Professional development of teacher educators - a case study at ho chi minh city university of education

 TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC 
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC SƯ PHẠM TP HỒ CHÍ MINH 
Tập 17, Số 5 (2020): 818-828 
HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION 
JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 
Vol. 17, No. 5 (2020): 818-828 
ISSN: 
1859-3100 Website:  
818 
Research Article* 
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF TEACHER EDUCATORS – 
A CASE STUDY AT HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION 
Le Thi Thu Lieu
*
, Nguyen Thanh Trung, Nguyen Thi Thu Huyen, 
Nguyen Thi Thu Trang, Bui Tran Quynh Ngoc 
Ho Chi Minh City University of Education, Vietnam 
*
Corresponding author: Le Thi Thu Lieu – Email: lieultt@hcmue.edu.vn 
Received: April 10, 2020; Revised: May 20, 2020; Accepted: May 27, 2020 
ABSTRACT 
Studies of teacher educators as well as their professional development have been focused 
since the 1990s. It has been challenging for universities of education over the world to establish 
effective and appropriate professional development policies and activities for lecturers. In order to 
explore professional development of lecturers at Ho Chi Minh City University of Education 
(HCMUE), online questionnaires were sent to all lecturers at the university to ask about their 
working environment, formal and informal professional education. In this paper, we will mainly 
discuss the formal professional education including types, barriers and effectiveness of 
professional development of teacher educators at HCMUE. Descriptive statistics have been 
considered as the main method for data analysis in this study. Seventy one responses from the 
lecturers were collected, and the results showed that there were various types of formal 
professional development of the lecturers at the HCMUE; the lecturers had to face with the 
common barriers such as: lack of time due to workload, lack of funding and lack of suitable 
opportunities. The findings also revealed that the most valuable professional development activities 
of the lecturers normally had been ones that they were free to take them as well as paid tuition by 
themselves for. Furthermore, the research offers some recommendations for the management 
boards at universities of education in terms of proposing policies related to teacher educators’ 
formal professional development. 
Keywords: professional development; teacher educator; formal professional education; 
University of Education 
1. Introduction 
Professional development for teacher educators has been considered as one of the 
significant factors that possibly impact the quality of the teacher education programs in 
universities of education. HCMUE is a leading education university in the South of 
Vietnam. In the period from 2017 to 2021, HCMUE has been selected as one of eight 
Cite this article as: Le Thi Thu Lieu, Nguyen Thanh Trung, Nguyen Thi Thu Huyen, Nguyen Thi Thu Trang, 
& Bui Tran Quynh Ngoc (2020). Professional development of teacher educators - A case study at 
 Ho Chi Minh City University of Education. Ho Chi Minh City University of Education Journal of Science, 17(5), 
818-828. 
HCMUE Journal of Science Le Thi Thu Lieu et al. 
819 
universities of education to undertake the Enhancing Teacher Education Program in order 
to enhance the quality of teachers and managerial staff of general education institutions 
through the development of professionalism based on practical needs, the requirements of 
the fundamental and comprehensive renovation of education (Ministry of Education and 
Training, 2019). Therefore, exploring the current professional development of lecturers 
and using it to create suitable professional development policies and activities for the 
lecturers have been considered as a crucial issue for the HCMUE. In this paper, we will 
examine types, barriers and effectiveness of professional development of the lecturers and 
then propose some solutions for enhancing the effectiveness of professional development 
policies at HCMUE. 
2. Professional development of lectures 
Professional development of lecturers is a term referring to “teachers learning, 
learning how to learn, and transforming their knowledge into practice for the benefit of 
their students’ growth” (Avalos, 2010, p.10). Based on this definition, professional teacher 
development impacts directly the development of students as well as involved the ways 
that lecturers work with students. 
Types of education had a long research history, and they were basically divided into 
three types which are formal, non-formal and informal, as proposed by Coombs and 
Ahmed (1974). The popular form of education, which was heavily researched and 
systematically organized, is formal. Meanwhile, from the twentieth century, less formal 
and flexible forms such as non-formal education and informal education were increasingly 
interested in because of their ability to maximize learners’ activeness. Distinguishing these 
three education forms, Coombs and his colleagues (1974) also emphasized the role of non-
formal form. Therefore, non-formal and informal forms of education were proved to be 
advanced in adult education. This was also applied for lecturers, who needed to be further 
trained in order to improve teaching in higher education. The application of non-formal 
and informal forms of education also noted the requirements of expanding the training 
focus from knowledge to skills, beliefs and disposition - which were emphasized by 
ancient educators such as Sakyamuni, Jesus and especially Confucius. In the West, Socrate 
in the pedagogical oath also emphasized the teacher's two tools: ability and mental 
strength. However, the division of forms was only theoretical, in fact, the nature of 
coordination between these forms was quite common. Therefore, Dib (1988) thought these 
three forms as a process of developing in the direction of expanding learners' freedom and 
having rich relationships with each other. 
One of the biggest barriers to teacher professional development is the lack of 
training, counselling, or, if any, existing programs do not meet their needs while the 
lecturers need to improve expertise in the context of development of science and 
technology. Ahmed (1974) points out issues such as a prolonged training program, which 
HCMUE Journal of Science Vol. 17, No. 5 (2020): 818-828 
820 
have caused teachers to miss formal work; or part-time courses, which have always been 
held during office hours, have prevented lecturers from participating. Galaczi and his 
colleagues (2018) argued that because teachers were trained in a 20-year-ago model, it was 
not easy for them to meet the needs of their 21
st
 century students. The authors also 
criticised that training programs which were not diversified in frameworks. This affected 
the quality of training. Universities had only provided what they could offer, not what the 
students wanted to study. These classes often have a passive view of teachers focusing 
primarily on theoretical knowledge instead of problem-solving, which has been practical 
and applied experimentally. Holmqvist (2019) raised a warning about the lack of quality 
teachers and some issues related to this as the job satisfaction was very low because 
teachers were never consulted experimentally, or there was a problem for teachers because 
of the difference between theory and practice of teacher development. 
The shortage of equipment and facilities was regarded as another obstacle for the 
professional development of lecturers. Ahmed (1974) analyzed the shortage of funds for 
reinvestment of facilities; expensive equipment did not receive funding for maintenance 
and replacement. Fry, Ketteridge and Marshall (2009) also mention difficulties relating to 
facilities and laboratories. 
Effective professional development was considered as a structured professional 
learning which could lead to changes for teacher knowledge and practices, and 
improvements in student learning outcomes (Darling-Hammond, 2017). 
3. Methodology 
The surveys were sent by emails to lecturers at HCMUE from February 2019 to 
April 2019. There were 71 respondents from teacher educators at HCMUE at first, and 
after screening 69 were kept for analysis. The data were then coded and imported to the 
SPSS to analyze. Also, in some questions that the lecturers could choose more than one 
answer, Excel was used to count the answers. In general, descriptive statistics were the 
main ways to describe and analyze the data.. 
The survey had five main parts as: contextual questions; formal professional education - 
general questions; formal teacher development/education - specific questions; questions about 
informal teacher development and education; and open questions. This paper mainly discusses 
formal professional education in which focusing on types, barriers and effectiveness of 
professional teacher development of teacher educators at the HCMUE. 
HCMUE Journal of Science Le Thi Thu Lieu et al. 
821 
Table 1. Participants’ demographic information 
Demographic variables Frequency Percentage 
(%) 
Gender 
Male 28 40.6 
Female 41 59.4 
Seniority 
0 to 4 years 18 26.1 
5 to 10 years 19 27.5 
11 to 15 years 15 21.7 
> 15 years 17 24.6 
Qualification 
Bachelor's degree 3 4.3 
Postgraduate Certificate or Diploma 0 
0 
Master's degree 45 65.2 
Doctorate 21 30.4 
Main teaching 
subject areas 
Maths 1 1.4 
Sciences (including natural 
sciences, life sciences) 
7 10.1 
Languages 13 18.8 
Humanities (including history and 
geography) 
16 23.2 
Arts 2 2.9 
Technology (including IT and 
computing) 
1 1.4 
Physical Education and Sports 1 1.4 
Social Sciences (including 
psychology and sociology) 
13 18.8 
Education 15 21.7 
Total 69 100.0 
Table 1 shows demographic information of the surveyed lecturers at HCMUE: 
gender, seniority, qualification and main teaching areas. 
Of the 69 participants, the percentage of female was greater than that of male. The 
number of lecturers with working experience from 0 to 4 years, from 5 to 10 years, from 
11 to 15 years and over 15 years working in higher education were relatively equal, 
respectively 26.1%, 27.5%, 21.7% and 24.6%. In terms of qualification, the percentage of 
lecturers with master’s degree was 65.2%, which was more than two times higher than that 
of lecturers with doctorate’s degree. The number of lecturers with bachelor's degree 
accounted for the lowest proportion with 4.3%. 
HCMUE Journal of Science Vol. 17, No. 5 (2020): 818-828 
822 
Lecturers from four teaching areas: Humanities (including History and Geography), 
Education, Languages and Social Science (including Psychology and Sociology) accounted 
for nearly 82.5% of lecturers. 
4. Findings 
4.1. Main types of formal professional education of teacher educators at the HCMUE 
Over 82.6% of the lecturers undertook formal professional education that support 
their development as a teacher educator (as training, courses, continuous professional 
development or in-service training) in the last 12 months. There was only 15.9% of 
lecturers who did not participate in any activities of formal professional development. 
Table 2. Main types of formal teacher development of lecturers at HCMUE 
Valid Frequencies Percentage 
Didactic training 47 68.1% 
Conferences 32 46.4% 
Workshops 55 79.7% 
Learning on the job 45 65.2% 
Collaborative learning 22 31.9% 
International links 16 23.2% 
Distance learning 2 2.9% 
Peer observation 35 50.7% 
Self-directed study 54 78.3% 
Research projects related to teaching and learning 42 60.9% 
Other 2 2.9% 
According to Table 2, workshops, self-directed study, didactic training and research 
projects related to teaching and learning were the most popular forms of formal teacher 
development of the lecturers at HCMUE. 
4.2. Barriers to professional development of lecturers 
Table 3. Main barriers to teacher professional development 
Valid Frequency Percentage Ranking 
Lack of time due to workload 59 85.5% 1 
Lack of funding 43 62.3% 2 
Lack of information about the best way to 
develop as a teacher 
22 31.9% 
4 
Lack of support from managers/employers 21 30.4% 5 
Lack of suitable opportunities 28 40.6% 3 
My other commitments don't allow the time 12 17.4% 6 
None 4 5.8% 7 
HCMUE Journal of Science Le Thi Thu Lieu et al. 
823 
The lack of time due to high workload was the barrier with the highest rate of 85.5%. 
Over half of the lecturers (62.3%) mentioned that the lack of funding was also considered 
as a difficulty for them to develop their professional development. The lack of suitable 
opportunities was the third constraint that can impact the professional development of the 
lecturers with the vote of 40.6%. The lack of information about the best ways to develop as 
a teacher and the lack of support from the employer were also barriers for the professional 
development of the lecturers according to the opinions of about one-third of lecturers. 
There was nearly one-fifth of the lecturers also agreeing that their commitments on other 
activities did not allow them to spend time on the professional development, while 5.8% 
accepted that they did not have any barrier for their professional development. 
4.3. Effectiveness of professional development activities by the lecturers at HCMUE 
The result in the final open question of the most valuable professional development 
activities showed that short courses taught by the lecturers who graduated from foreign 
countries with updated knowledge, conferences and workshop, Master and PhD degree 
programs and working in projects are the most valuable activities for the teacher educators 
at HCMUE. There were 40.6% of lecturers stating that they were funded by their employer 
for their professional learning activities while about a third of the lecturers who answered 
that they paid for these activities. However, 15.9% of the lecturers mentioned that both 
their employer and themselves paid for their most valuable professional development 
activities. 
Table 4. Subjects paying for the most valuable PD activities of lecturers 
and subjects deciding for the participation in these 
Subjects paying for the most valuable PD activities 
of lecturers 
Subjects deciding 
for the participation 
in the most valuable PD 
activities of lecturers 
 Frequencies Percentage Frequencies Percentage 
Self 22 31.9% 33 47.8% 
Employers 28 40.6% 30 43.5% 
Both of lecturers and employers 11 15.9% 0 0 
Other 8 11.6% 6 8.7% 
Total 69 100% 69 100% 
There was not much difference between the survey result that lecturers' most 
significant professional development activities decided by themselves and those decided by 
their employers, 47.8% and 43.5% respectively (Table 5). These numbers showed that both 
lecturers and employers play a crucial role in deciding the participation in the most 
valuable professional development activities for the teacher educators. 
HCMUE Journal of Science Vol. 17, No. 5 (2020): 818-828 
824 
Table 5. Funding and deciding for the participation in the least PD activities 
Subjects paying for the least valuable PD activities 
of lecturers 
Subjects deciding 
for the participation 
in the least valuable PD 
activities of lecturers 
 Frequencies Percentage Frequencies Percentage 
Self 9 13.0% 10 15.9% 
Employers 48 69.6% 34 54.0% 
Both of lecturers and 
employers 
3 4.3% 16 25.4% 
Other 9 13.0% 9 13.0% 
Total 69 100% 69 100% 
A considerable number (69.6%) of the lecturers stated that their least valuable 
professional development activities funded by their employers whereas only 13% of these 
answers were for the activities paid by themselves or by others. 
While 54% of the lecturers reported that these activities were decided by their 
employers, 15.9% were decided by themselves. 
These numbers mean that most of the least valuable professional development 
activities of the lecturers were funded and decided by the employers, and these activities 
may be not appropriate for the lecturers’ needs for professional development. 
Therefore, it could be concluded that the most significant professional development 
activities were the ones that they had more power in deciding. While the least valuable 
professional development activities were the ones primarily funded by their employers and 
compulsory. 
Table 6. Reasons leading to the most valuable professional development (PD) activities 
of lecturers 
Valid Frequency Percentage Ranking 
It impacted on the way I understand my role as a 
teacher 
53 76.8% 1 
It updated my teaching skills or competencies 53 76.8% 1 
It impacted on the way I work with my students 50 72.5% 2 
It impacted on my subject specialist knowledge 46 66.7% 3 
It informed me about new research or ideas for 
teaching 
4 63.8% 4 
It enabled me to collaborate with others 43 62.3% 5 
It updated me on policy changes 25 36.2% 6 
It made me aware of new initiatives 40 58.0% 6 
Other 1 1.4% 7 
HCMUE Journal of Science Le Thi Thu Lieu et al. 
825 
Table 7. Reasons leading to the least valuable PD activities of lecturers 
Valid Frequency Percentage Ranking 
It did not update my teaching skills or competencies 
30 43.5% 1 
It did not impact on the way I work with my 
students 
25 36.2% 2 
It did not inform me about new research or ideas for 
teaching 
20 29.0% 3 
It did not impact on my subject specialist 
knowledge 
18 26.1% 4 
It did not impact on the way I understand my role as 
a teacher 
17 24.6% 5 
It did not update me on policy changes 15 21.7% 6 
It did not enable me to collaborate with others 15 21.7% 6 
It did not make me aware of new initiatives 15 21.7% 6 
Other 13 18.8% 7 
Lecturers ranked PD activities based on the necessity of the activities in helping 
them update their teaching skills or competencies and impacting their ways to work with 
students at two highest levels in both questions of the reasons leading to the most and the 
least valuable PD activities of lecturers (Table 6 and Table 7). 
5. Discussion 
For the barriers in developing their professional, the lack of time due to the workload is 
the most concern of over 80% of lecturers. This result is consistent with the previous studies 
of Ahmed (1974). In fact, according to the Regulation No.2652/QĐ-ĐHSP on a working 
regime for lecturers issued by HCMUE in October 30
th
, 2017, the total working time of 
lecturers in a school year to perform tasks of teaching, scientific research, training and other 
tasks in is 1,760 hours (HCMUE, 2017). Basically, this regulation is built based on the 
Circular No. 47/2014/TT-BGDĐT on a working regime for lecturers of the Ministry of 
Education issued on December 31
st
, 2014 (Ministry of Education and Training, 2014). Hence, 
the concern of the lack of time due to the workload for professional development of lecturers 
may be a common issue of other lecturers in other universities in Vietnam, not only at 
HCMUE. Besides the lack of time due to the workload, the finding also indicated that the lack 
of information about the best ways to develop as a teacher and the lack of suitable 
opportunities were also obstacles for many lecturers. 
For the most valuable professional development activities, the study revealed that the 
most significant professional development activities of the lecturers normally were ones 
that they paid for and were selected by the lecturers. The lecturers ranked professional 
development activities related to how the activities helped them to update their teaching 
skills or competencies and impacting the ways they work with students at two highest 
levels in both questions of the reasons that they thought those particular activities were 
HCMUE Journal of Science Vol. 17, No. 5 (2020): 818-828 
826 
valuable and those were lacking in value. This means that professional development 
activities that are significant for the lecturers are the ones that can impact much on their 
updating their teaching skills and competencies as well as enhancing their ability to work 
with their students. In fact, the ability to work with students does not only depend on the 
knowledge or theory of lecturers, but also on their ability to apply these into practices. 
Therefore, it can be easily explained that professional development activities that can 
foster both the knowledge/theory and the practice of the lecturers definitely will be 
valuable for the lecturers. In another word, effective professional development activities 
are the ones can result in changes for the lecturers’ knowledge and practices (Darling-
Hammond, 2017). 
At HCMUE, the strategy of developing sources, training and retraining for teacher 
educators in the period of 2015-2020, vision to 2030 set objectives that the university will 
have over 35% of lecturers with PhD or higher degree; 10% of them have titles of 
professors and associate professors; 100% of them will reach IT and foreign language 
standards; 10% of non-English-speaking lecturers can teach in English; 1/3 of lecturers 
will receive the doctorate degree abroad, striving to 2030, the proportion of lecturers with 
doctorate degrees will be over 45% (HCMUE, 2016). The university also builds a policy 
on training and developing lecturers, funding and supporting policies for lecturers in 
participating in training courses; workshop and conferences; and postgraduate education 
programs in order to support the lecturers in their professional development. Building 
policies for professional development of lecturers are still mainly based on regulations of 
the Government and the Ministry of Education and Training, but have not focused much 
on needs of the lecturers and the evaluation of the effectiveness of these activities. Thus, it 
is necessary to create suitable professional development policies and valuable activities in 
order to enhance these at the HCMUE. 
6. Conclusion 
The main purpose of this paper was to explore the situation of professional 
development of the lecturers at the HCMUE, particularly in the forms of formal 
professional development, the obstacles and the effectiveness of the professional 
development of these lecturers. 
The result showed that most of the lecturers participate in a variety of forms of 
formal professional education in the last 12 months. The lack of time due to the workload, 
lack of funding and lack of suitable opportunities were identified as three common 
obstacles for the professional development by many lecturers. They also appreciated the 
professional development activities that they have autonomy in funding and deciding to 
take. Also, the lecturers gave positive feedback on professional development activities that 
help them to update their teaching skills or competencies and impacting on the way they 
work with students. 
HCMUE Journal of Science Le Thi Thu Lieu et al. 
827 
This research only described and analyzed the overview of types of formal 
professional development, barriers and the effectiveness of this for the lecturers at the 
HCMUE. The study did not examine the reasons of these findings, cultural and context 
issues affecting the findings. Therefore, the next research should interview lecturers and 
managers at the university in order to investigate more reasons of using their popular 
formal professional development types, their reasons of obstacles and the effectiveness of 
their formal professional development activities at the HCMUE. 
 Conflict of Interest: Authors have no conflict of interest to declare. 
 Acknowledgment: This work was supported by the UK Vietnam Higher Education 
Partnership (UK-VN HEP), period 2017-2019. 
REFERENCES 
Chu, S., Reynolds, R., Tavares, N., Notari, M., & Lee, C. (2016). Teachers? Professional 
Development. Springer Science. 
Coombs, W.W., & M. Ahmed. (1974). How Non – Formal Education can help. Baltimore and 
London. The Johns Hopkin University Press. 13-34. 
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional 
Development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. 
Dib, C. Z. (2008). Formal, non‐ formal and informal education: concepts/applicability. 
Cooperative Networks in Physics Education - Conference Proceedings, (173), 300-315. 
Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning, implicit learning and tacit knowledge, in F. Coffield (Ed). 
The Necessity of Informal Learning. Bristol: Policy Press. 
Evelina, G., Andrew, N., Monica, P., & Allen, H. (2017). The Cambridge English Approach to 
Teacher Professional Development. Retrieved from 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315388596_The_Cambridge_English_Approach_t
o_Teacher_Professional_Development 
Heather, F., Steve, F. & Stephanie, M. (2009). A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher 
Education: Enhancing Academic Practice. New York, NY: Routledge. 
Ho Chi Minh City University of Education (2018.) Quyet dinh 3972 ve boi duong boi duong lai can 
bo, vien chuc [Regulation No. 3972/QĐ-ĐHSP on training and retraining officials of 
HCMUE, issued by December 28
th
, 2018. 
Ho Chi Minh City University of Education (2017). Quyet dinh 2652 ve che do lam viec cua giang 
vien [Regulations No. 2652/QĐ-ĐHSP on working regime for lecturers of HCMUE], issued 
by October 30
th
, 2017. 
Ho Chi Minh City University of Education (2016). Bao cao ve thuc trang va dinh huong quy hoach 
phat trien giai doan 2016 – 2020, tam nhin 2030 [Report on the status and orientation of 
development planning for HCMUE in the period 2016-2020, vision 2030]. 
Holmqvist, M. (2019). Lack of Qualified Teachers: A Global Challenge for Future Knowledge 
Development. IntechOpen, DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.83417 
HCMUE Journal of Science Vol. 17, No. 5 (2020): 818-828 
828 
Jeffs, T., & Smith, M. K. (1999). Informal education and health promotion, in E. R. Perkins, I. 
Simnett and L. Wright (eds.). Evidence-Based Health Promotion, London: John Wiley. 
Ministry of Education and Training, Vietnam (17/10/2019). Nang cao Chuong trinh dao tao giao 
vien [Enhancing Teacher Education Program]. Retrieved from: 
Ministry of Education and Training, Vietnam. (2014). Quyet dinh 47/2014/TT-BGDĐT ve che do 
lam viec cua giang vien Truong Dai hoc Su pham Thanh pho Ho Chi Minh [Regulations No. 
47/2014/TT-BGDĐT on working regime for lecturers of HCMUE], issued by December 31th, 
2014. 
Nguyen, T. X. L. (2019). Boi duong giang vien su pham tai Truong Dai hoc Vinh theo dinh huong 
phat trien nang luc: Thuc trang va giai phap [Training Pedagogical Teachers at Vinh 
University in the direction of capacity development: Current situation and solutions]. 
Jourrnal of Education, 452(2), 18-23. 
Tight, M. (1996). Key concepts in adult education and training. New York, NY: Routledge. 
BỒI DƯỠNG CHUYÊN MÔN CHO GIẢNG VIÊN SƯ PHẠM – 
NGHIÊN CỨU TRƯỜNG HỢP 
 TẠI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC SƯ PHẠM THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH 
Lê Thị Thu Liễu*, Nguyễn Thành Trung, 
Nguyễn Thị Thu Huyền, Nguyễn Thị Thu Trang, Bùi Trần Quỳnh Ngọc 
Trường Đại học Sư phạm Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, Việt Nam 
*
Tác giả liên hệ: Lê Thị Thu Liễu – Email: lieultt@hcmue.edu.vn 
Ngày nhận bài: 10-4-2020; ngày nhận bài sửa: 20-5-2020, ngày chấp nhận đăng: 27-5-2020 
TÓM TẮT 
Các nghiên cứu về giảng viên sư phạm và việc phát triển chuyên môn cho đội ngũ bắt đầu 
được chú ý từ thập niên 90, hiện tại cũng là thách thức đối với các trường đại học đào tạo giáo 
viên trên khắp thế giới trong việc xây dựng các chính sách và hoạt động phát triển chuyên môn phù 
hợp và hiệu quả cho giảng viên. Để tìm hiểu về việc phát triển chuyên môn cho giảng viên tại 
Trường Đại học Sư phạm Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, các bảng hỏi trực tuyến đã được gửi đến tất cả 
các giảng viên tại trường để hỏi về môi trường làm việc và việc học tập chuyên môn chính thức và 
không chính thức. Trong nghiên cứu này, chúng tôi sẽ tập trung thảo luận việc học tập chuyên môn 
chính thức bao gồm các hình thức học tập, các rào cản và hiệu quả của các hoạt động này của 
giảng viên sư phạm. Thống kê mô tả được xem như công cụ chính cho các phân tích dữ liệu trong 
nghiên cứu này. 71 phiếu phản hồi từ giảng viên và kết quả thu được cho thấy có nhiều hình thức 
học tập chuyên môn của giảng viên tại Trường; giảng viên phải đối mặt với các rào cản phổ biến 
như: thiếu thời gian do khối lượng công việc nhiều, thiếu nguồn tài trợ và thiếu các cơ hội phù 
hợp. Kết quả nghiên cứu cũng thể hiện rằng các hoạt động học tập chuyên môn có giá trị nhất cho 
giảng viên sư phạm thường là các hoạt động mà họ có thể tự chọn để theo học cũng như tự chi trả 
học phí. Đồng thời, kết quả nghiên cứu cũng đưa ra một số khuyến nghị cho các cấp quản lí tại các 
trường đào tạo giáo viên trong việc đề xuất các chính sách liên quan đến việc bồi dưỡng chuyên 
môn chính thức cho giảng viên sư phạm. 
Từ khóa: bồi dưỡng chuyên môn; giảng viên sư phạm; học tập chuyên môn chính thức; 
trường đại học đào tạo giáo viên