Does Support for Professional Development in Early Childhood and Care Settings Matter? A Study in Four Countries
-
Published:2024-04-15
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:1082-3301
-
Container-title:Early Childhood Education Journal
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Early Childhood Educ J
Author:
Cadima JoanaORCID, Ferreira Tiago, Guedes Carolina, Alves Diana, Grande Catarina, Leal Teresa, Piedade Filipe, Lemos Ana, Agathokleous Andri, Charalambous Vicky, Vrasidas Charalambos, Michael Demos, Ciucurel Manuela, Chirlesan Georgeta, Marinescu Bogdan, Duminica Delia, Vatou Anastasia, Tsitiridou-Evangelou Maria, Zachopoulou Evridiki, Grammatikopoulos Vasilis
Abstract
AbstractProfessional Development (PD) can be a powerful lever for improving the quality of teacher-child interactions in early childhood education and care (ECEC) and teachers’ feelings of support and competence. However, there is a dearth of studies examining different formats of PD and their links with workplace features. The present study aims to understand (a) different types of PD participation (structured and center-embedded) and their levels of interest of preschool teachers in four European countries (Cyprus, Greece, Portugal, and Romania), and (b) the extent to which they are associated with PD incentives and perceived support. Participants were preschool teachers from Cyprus (N = 93; Mage = 41; SD = 7.47), Greece (N = 92; Mage = 40; SD = 9.81), Portugal (N = 92; Mage = 45; SD = 9.65), and Romania (N = 97; Mage = 40; SD = 10.40). The vast majority of participants were women (95-99%). Participants reported on PD attendance – structured (courses/seminars, conferences) and center-embedded (e.g., observation visits, peer and/or self-observation) –, levels of interest in PD; PD incentives (e.g., release from working with children; reimbursement/payment of costs); and perceived workplace support. Results from the Multi-Group Path Models showed that, in all countries, the provision of incentives was associated with increased participation in center-embedded PD, but not in structured PD. Additionally, the perceived support from their setting was positively associated with greater interest in PD. Understanding what best supports different types of PD can be critical to inform policy efforts aiming to increase PD attendance.
Funder
Universidade do Porto
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference38 articles.
1. Bayly, B. L., Dizon, E., Shrestha, G., Smith, C. L., Tekle, S., & Cooper, R. B. (2022). Leveraging self-determination theory to understand which preschool teachers benefit most from a professional development intervention. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 43, 194–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2020.1818652 2. Bove, C., Jensen, B., Wysłowska, O., Iannone, R. L., Mantovani, S., & Karwowska-Struczyk, M. (2018). How does innovative continuous professional development (CPD) operate in the ECEC sector? Insights from a cross‐analysis of cases in Denmark, Italy and Poland. European Journal of Education, 53(1), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12262 3. Chen, F., Curran, P. J., Bollen, K. A., Kirby, J., & Paxton, P. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the use of fixed cutoff points in RMSEA Test Statistic in Structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 36(4), 462–494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124108314720. 4. Connors, M. C. (2016). Creating cultures of learning: A theoretical model of effective early care and education policy. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.12.005. 5. Connors, M. C. (2019). Pathways to quality: From internal program supports to early educators’ practice. Early Education and Development, 30(5), 569–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2019.1584502.
|
|