Scholarlink

<p>This study investigates the impact of systematic support on instructional quality for higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) among STEM teachers, focusing on the alignment between teachers’ training and current teaching roles. Teachers are categorized as “consistent” or “inconsistent” based on the degree to which their instructional practices align with their formal preparation for teaching. The constructs of systematic support consist of teacher education for preservice teachers and professional development for in-service teachers, with teaching quality assessed by critical thinking, knowledge transfer, problem-solving, and self-regulation, which are key components of STEM literacy. Using data from the Teaching and Learning International Survey 2018, the study examines differences in support experiences between consistent and inconsistent teacher groups. Findings indicate that consistent teachers benefit significantly from systematic support, particularly in general pedagogy and targeted PD. In contrast, inconsistent teachers display weaker associations, with PD showing limited compensatory effects for HOTS instructions. Educational attainment consistently influences teaching quality, particularly for critical thinking, among both consistent and inconsistent teachers across STEM fields. This study suggests alignment through structured support mechanisms as well as a need for designing compensatory PD initiatives for inconsistent teachers to optimize teachers’ professional competencies and improve teaching and learning in STEM.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Impact of Systematic Support in Teacher Education and Professional Development on Training-Teaching Alignment and Instructional Quality

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月25日

查看全文
  • Ari Kim

摘要

This study investigates the impact of systematic support on instructional quality for higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) among STEM teachers, focusing on the alignment between teachers’ training and current teaching roles. Teachers are categorized as “consistent” or “inconsistent” based on the degree to which their instructional practices align with their formal preparation for teaching. The constructs of systematic support consist of teacher education for preservice teachers and professional development for in-service teachers, with teaching quality assessed by critical thinking, knowledge transfer, problem-solving, and self-regulation, which are key components of STEM literacy. Using data from the Teaching and Learning International Survey 2018, the study examines differences in support experiences between consistent and inconsistent teacher groups. Findings indicate that consistent teachers benefit significantly from systematic support, particularly in general pedagogy and targeted PD. In contrast, inconsistent teachers display weaker associations, with PD showing limited compensatory effects for HOTS instructions. Educational attainment consistently influences teaching quality, particularly for critical thinking, among both consistent and inconsistent teachers across STEM fields. This study suggests alignment through structured support mechanisms as well as a need for designing compensatory PD initiatives for inconsistent teachers to optimize teachers’ professional competencies and improve teaching and learning in STEM.