. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (9th ed.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
37. Yıldırım, İ. (2017). Eğitimin oyunlaştırılmasına ilişkin öğrenci algıları: Bir Q metodu analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 191(42). 235-246.
38. Yuan, R. (2016). Understanding higher education-based teacher educators’ identities in Hong Kong: a sociocultural linguistic perspective, Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 379-400, doi:10.1080/1359866X.2015.1094779
39. Higher Education Law (1981, 4 Nov.). Official Newspaper (Issue: 17506). Retrieved from http://www.yok.gov.tr/documents/37915040/38672190/2547+say%C4%B1l%C4%B1%20Y%C3%BCksek%C3%B6%C4%9Fretim+Kanunu.pdf/954efd63-dec8-4584-8bc9-b3a58968f2da
40. Williams, J., Ritter, J., & Bullock, S.M., (2012). Understanding the complexity of becoming a teacher educator: experience, belonging, and practice within a professional learning community. Studying teacher education, 8, 245–260.
41. Wilson, S.M. (2006). Finding a canon and core: Meditations on the preparation of teacher educator-researchers. Journal of Teacher Education 57(3), 15–25.
42. Zeichner, K. (2005). Becoming a teacher educator: A personal perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 117–124, doi:10.1016/j.tate.2004.12.001