Despite growing institutional and policy interest in teacher education, discussions regarding the professional growth of Korean L1 teachers remain limited, often concentrating primarily on student outcomes. This study investigates the professional growth perspectives of 56 Korean L1 teachers using the Q methodology. Participants sorted statements representing six habits of mind—epistemic, sociolinguistic, psychological, moral-ethical, philosophical, and aesthetic—across three reflective categories: content, process, and premise. Findings revealed epistemic and psychological habits as central, while philosophical, sociolinguistic, and aesthetic habits received less focus. Teachers prioritized personal growth over collective or contextual considerations, revealing gaps in addressing sociocultural diversity and comprehensive learner development. The study highlights the need for balanced teacher-training frameworks that integrate universal pedagogical principles with subject-specific needs, promoting holistic professional growth and adaptability.
BeauchampC. (2015). Reflection in teacher education: Issues emerging from a review of current literature. Reflective Practice, 16(1), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2014.982525
3.
BeneschS. (2018). Emotions as agency: Feeling rules, emotion labor, and English language teachers’ decision-making. System, 79, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.03.015
4.
BrookfieldS. D. (2005). The power of critical theory: Liberating adult learning and teaching. Jossey-Bass.
BulloughJr., R. V. (2011). Ethical and moral matters in teaching and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.09.007
ChangS. (2023). Validation of intercultural sensitivity and respect for diversity scale (RDS) in a Korean sample. Multicultural Education Review, 15(2), 122–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615X.2023.2250712
9.
ChengA.ZamarroG. (2018). Measuring teacher non-cognitive skills and its impact on students: Insight from the measures of effective teaching longitudinal database. Economics of Education Review, 64, 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.03.001
10.
CrantonP. (2016). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide to theory and practice. Routledge.
11.
CrickN. (2012). Democracy and rhetoric: John dewey on the arts of becoming. University of South Carolina Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv6sj991
12.
De CostaP. I.NortonB. (2017). Introduction: Identity, transdisciplinarity, and the good language teacher. The Modern Language Journal, 101(Suppl. 1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12368
13.
DencevH.CollisterR. (2010). Authentic ways of knowing, authentic ways of being: Nurturing a professional community of learning and praxis. Journal of Transformative Education, 8(3), 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344611407202
14.
DeweyJ. (1933). How we think. Heath.
15.
De WittA.BootsmaM.DermodyB. J.RebelK. (2024). Designing transformative interventions for a world in crisis: How the ‘Worldview Journey’ invites for personal, cultural, and systems transformation. Environmental Science & Policy, 162, Article 103896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103896
16.
EllisV.Souto-ManningM.TurveyK. (2019). Innovation in teacher education: Towards a critical re-examination. Journal of Education for Teaching, 45(1), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2019.1550602
17.
EnglishA. R. (2013). Discontinuity in learning, dewey, herbart, and education as transformation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139177825
18.
FodstadL. A.HusabøG. B. (2021). Planning for progression? Norwegian L1 teachers’ conception of literature teaching and literary competence throughout lower secondary education. L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 21, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.17239/L1ESLL-2021.21.02.06
19.
FraschiniN.LundbergA.AlianiR. (Eds.), (2024). Advancing language research through Q methodology. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.22679720
20.
HogganC. (2023). The 7 cardinal sins of transformative learning scholarship. Journal of Transformative Education, 21(4), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/15413446231196265
21.
HongW.YoungsP. (2014). Why are teachers afraid of curricular autonomy? Contradictory effects of the new national curriculum in South Korea. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(sup1), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2014.959471
22.
KeganR. (2000). What “form” transforms? A constructive-developmental approach to transformative learning. In MezirowJ. (Ed.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 35–70). Jossey-Bass.
23.
KingP.KitchenerK. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. Jossey-Bass.
24.
KlassenR. M.DurksenT. L.Al HashmiW.KimL. E.LongdenK.MetsäpeltoR. L.PoikkeusA.GyöriJ. G. (2018). National context and teacher characteristics: Exploring the critical non-cognitive attributes of novice teachers in four countries. Teaching and Teacher Education, 72, 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.001
25.
KnowlesM. S. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Follett.
26.
KnowlesM. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. Association Press. (revised and updated).
27.
KwakS. (2017). How Korean language arts teachers adopt and adapt open educational resources: A study of teachers’ and students’ perspectives. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(4), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i4.2977
LundbergA.de LeeuwR.AlianiR. (2020). Using Q methodology: Sorting out subjectivity in educational research. Educational Research Review, 31, Article 100361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100361
30.
Lunn BrownleeJ.FergusonL. E.RyanM. (2017). Changing teachers’ epistemic cognition: A new conceptual framework for epistemic reflexivity. Educational Psychologist, 52(4), 242–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1333430
31.
MacKeracherD. (2012). The role of experience in transformative learning. In TaylorE. W.CrantonP. (Eds.), The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 342–354). Jossey-Bass.
32.
MaggioniL.ParkinsonM. M. (2008). The role of teacher epistemic cognition, epistemic beliefs, and calibration in instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 445–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9081-8
33.
MarcosJ. M.SanchezE.TillemaH. H. (2011). Promoting teacher reflection: What is said to be done. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2011.538269
34.
MerriamS. B.BaumgartnerL. M. (2020). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
35.
MezirowJ. (1985). A critical theory of self-directed learning. In BrookfieldS. (Ed.), Self-directed learning: From theory to practice (pp. 17–30). Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.36719852504
36.
MezirowJ. (2000). Learning to think like an adult. In MezirowJ. (Ed.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 3–34). Jossey-Bass.
MillerE. R.GkonouC. (2018). Language teacher agency, emotion labor and emotional rewards in tertiary-level English language programs. System, 79, 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.03.002
39.
NewmanM. (2012). Calling transformative learning into question: Some mutinous thoughts. Adult Education Quarterly, 62(1), 36–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713610392768
40.
ParkS.ParkS. (2024). Generational differences in work values in the Korean government sector. European Journal of Training and Development, 48(1/2), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-05-2022-0057
41.
ParkS. N. (2019). The sound of learning the Confucian classics in chosŏn Korea. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 79(1–2), 131–187. https://doi.org/10.1353/jas.2019.0006
42.
RaikouN. (2019). Teacher education at the forefront: Long-term study through the prism of university pedagogy and transformative learning theory. European Journal of Education Studies, 6(3), 88–102.
43.
RoJ. (2025). Forcing quality without substance: A critical analysis of evaluating teacher education programmes in South Korea. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 45(2), 570–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2023.2174950
44.
RyuS. (2019). Critical examination about CSAT Korean language and its developmental directions. Korean Education, 121, 353–380.
45.
SchmolkP. (2014). PQMethod, version 2.35.
46.
ShorI. (2012). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. University of Chicago Press.
47.
SjöströmJ. (2018). Science teacher identity and eco-transformation of science education: Comparing Western modernism with Confucianism and reflexive bildung. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(1), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9802-0
48.
SoK. (2020). Whom is the national curriculum for? Politics in the national curriculum system of South Korea. In FanG.PopkewitzT. S. (Eds.), Handbook of education policy studies: School/university, curriculum, and assessment (pp. 165–184). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8343-4_9
49.
SongM.LeeH.KoJ. (2023). How do elementary students read poetry together? Elementary students’ reading practices using digital annotations. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 23, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.21248/l1esll.2023.23.1.446
50.
Stranger-JohannessenE.NortonB. (2017). The African storybook and language teacher identity in digital times. Modern Language Journal, 101(Suppl. 1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12374
51.
TagumaM.FridA. (2024). Curriculum frameworks and visualisations beyond national frameworks: Alignment with the OECD learning compass 2030. OECD.
TaylorK.EliasD. (2012). Transformative learning: A developmental perspective. In TaylorE. W.CrantonP. (Eds.), The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 147–161). Jossey-Bass.
ZhangF.LiuY. (2014). A study of secondary school English teachers’ beliefs in the context of curriculum reform in China. Language Teaching Research, 18(2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813505940
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
