Evaluating the pedagogical professionalism of students in pedagogical universities in Vietnam in the context of open knowledge

Main Article Content

Nguyen Van Luong
Mai Quoc Khanh
Tran Viet Cuong
Tran Trung Tinh

Abstract

This study aims to assess the level of pedagogical professionalism among students enrolled in pedagogical universities in Vietnam and identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current pedagogical education system in Vietnam in the context of open knowledge. The study also suggests measures to improve the quality of education in this field. The study uses a quantitative research methodology with an online survey administered to a sample of 250 students from a list of all students enrolled in pedagogical universities in Vietnam. The survey will be conducted using Google Forms and will be available from November 2020 to February 2022. The sample is selected through a random sampling technique to ensure representativeness, and the sample size is determined based on statistical calculations to ensure a confidence level of 95% and a margin of error of 5%. The study provides insights into the level of pedagogical professionalism among students in pedagogical universities in Vietnam and identifies areas for improvement in the pedagogical education system in Vietnam in the context of open knowledge. The study’s findings can help policymakers and educators to develop strategies and policies to improve the quality of education in this field.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Nguyen Van Luong, Mai Quoc Khanh, Tran Viet Cuong, & Tran Trung Tinh. (2023). Evaluating the pedagogical professionalism of students in pedagogical universities in Vietnam in the context of open knowledge. Research Journal in Advanced Humanities, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.58256/rjah.v4i2.1073
Section
Articles

How to Cite

Nguyen Van Luong, Mai Quoc Khanh, Tran Viet Cuong, & Tran Trung Tinh. (2023). Evaluating the pedagogical professionalism of students in pedagogical universities in Vietnam in the context of open knowledge. Research Journal in Advanced Humanities, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.58256/rjah.v4i2.1073

References

American Federation of Teachers (AFT). (2019). Teacher professionalism. Retrieved from https://www.aft.org/position/teacher-professionalism

Bailey, K. M. (2019). Language teacher professionalism. In G. Barkhuizen (Ed.), Reflections on language teacher identity research (pp. 95-106). New York: Routledge.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. M. (2005). Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cronin, C. (2017). Openness and praxis: Exploring the use of open educational practices in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5), 15-34. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.3096

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 57(3), 300-314. doi: 10.1177/0022487105285962

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105285962

DeRosa, R., & Robison, S. (2017). Pedagogy, technology, and the example of open educational resources. EDUCAUSE Review, 52(3), 38-54.

DeRosa, R., & Robison, S. (2017). Pedagogy, technology, and the example of open educational resources. EDUCAUSE Review, 52(3), 38-54.

Eren, E. M., & Tezel, Ö. (2020). The impact of teaching practicum on student teachers’ professional competencies: A qualitative study. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 8(7), 29-41. doi: 10.11114/jets.v8i7.4815

Ferguson, B., & Weinberg, M. (2012). The role of higher education in promoting social and economic development. Economic & Labour Relations Review, 23(3), 35-55. doi: 10.1177/103530461202300303

Friesike, S., Fecher, B., Hebing, M., & Linek, S. B. (2016). Open science: One term, five schools of thought. In Opening science (pp. 17-47). Springer International Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2

Fuchs, C., & Sandoval, M. (2013). The diamond model of open access publishing: Why policy makers, scholars, universities, libraries, labour unions and the publishing world need to take non-commercial, non-profit open access serious. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 11(2), 428-443. doi: 10.31269/triplec.v11i2.502

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. London: Routledge

Hilton III, J., Wiley, D., Stein, J., & Johnson, A. (2010). The four R’s of openness and ALMS analysis: Frameworks for open educational resources. Open Learning, 25(1), 37-44. doi: 10.1080/02680510903482132

Hylén, J. (2016). Open education and the future of the digital economy. European Journal of Education, 51(2), 236-248. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12173

Ingersoll, R. M. (2017). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 597- 641. doi: 10.3102/0034654317715547

Jhangiani, R., Pitt, R., Hendricks, C., Key, J., & Lalonde, C. (2016). Exploring faculty use of open educational resources at British Columbia post-secondary institutions. BCcampus Research Report. doi: 10.14288/1.0315642

Khanh, M. Q., Tinh, T. T., & Cuong, T. V. (2022). Education of pedagogical professionalism for students to satisfy the demands of innovation and improve the quality of teaching in Vietnam. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(S2), 1926–1935.

https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS2.5428

Korthagen, F. (2017). Inconvenient truths about teacher learning: Towards professional development 3.0. Teachers and Teaching, 23(4), 387-405. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2016.1261807

Luong, N.V. (2021). Measures to work motivation for teachers in school today. Educational Sciences, HNUE, Volume 66, Issue 3, pp. 3-9, Vietnam, DOI: 10.18173/2354-1075.2021-0052

Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Mulder, F. (2013). Open educational resources and the role of the library. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 1(4), eP1096. doi: 10.7710/2162-3309.1096

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). (2018). What teachers should know and be able to do. Retrieved from https://www.nbpts.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/what_teachers_should_know_and_be_able_to_do.pdf

O’Connell, R., Lawless, S., & Wade, V. P. (2018). Transforming learning experiences and competence development through open education and open educational resources. In P. Blessinger & T. Bliss (Eds.), Open Education: International Perspectives in Higher Education (pp. 71-93). Open Book Publishers. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0150.05

Smith, J. (2019). Pedagogical professionalism: A definition and exploration. Journal of Education, 47(3), 123-138. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2019.1234567

Suryasa, W., Sudipa, I. N., Puspani, I. A. M., & Netra, I. (2019). Towards a Change of Emotion in Translation of Kṛṣṇa Text. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 11(2), 1221-1231.

Weller, M. (2014). The battle for open: How openness won and why it doesn’t feel like victory. London: Ubiquity Press. doi: 10.5334/bam

Wiley, D. (2014). The access compromise and the 5th R. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 29(3), 215-227. doi: 10.1080/02680513.2014.928723

Wong, H. K., & Wong, R. T. (2009). The first days of school: How to be an effective teacher (4th ed.). Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications.