Profile: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development

Community of Inquiry Framework for English Language Teacher Education

The community of inquiry (CoI) framework (Garrison et al., 1999) posits that meaningful online learning emerges at the intersection of social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence. “Teaching presence consists of three main areas of responsibility for the instructor: design and organization, facilitation of discourse, and direct instruction” (Anderson et al., 2001, p. 5). Research consistently identifies teaching presence as a significant determinant of satisfaction and learning success in online courses (Li et al., 2022; Muir et al., 2022). In English language teacher education, teaching presence involves not only clear learning outcomes, structured activities, and transparent assessment criteria but also the modeling of effective language teaching practices, such as communicative task design, scaffolding of language production, and the integration of technology-mediated language-learning tools. In the Latin American context, where only 27-40% of teachers reach basic levels of digital competency in key dimensions (Gambi et al., 2025), explicit and visible teaching presence becomes particularly critical.

Social presence refers to learners’ ability to project themselves socially and emotionally in online environments (Garrison et al., 1999, p. 94), creating authentic interpersonal relationships despite physical distance (Garrison et al., 1999; Swan et al., 2000). Social presence is associated with satisfaction and perceived learning outcomes (Muir et al., 2022; Slijepcevic & Huang, 2025). For English language teachers, social presence is intertwined with opportunities to use the target language meaningfully with peers, build professional identity as ELT practitioners, and participate in communities of practice focused on language pedagogy rather than on generic teaching concerns. Yet empirical studies show that reduced social presence remains one of the primary concerns preservice teachers report about online learning (Almendingen et al., 2021; Ganji et al., 2024; Kaya, 2023).

Cognitive presence is defined as the extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry (Garrison et al., 2001, p. 11). Online environments can support cognitive presence through asynchronous discussions, which allow for deeper reflection than spontaneous classroom contributions (Ng & Cheung, 2007). In English language teacher education, cognitive presence involves integrating linguistic knowledge, second-language acquisition theory, and pedagogical content knowledge of English language teaching, as well as the ability to critically evaluate digital tools and tasks for language learning.

Quality Instructional Design Principles for Language Teacher Education

International frameworks such as Quality Matters (2020) summarize research-derived criteria for online course quality, highlighting organization, clarity of learning outcomes, appropriate materials, participation strategies, and effective use of technology. In the case of English-language teacher education, these design principles must also ensure alignment with language-teaching standards, provide opportunities for authentic language use, integrate multimodal input, and include tasks that mirror the communicative and intercultural aims of language classrooms.

Assessment and feedback are central to quality online learning. Transparent criteria and well-designed rubrics reduce uncertainty and support self-regulated learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Gikandi et al., 2011). Research shows that preservice teachers strategically consult rubrics at key moments to understand expectations (Geesa et al., 2025). For English language teachers, assessment in online courses often serves as a model for assessing language learning: the way instructors provide feedback on written and forum tasks can influence how participants later design rubrics and feedback practices in their own ELT classrooms.

Interaction and engagement strategies directly influence the quality of online learning. Anderson’s (2003) interaction framework stresses student-teacher, student-student, and student-content interaction. All three types are associated with learning satisfaction, with student-content interaction often showing particularly strong effects (Li et al., 2022). Meta-analytic evidence suggests that blended approaches, in which online components account for roughly 30-69% of learning activities, yield optimal outcomes (Schmid et al., 2023; Yu et al., 2025).

Teacher Education in the Latin American and Uruguayan Contexts

Latin America has seen substantial growth in distance and blended teacher education, with high proportions of pedagogy graduates receiving their degrees via distance programs in countries such as Brazil and Chile (Vaillant, 2024). At the same time, large-scale studies reveal persistent digital competency gaps among teachers and emphasize that pedagogical skills are a top instructional priority (Gambi et al., 2025; Villegas-Reimers et al., 2023). Emotional and relational aspects, including student apathy, anxiety, and demotivation, were particularly salient during the pandemic (Machado do Nascimento et al., 2021), underscoring the need for online programs that offer both academic and emotional support (Muñoz del Carpio Toia et al., 2021).

Within this broader regional landscape, Uruguay stands out for its longstanding national digital inclusion policy (Plan Ceibal), which has facilitated relatively broad access to devices and connectivity compared to many neighboring countries (Villegas-Reimers et al., 2023). The present study is thus situated in a national context with relatively favorable infrastructure, which must be taken into account when considering the transferability of its findings to other Latin American settings.

Comparative Perspectives: Preservice vs. In-Service English Language Teachers

Differences between preservice and in-service teachers are central to understanding perceptions of online learning. Preservice teachers often show strong motivation and self-directed learning tendencies but report difficulties with learning control, such as pacing and goal setting (Geesa et al., 2025). They tend to use resources reactively and seek support to understand expectations (Almendingen et al., 2021). In-service teachers bring extensive professional experience, demonstrate more systematic and preventive use of resources, and emphasize the quality of evaluation, workload, and peer learning opportunities (Geesa et al., 2025; Kaya, 2023). They also face challenges balancing professional, academic, and personal responsibilities (Almendingen et al., 2021).

For English language teachers at both stages, these patterns intersect with ongoing development of language proficiency, awareness of language pedagogy, and the need to adapt ELT practices to technology-rich environments—factors that may shape perceptions of online teacher education differently from those of teachers in other subject areas.

Sampling and Recruitment

The final sample consisted of 65 English-language teachers, divided into two subgroups: 37 preservice teachers and 28 in-service teachers enrolled in a master’s program. Participants were recruited via institutional mailing lists and course announcements at the end of the academic period. All students enrolled in the focal courses who met the inclusion criteria (advanced standing in the program, completion of at least one online course, and willingness to participate) received an invitation to complete the online questionnaire; participation was entirely voluntary, with no incentive or academic benefit. Of the 89 eligible individuals invited, 65 completed the questionnaire, yielding a response rate of approximately 73%. Students who had withdrawn from the courses, had not completed the online components, or had declined consent were excluded from the study. Hence, participants were selected through voluntary response sampling within well-defined course cohorts; this limitation is acknowledged in the discussion of the study’s limitations.

Instruments: Development, Validation, and Reliability

Differentiated questionnaires were used for each group to capture the specificities of their educational and professional contexts, following recommendations to adapt instruments to participants’ trajectories (Swan et al., 2000; Vaughan et al., 2013). Each questionnaire included:

• Closed items on a 5-point Likert scale to measure perceptions of course design, interaction, assessment, teacher presence, and professional utility of the course

• Open-ended questions to elicit testimonies about significant learning instances, perceived challenges, and suggestions for improvement

Instrument development was guided by the dimensions proposed by Quality Matters (2020), the CoI framework (Garrison et al., 1999), and recent literature on perceptions of online courses (Akpen et al., 2024; Jones & Blankenship, 2017). An initial pool of items was drafted and then reviewed independently by three experts in online teacher education, who evaluated the items’ relevance, clarity, and alignment with the constructs of interest. Based on their feedback, items were reworded, merged, or eliminated to improve clarity and content validity.

Both instruments were piloted with 12 English-language teachers (six preservice and six graduate) who were not part of the final sample. Pilot participants rated item clarity on a 5-point scale (1 = very unclear, 5 = very clear); the average clarity rating across items was 4.2, and further minor wording adjustments were made as a result. Internal reliability was estimated using Cronbach’s alpha, yielding values of .82 for the preservice questionnaire and .79 for the in-service questionnaire, indicating acceptable internal consistency for research purposes. Illustrative items for each scale are presented in the Appendix.

Ethical Considerations

The study adhered to ethical principles for research with human participants, in accordance with international guidelines for qualitative and educational research (American Educational Research Association, 2011; British Educational Research Association, 2018). Participants received detailed information about the study’s purposes, the voluntary nature of participation, and the exclusive use of their data for research and course improvement. Questionnaires were anonymous and did not collect personally identifiable information, ensuring confidentiality and privacy protection. It was clearly stated that participation would entail no academic benefit or detriment, and that participants could withdraw at any time without consequences. Data were stored on secure institutional servers accessible only to the research team.

Data Analysis

Quantitative Analysis. Closed-ended responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations were calculated for all Likert-scale items for each group. Between-group comparisons (preservice vs. in-service) were conducted using independent samples t-tests. Where statistically significant differences were detected, effect sizes were computed using Cohen’s d to indicate the magnitude of the differences; a significance threshold of p < .05 (two-tailed) was adopted.

Qualitative Analysis. Responses to the open-ended questions were analyzed thematically (Braun & Clarke, 2006), yielding a consolidated codebook. In total, 47 initial codes were grouped into 12 categories, which were subsequently refined into five major themes representing perceptions of organization, resources, assessment and feedback, instructor presence, and collaboration/growth points. Comparative analyses examined similarities and differences in themes between preservice and in-service teachers. Triangulation was achieved by comparing qualitative themes with patterns identified in the quantitative data; member checking was not conducted, which is noted as a limitation.

Preservice English Language Teachers

In-Service English Language Teachers

Similarities Across Professional Stages

The comparative analysis reveals several convergences. Both preservice and in-service English language teachers valued normative and organizational resources—particularly rubrics, guides, and reference materials—as essential for orienting participation and performance. This supports prior research on the importance of transparent assessment criteria and structured guidance in online learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Geesa et al., 2025). Both groups also highlighted the role of course organization, modular structure, and continuous access to materials as enablers of effective time management and progression, resonating with the emphasis on teaching presence in the CoI framework (Garrison et al., 1999).

In both cohorts, the instructor’s role was central: availability, support, expertise, and constructive feedback were frequently cited as decisive factors in a positive learning experience. This aligns with studies linking teaching presence and feedback quality to satisfaction and perceived learning (Li et al., 2022; Muir et al., 2022; Shea & Bidjerano, 2010).

Importantly, in the ELT context, these convergences mean that both novice and experienced English language teachers look for online courses that not only “work” structurally but also model high-quality language pedagogy through their organization, materials, and feedback practices.

Differences Between Preservice and In-Service English Language Teachers

Differences reflect distinct professional stages. Preservice teachers tended to use resources reactively, consulting guidance as needed, and focused on obtaining support, understanding expectations, and managing time. In-service teachers reported more systematic and preventive use of resources, emphasized the quality of evaluation, workload management, and peer learning opportunities, and voiced specific concerns about balancing professional responsibilities with academic demands.

For English language teachers, these differences may also mirror shifts from primarily internalizing ELT concepts (preservice) to critically analyzing and reshaping their own ELT practices (in-service). In-service participants, for example, appeared particularly attuned to how assessment approaches, feedback styles, and collaborative tasks in the course could inform their own work with language learners.

Key Variables for Effective Online English Language Teacher Education

Across both groups, several variables emerged as central to meaningful learning:

• structured organization and clear instructions that scaffold task completion

• accessibility and utility of normative resources (rubrics, guides, samples)

• active instructor presence and constructive, timely feedback

• opportunities for practical and collaborative activities, with in-service teachers expressing a stronger emphasis on peer learning

From an ELT perspective, these features support not only general academic success but also the development of language-specific pedagogical content knowledge, as participants encounter multiple examples of how to design and evaluate language-focused tasks in online environments.

Areas for improvement common to both groups include the need for more synchronous interaction, diversified interaction formats (e.g., small-group sessions, optional tutorials), and optimized feedback turnaround time, especially in large cohorts—concerns that echo broader research on online teacher education (Almendingen et al., 2021; Geesa et al., 2025; Kaya, 2023).

Taken together, the findings affirm the relevance of the CoI framework while showing that, in English language teacher education, each presence acquires discipline-specific nuances: teaching presence must model ELT practices, social presence must support professional communities of language teachers, and cognitive presence must integrate language content, pedagogy, and technology.