Professional Development Access, Participation Persistence, and Completion Readiness among Education Personnel
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21423800Keywords:
completion readiness, education personnel, participation persistence, partial least squares structural equation modeling, professional development, professional learningAbstract
This study addressed the conditions that enabled education personnel to access professional development, sustain their participation, and prepare for successful completion. A cross-sectional explanatory-predictive latent-variable design was employed among education personnel in the DepEd Schools Division Office of Apayao. Data were gathered using a validated researcher-developed questionnaire and analyzed through descriptive statistics, partial least squares structural equation modeling, bootstrapping, mediation analysis, PLSpredict, and importance-performance map analysis. Results showed that professional development access was moderate, while participation persistence and completion readiness were high. Schedule and workload accommodation, financial and logistical support, technology and connectivity, recovery after interruption, and organizational support for completion emerged as the main areas of concern. The measurement model demonstrated acceptable reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Professional development access significantly predicted participation persistence and completion readiness, while participation persistence also significantly predicted completion readiness. Mediation analysis confirmed that participation persistence partially transmitted the effect of access on completion readiness. The model demonstrated moderate explanatory and predictive power, indicating that access and persistence were important but not exclusive determinants of readiness. Importance-performance analysis identified schedule accommodation, supervisory support, and financial assistance as priority areas for intervention. The findings underscored that providing professional development opportunities was insufficient without sustained organizational support. Protected learning time, flexible recovery arrangements, reliable technology, logistical assistance, and continuous facilitator guidance were recommended to strengthen participation and completion outcomes.
Downloads
References
Azzolini, D., Marzadro, S., Rettore, E., Engelhardt, K., Hertz, B., & Wastiau, P. (2023). Raising teacher retention in online courses through personalized support. Evidence from a cross-national randomized controlled trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 16(2), 300–325. doi:10.1080/19345747.2022.2100850
Bragg, L. A., Walsh, C., & Heyeres, M. (2021). Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature. Computers & Education, 166, Article 104158. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104158
Brugha, M. E., Arif, I., Peters, S., Ahmed, F., Piccini, C., Bermudez, G. M. A., Goodland, J., Raghavendra, D., & Weeden, K. (2024). Educators’ perceptions and experiences of online teacher professional development. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2024(1), Article 17. doi:10.5334/jime.902
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. doi:10.54300/122.311
Department of Education. (2017). DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017: National adoption and implementation of the Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers.
Department of Education. (2020a). DepEd Memorandum No. 50, s. 2020: DepEd professional development priorities for teachers and school leaders for School Year 2020–2023.
Department of Education. (2020b). DepEd Order No. 001, s. 2020: Guidelines for NEAP recognition of professional development programs and courses for teachers and school leaders.
Dille, K. B., & Røkenes, F. M. (2021). Teachers’ professional development in formal online communities: A scoping review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, Article 103431. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103431
Gore, J., Lloyd, A., Smith, M., Bowe, J., Ellis, H., & Lubans, D. (2017). Effects of professional development on the quality of teaching: Results from a randomised controlled trial of Quality Teaching Rounds. Teaching and Teacher Education, 68, 99–113. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2017.08.007
Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980. doi:10.3102/0034654315626800
Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2017). Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in massive open online courses. Computers & Education, 104, 18–33. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.001
Lan, Y. (2022). The role of teachers’ grit and motivation in self-directed professional development. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 922693. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.922693
Lay, C. D., Allman, B., Cutri, R. M., & Kimmons, R. (2020). Examining a decade of research in online teacher professional development. Frontiers in Education, 5, Article 573129. doi:10.3389/feduc.2020.573129
Li, J., & Copur-Gencturk, Y. (2025). Perceptions versus performance: Assessing teacher learning in asynchronous online professional development. Education and Information Technologies, 30(4), 4751–4776. doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13020-3
Mailizar, M., Umam, K., & Elisa, E. (2022). The impact of digital literacy and social presence on teachers’ acceptance of online professional development. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), Article ep384. doi:10.30935/cedtech/12329
Morina, F., Fütterer, T., Hübner, N., Zitzmann, S., & Fischer, C. (2025). Effects of online teacher professional development on teacher-, classroom-, and student-level outcomes: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 228, Article 105247. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105247
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). TALIS 2018 results: Volume I: Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/1d0bc92a-en
Republic of the Philippines. (2016). Republic Act No. 10912: Continuing Professional Development Act of 2016.
Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. doi:10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
Stavermann, K. (2025). Online teacher professional development: A research synthesis on effectiveness and evaluation. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 30(1), 203–240. doi:10.1007/s10758-024-09792-9
Ventista, O. M., & Brown, C. (2023). Teachers’ professional learning and its impact on students’ learning outcomes: Findings from a systematic review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 8(1), Article 100565. doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100565
Yoon, I., & Kim, M. (2022). Dynamic patterns of teachers’ professional development participation and their relations with socio-demographic characteristics, teacher self-efficacy, and job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109, Article 103565. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103565
Zhang, X., Admiraal, W., & Saab, N. (2021). Teachers’ motivation to participate in continuous professional development: Relationship with factors at the personal and school level. Journal of Education for Teaching, 47(5), 714–731. doi:10.1080/02607476.2021.1942804
Zhang, X., Admiraal, W., & Saab, N. (2022). Teacher autonomous motivation for continuous professional development: The relationship with perceived workplace conditions. Teachers and Teaching, 28(8), 909–924. doi:10.1080/13540602.2022.2137128
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
