Content area
Purpose
Most of the current literature investigates workplace-based formal and informal learning separately; thus, the relationship between these two types of learning remains unclear. This study aims to fill this research gap, drawing on self-determination theory to bridge teachers’ formal and informal learning and uncover the relationship between the two.
Design/methodology/approach
The participants of the study are 1,886 primary and secondary in-service teachers in China. Structural equation modeling and bootstrapping are used to test the proposed model.
Findings
The study reveals complicated influencing mechanisms of formal learning on different types of informal learning among in-service teachers. Teachers’ basic psychological needs, satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior are found to play crucial mediating roles in this process.
Practical implications
First, this study suggests that different configurations of intervention strategies should be formulated depending on the foci for improving teachers’ learning. Second, this study indicates that only highlighting the importance of reflection, which is the approach currently used, is not sufficient to improve teachers’ daily reflective practice. Third, there is an urgent need to design training programs to improve teachers’ abilities to purposefully expand their job boundaries, which could not only benefit teachers’ performance but also contribute to school improvement. For policymakers and school principals, we suggest that more attention be given to the satisfaction of teachers’ basic needs.
Originality/value
This study contributes to the literature on workplace learning by connecting formal and informal learning and elucidating how teachers’ reported formal learning influences their informal learning activities via varied paths. The findings have implications for continuous professional development policy and training programs in the workplace.
1. Introduction
To remain aligned with the evolving demands of labor markets, individuals must engage in continuous learning through both formal and informal means (OECD, 2021a; Tannenbaum and Wolfson, 2022). Teachers, too, must continuously enhance their professional competencies through various learning activities (Darling-Hammond and Oakes, 2021; Schleicher, 2020). Existing research underscores the pivotal roles of both formal and informal learning in improving teachers’ professional performance, personal well-being and student outcomes (Darling-Hammond and Bransford, 2007; Kennedy, 2016; Kyndt et al., 2016; Lecat et al., 2020). Nonetheless, significant research gaps exist in this area. First, studies on workplace learning tend to address formal and informal learning separately, which obscures the relationship between the two and results in an incomplete understanding of workplace learning (Kyndt et al., 2016; Lefstein et al., 2020). Second, most of these workplace learning studies focus predominantly on formal learning, leaving informal learning an underexplored area for which limited insights have been generated (Eraut, 2011). To gain a comprehensive understanding of workplace learning to foster continuous professional development, it is crucial to investigate the interplay between formal and informal learning (Eraut, 2011; OECD, 2021b).
In this study, we draw upon self-determination theory (SDT) to examine the link between formal and informal learning among teachers. SDT posits that when individuals perceive the availability of resources and opportunities as supportive of their basic psychological needs – autonomy, competence and relatedness – they experience a high level of autonomous motivation toward continuous learning and professional growth (Deci and Ryan, 2000). Therefore, we postulate that teachers’ basic psychological needs serve as a key mediator in the relationship between formal learning and informal learning. Recent research indicates that challenge-seeking behavior is significantly driven by the satisfaction of these basic psychological needs (Deterding et al., 2022; Lee and Reeve, 2017). Individuals who engage in challenge-seeking behavior often encounter gaps in knowledge and skills, prompting them to undertake informal learning activities to address these gaps and meet challenges (Chase et al., 2020; Demerouti et al., 2019). Hence, we propose that teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior may act as an additional mediator, following the satisfaction of basic psychological needs, in the relationship between formal and informal learning.
In sum, with the goal of providing novel insights into the motivational processes that underpin continuous professional development, which predominantly takes the form of informal learning, this study investigates how in-service teachers’ formal learning influences their informal learning activities through the sequential mediation of basic psychological need satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior. In practical terms, the insights gained from this study can substantially inform the design of teachers’ professional development programs that effectively integrate formal and informal learning opportunities. Policymakers and educational leaders can leverage these findings to create supportive environments that foster intrinsic motivation and encourage teachers to actively seek out challenges, thereby enhancing their professional growth and improving educational outcomes for students.
2. Formal and informal learning of teachers
Workplace learning is defined as the acquisition of knowledge and skills through work processes triggered by consultation and collaboration within the working group, consultation outside the working group and the challenge of the work itself (Eraut, 2007). It generally encompasses formal and informal learning activities (Jacobs and Park, 2009), both of which are critical to lifelong growth and organizational development (Hager, 2004, 2011).
Teachers’ formal learning refers to learning opportunities and experiences derived from programs organized or endorsed by the school or sponsored by the institution, which aim at fostering their professional development (Feiman-Nemser, 2012). For example, a formal learning scenario could involve a teacher attending a state-sponsored training seminar designed to introduce new teaching methodologies. Other examples include participation in workshops on curriculum development or symposia focused on educational technology. Characterized by a top-down approach, predetermined intentions, well-structured curricula and diverse formats ranging from programs and training seminars to symposia and workshops, formal learning plays a crucial role in teachers’ career progression (Feiman-Nemser, 2012; Richter et al., 2014). Teachers’ informal learning involves self-initiated learning behavior, which is aimed at addressing professional development needs (Kyndt et al., 2016) or resolving work-related issues (Hoekstra and Korthagen, 2011). For instance, a teacher might informally learn through discussions with colleagues about classroom management techniques or through reflective practices after lessons. Such learning lacks systematic support and pre-determined objectives. Instead, it is opportunistic, unstructured and embedded in daily work (Eraut, 2004; Hoekstra et al., 2009; Huang et al., 2020). Informal learning has been consistently shown to broaden teachers’ subject knowledge (Fraser, 2010), enhance their pedagogical skills (Kang and Cheng, 2014) and transform their professional attitudes and identity (Hoekstra and Korthagen, 2011; Verberg et al., 2013). Moreover, it significantly impacts student outcomes (Jennings and Greenberg, 2009; Shoshani and Eldor, 2016). Teachers’ informal learning activities can be categorized into five types: four are interactive learning activities – learning through media, colleague interaction, stakeholder interaction and student interaction – while the fifth is reflecting on teaching practice or work performance (Huang et al., 2020; Louws et al., 2017).
The overall impact of formal learning on informal learning has been theoretically and empirically confirmed (Choi and Jacobs, 2011; Rowden and Conine, 2005). Mezirow (1997) posited that formal learning activity functions as an important way for individuals to establish and transform their perspectives, which increases the possibility of autonomous learning. In addition, individuals are likely to use the methods and skills acquired from formal learning to extend their knowledge and sharpen their skills through various informal learning activities (Svensson et al., 2004). Empirical studies have also demonstrated that participation in formal learning can enhance individuals’ professional motivation (Lohman, 2008). Those with more formal education and training experience have been found to devote more time to self-directed, informal learning activities (Westbrook and Veale, 2001; Rowden, 2002). Therefore, we postulate that teachers’ formal learning positively influences their five types of informal learning activity, as follows:
3. Self-determination theory and the mediating role of basic need satisfaction
The mediating role of basic psychological need satisfaction between formal and informal learning is substantially supported by SDT and existing studies. SDT, as a prominent framework for understanding human motivation and development, suggests that individuals experience different types of motivation concerning their work, each representing a distinct form of behavioral regulation. These motivations are assumed to follow a continuum from autonomous to controlled regulation (Deci et al., 2017; Deci and Ryan, 2000). A task that is inherently interesting may generate autonomous regulation, where individuals are intrinsically motivated to engage in the activity. For tasks that are not inherently interesting, external factors may play a significant role in motivating individuals. The more individuals internalize these external factors, aligning them with their values and sense of self, the more they can achieve autonomous regulation (Ryan and Deci, 2017). Compared with controlled regulation, autonomous regulation motivates individuals to display greater effort and engagement in their work tasks, leading to proactive work and learning behaviors (Gagné et al., 2015; Manganelli et al., 2018).
SDT posits that individuals have three fundamental psychological needs:
Autonomy;
Competence; and
Relatedness, which are critical to their autonomous regulation.
The need for autonomy pertains to the desire to act as a causal agent and to have volition. The need for competence involves the inherent desire to effectively manage tasks, while relatedness concerns the urge to care for, connect with and engage with others (Ryan and Deci, 2020). SDT emphasizes the importance of satisfying these basic needs for autonomous motivation and self-initiated learning (Howard et al., 2017; Ryan and Deci, 2017). A wealth of educational research has confirmed the indispensable role of teachers’ basic need satisfaction in fostering their continuous professional learning (Collie et al., 2018; Klassen et al., 2012). When teachers experience a high level of autonomy, they are more likely to engage in informal learning activities. The freedom to choose what, when and how they learn allows them to explore topics of personal interest and relevance to their teaching practice, leading to more meaningful and self-directed learning experiences (Hargreaves et al., 2013; Valckx et al., 2020). Feeling capable can drive teachers to engage in informal learning through various interactions with peers, students and stakeholders. When teachers feel competent, they are more inclined to learn from their peers by participating in collaborative problem-solving, sharing best practices and engaging in reflective dialogues (Liu and Hallinger, 2018). This sense of competence can also encourage teachers to embrace challenges in teaching (Huang et al., 2019). Relatedness, the need for connection and belonging, enhances informal learning by fostering a supportive and collaborative learning environment. When teachers feel connected to their peers, they are more motivated to engage in open communication and exchange ideas with them. In addition, they may feel safe to take risks and reflect on their practice without fear of judgment, learning from both successful and unsuccessful teaching experiences (Hargreaves, 2021; Wolgast and Fischer, 2017). Having strong relationships with students also supports teachers’ informal learning, as these relationships can foster open teacher-student interactions, through which teachers can gain a better understanding of students' learning needs (Li et al., 2022). Overall, the satisfaction of these three basic psychological needs – autonomy, competence and relatedness – promotes a high level of motivation, which in turn enhances teachers’ engagement in diverse informal learning activities.
SDT proposes that the workplace context, including the provision of formal learning, influences individuals’ basic need satisfaction in a pivotal way (Deci et al., 2017). Although few studies have directly explored the relationship between teachers’ formal learning and their basic need satisfaction, indirect evidence suggests that teachers’ formal learning can fulfill their basic psychological needs in the workplace. First, such learning gives teachers access to up-to-date pedagogical knowledge through which they can enhance their skill set (Darling-Hammond and Oakes, 2021; Schleicher, 2020), which has been identified as a crucial precursor to basic need satisfaction (Moran et al., 2012). Second, practice-based training sessions and sharing workshops provide teachers with meaningful and informative feedback (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Kennedy, 2016), which is recognized as a key condition for need satisfaction (Deci et al., 2017). Teacher education studies have shown that formal learning programs can augment their basic needs for knowledge, skills (Kunter et al., 2007; Richter et al., 2014), autonomy (Castle, 2004) and relatedness (Barrable and Lakin, 2020). Based on the reviewed theories and empirical studies, we posit:
4. The mediating role of challenge-seeking behavior
Challenge-seeking behavior refers to the proactive and intentional pursuit of tasks, activities or opportunities that involve difficulty, obstacles or uncertainty, with the aim of expanding one’s skills and achieving professional or personal growth (Demerouti et al., 2019; Porter et al., 2020). A relatively nascent concept, challenge-seeking behavior has been identified as critical for understanding professional learning and performance (Demerouti et al., 2019; Petrou et al., 2012).
Formal learning can influence individuals’ challenge-seeking behavior in two ways. First, empirical studies have demonstrated that formal learning can positively alter teachers’ beliefs (van den Bergh et al., 2015), accepted responsibilities (Fuller et al., 2006) and perceived values (Guskey, 2002). These transformed beliefs and values or expanded responsibilities may motivate teachers to broaden the boundaries of their tasks and implement innovation and change in the classroom (Abrami et al., 2004; Huang et al., 2020). Second, formal learning can enhance individuals’ self-efficacy and augment their professional knowledge and skills (Morris et al., 2017). Individuals whose confidence has been boosted and who feel a sense of control over their work (Tschannen‐Moran and McMaster, 2009) are more inclined to seek additional challenges, such as undertaking more tasks or responsibilities (Rudolph et al., 2017).
Individuals’ challenge-seeking behavior can, in turn, enhance their engagement in informal learning activities (Hoekstra et al., 2009; Huang, 2021). When individuals engage in challenge-seeking behavior, they encounter new tasks that necessitate the augmentation of their knowledge and skills. Consequently, they must engage in informal learning activities to bridge their knowledge or skills gaps. In other words, challenge-seeking behavior can create continuous learning needs which, in turn, promote diverse informal learning activities (Huang et al., 2020; Loderer et al., 2018).
The impact of basic need satisfaction on challenge-seeking behavior is supported by SDT and existing studies. SDT posits that satisfaction of the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness can drive individuals’ self-initiated workplace behavior (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Ryan and Deci, 2017), including challenge seeking. Specifically, increased autonomy is positively associated with proactive behavior and personal initiative (Ghitulescu, 2013; Hornung and Rousseau, 2007). Individuals who have a high degree of autonomy more persistently increase their job challenges (Rudolph et al., 2017; Ryan and Deci, 2020). Further, those who have a higher level of competence, another basic psychological need, are more likely to seek challenges for self-enhancement (Lazazzara et al., 2020). Studies on teacher education indicate that when teachers feel competent, they are likely to take on more challenges in teaching (Hoekstra et al., 2009; Van Eekelen et al., 2006). In addition, individuals whose needs for good interpersonal relationships are met are motivated to invest time and energy in their connections with others, such as by participating in new projects and experiments (Niessen et al., 2016). These challenge-seeking behaviors will then drive teachers’ informal learning activities. Based on these findings from previous studies, we posit:
A conceptual model of this study is provided in Figure 1.
5. The context of the study
In China, teachers’ formal learning experiences primarily consist of predesigned professional development programs. On average, teachers are required to attend more than 90 h of continuous learning annually. These training programs are organized at various levels, including provincial, city, district and school levels and cover diverse areas such as educational theories, psychological theories, subject pedagogies and educational technologies. This comprehensive approach ensures that teachers gain the skills and knowledge necessary to enhance their teaching practices. The instructional modes include online pre-recorded videos and face-to-face teaching. The instructors typically comprise university scholars and exemplary teachers, providing high-quality education and mentorship. Teachers have the flexibility to choose different programs based on their interests or specific teaching needs. Regarding the relationship between formal and informal learning, teachers in China reported that topics of interest in formal learning can motivate them to further explore these subjects through informal learning activities (Huang et al., 2020). However, the mechanisms underlying this relationship remain underexplored.
6. Method
Participants
Our sample consists of 1,886 in-service primary and secondary school teachers from Gansu and Yunnan provinces in southwest China. Each participant received a link to a consent form and an online questionnaire from their school principal. The links were sent via WeChat, the most popular online messaging platform in mainland China. Table 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the sample.
Measures
Formal learning.
We use the professional learning opportunity subscale of the 2020 North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, 2020). To measure teacher-received formal learning provided by their school, we used 13 statements (e.g. “Professional development provided by my school deepens my content knowledge.”) to which teachers responded on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree).
Basic need satisfaction.
The 16-item Work-Related Basic Need Satisfaction Scale developed by Van den Broeck and colleagues (2010) is used to assess teachers’ basic need satisfaction on a five-point Likert scale, with scores ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). An example item is, “I feel like I can be myself at my job.”
Challenge-seeking behavior.
The 5-item subscale of increasing job demands behavior developed by Tims et al. (2012) is used to examine teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior. An example item is, “I regularly take on extra tasks even though I do not receive extra salary for them.” A five-point Likert scale is used from 1 (never) to 5 (always).
Informal learning activity.
Teachers’ informal learning activities are evaluated using the Informal Teacher Learning Scale (Huang et al., 2021, 2022). We provided teachers with a definition and examples of informal learning to facilitate their reflection on personal, informal learning activities in the past three months (1 = never; 5 = always). The scale has 5 dimensions: learning through media (5 items, e.g. “I read hard-copy educational materials [e.g. teaching reference books, journals]”), learning through colleague interaction (3 items, e.g. “I communicate with my colleagues about student learning”), learning through stakeholder interaction (4 items, e.g. “I discuss educational issues in online communities”), learning through student interaction (4 items, e.g. “I discuss teaching methods with my students”), and learning through reflection (3 items, e.g. “I think about how to continue to improve my teaching”).
Analysis
To test the construct validity of the studied variables, we first conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). We retained items with factor loadings of at least 0.40 (Nunnally, 1994). Given that this study’s self-reported data were obtained concurrently from the same participants, common method variance (CMV) was a potential concern. To determine whether there was a significant difference between the model with the CMV factor and the model without it, we used a latent variable model with a first-order factor containing all of the measurements as indicators (Podsakoff et al., 2003; Richardson et al., 2009). Following the CMV test, we used descriptive statistical analysis to determine the means and standard deviations of the variables investigated, as well as their Spearman’s correlations. Then, a measurement model encompassing all eight variables was built. For all of the variables, the absolute values of skewness and kurtosis were less than 0.63 and 0.95, respectively, indicating a mildly non-normal distribution (Curran et al., 1996; Finney and Distefano, 2006). To test the hypothesis model, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used with maximum likelihood as the estimator. As the comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) values were both greater than 0.90 and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) were less than 0.08, the model fit was regarded as acceptable (Schreiber et al., 2006). Bootstrapping procedures with 2,000 repetitions were performed to verify the mediation effect, and Mplus 8.3 software was used to conduct all of the analyses.
7. Results
Measurement validation and descriptive results
Based on the CFA results, we deleted six items that did not meet the cut-off criteria from both the professional learning and teachers’ basic need satisfaction scales. The remaining items’ loadings were greater than 0.46. We examined the measurement model with and without the CMV factor and found that the change in the fit index was not statistically significant (∆CFI = 0.001) based on Cheung and Rensvold’s (2002) criterion. As a result, CMV was unlikely to have dramatically skewed the interpretation of our findings. We then conducted the descriptive analysis. The results in Table 2 show that most of the teachers’ learning was through interaction with colleagues (M = 4.03; SD = 0.96) and reflection (M = 4.02; SD = 0.93), and they interacted less frequently with stakeholders (M = 3.06; SD = 0.97).
Compared with novice teachers (less than 3 years) and those with mid-level teaching experience, we found that teachers with extensive teaching experience (over 15 years) exhibited higher frequencies in basic needs satisfaction (M = 3.64, p < 0.001), informal learning through media (M = 3.65, p < 0.05), student interaction (M = 3.67, p < 0.001) and reflection (M = 4.04, p < 0.001). Regarding gender differences, male teachers were found to engage more frequently in challenge-seeking behavior (M = 3.57, p < 0.05) compared to female teachers. Conversely, female teachers participated more frequently in informal learning activities such as learning through colleagues (M = 4.08, p < 0.001) and reflection (M = 4.00, p < 0.01). In terms of school type, teachers in urban schools engaged more frequently in learning through stakeholder interactions (M = 3.10, p < 0.001) compared to their counterparts in rural schools.
Structural equation modeling and bootstrapping results
The measurement model yielded a good model fit (CFI = 0.921, TLI = 0.914, RMSEA = 0.057, SRMR = 0.045). The regression analysis revealed that the participants’ gender, school type and teaching experience had significant effects on the examined variables, but their educational background did not. These three demographic factors were controlled in subsequent analyses. The SEM showed that our conceptual model fit the data well (CFI = 0.940, TLI = 0.933, RMSEA = 0.047, SRMR = 0.044).
Formal learning were found to be directly related to the three types of interactive informal learning activities (stakeholder: β = 0.11 p < 0.001; colleague: β = 0.09, p < 0.01; student: β = 0.08, p < 0.01). Thus, H1 was partially supported. It has a stronger association with basic need satisfaction (β = 0.40, p < 0.001), followed by challenge-seeking behavior (β = 0.35, p < 0.001). Figure 2 shows the detailed SEM results. We found that challenge-seeking behavior has a stronger relationship with informal learning than does basic need satisfaction. Teachers’ basic need satisfaction was also found to be positively related to their challenge-seeking behavior.
Bootstrapping was also used to test the indirect effects of teachers’ basic need satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior (see Table 3). In general, basic need satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior fully mediated the impact of formal learning on learning through media and reflection and partially mediated the impact on the other three informal learning activities (partially supporting H2 and H3). Notably, challenge-seeking behavior had almost double the mediating effect of basic need satisfaction in the association between formal learning and all informal learning activities except for learning through colleague interaction. In addition, challenge-seeking behavior mediated more than half of the impact of basic need satisfaction on teachers’ informal learning, especially learning through media and reflection.
8. Discussion
This study expands knowledge of teachers’ workplace learning by investigating how formal learning influences informal learning through the sequential mediators of basic need satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior. We find that formal learning functions in various ways to promote informal learning activities. Both teachers’ basic need satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior are found to be critical mediators of formal and informal learning, with challenge-seeking behavior having a stronger relationship than basic need satisfaction with teachers’ informal learning.
Our findings advance understanding of teachers’ formal and informal learning by revealing different influencing patterns of formal learning on teachers’ informal learning activity. Specifically, formal learning directly influenced teachers’ interactive informal learning activity (i.e. learning through interaction with colleagues, students and stakeholders) instead of learning through media and learning through reflection. Given that interactions with colleagues, stakeholders and students are the most common topics involved in formal learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Kennedy, 2016), these activities may easily permeate and influence teachers’ daily learning activities (Huang et al., 2020; Richter et al., 2011). This result can also be explained by the fact that in professional practice, interactions with students, colleagues and stakeholders do not strictly adhere to formal or informal boundaries but often coexist along a continuum that encompasses elements of both. For example, while formal interactions may occur within structured settings like workshops or formal mentorship programs, informal interactions often arise spontaneously, such as through casual conversations or unstructured peer collaboration.
We found that formal learning can boost teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior. When they access cutting-edge theories and alternative pedagogy through formal learning (Kennedy, 2016), teachers are inclined to take on more challenges or implement teaching experiments (Guskey, 2002). Further, the strength of the associations between challenge-seeking behavior and most types of informal learning was very high. When teachers actively seek challenges and more responsibilities in their work, it is natural for them to carry out more informal learning to fulfill the requirements for professional knowledge and skills brought about by their new tasks (Rudolph et al., 2017). Notably, we found that the strength of the relationship between challenge-seeking behavior and teachers’ informal learning through colleague interaction is relatively low. It may be because colleague interaction is dependent on a school’s culture and on individual teachers’ motivation and initiation (Grosemans et al., 2015). This may partially explain why the association we found between challenge-seeking behavior and learning through colleague interaction was relatively weak.
This study found that the relationship between basic need satisfaction and informal learning is substantially mediated by teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior. Informal learning is typically problem-initiated and task-focused (Lecat et al., 2020). Since challenge-seeking behavior introduces new tasks, challenges and responsibilities for teachers, it is understandable that such behavior serves as a key mediator between the satisfaction of basic needs and informal learning activities. Notably, challenge-seeking behavior had twice the effect on learning through media and learning through reflection compared to basic need satisfaction. This may be because challenge-seeking behavior continuously generates knowledge gaps for teachers, prompting them to refer to online sources to solve their problems. Teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior is often integrated with teaching innovations or generates unexpected teaching outcomes, which require teachers to continuously reflect on the teaching process and student outcomes.
We also found that teachers’ basic need satisfaction mediated only one-third of the effect of formal learning on challenge-seeking behavior. This finding is noteworthy given that existing research has reported that teachers’ basic need satisfaction may be a core driver in predicting their proactive behavior (Chiu et al., 2021; Proudfoot and Boyd, 2022). However, our study reveals that teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior is primarily influenced by their formal learning. This may be because, even if teachers are satisfied with their basic needs, they might not have the proper opportunity to engage in challenge-seeking. Formal learning can broaden teachers’ perspectives and provide access to exciting ideas that may catalyze their challenge-seeking behavior.
Regarding the effect of teachers’ demographic factors, our results show that male teachers engage more frequently in challenge-seeking behavior compared to female teachers. This finding aligns with existing research on gender differences in challenge-seeking behavior (Croson and Gneezy, 2009). One explanation for this could be that females are often more motivated to avoid failure when making task choices, whereas males are generally more motivated to approach success (De Pater et al., 2009). These gender differences in task choice motivations may partially explain the observed differences in challenge-seeking behavior among teachers. Moreover, societal and cultural expectations often create gender stereotypes, portraying males as competent and agentic and females as communal (Ellemers, 2018). These stereotypes can implicitly influence individual teachers’ decision-making regarding challenge-seeking behavior. Such implicit biases may discourage female teachers from engaging in riskier tasks or pursuing challenges, contributing to the observed disparity in challenge-seeking behaviors between male and female teachers.
9. Limitations and suggestions for future research
The retrospective and self-perceptual nature of the data analyzed for this study might have generated recall biases that limit the validity of the measures used (Schwarz, 2007). Moreover, the scale used to measure teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior was adapted from the subscale of increasing challenging job demands developed by Tims et al. (2012). There is a need to develop a scale that specifically measures teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior. In addition, the limitations of cross-sectional study design apply to this research (David and Sava, 2015). A cross-lagged longitudinal design would enable a stronger conclusion to be drawn about the temporary impact of the antecedents on teachers’ informal learning. In addition, we focused on teachers’ basic need satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior in exploring the relationship between teachers’ formal and informal learning. Given the complexity of teacher learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Kennedy, 2016), additional factors, such as teachers’ personalities, other forms of job redesigning behavior and school culture, should be included in future studies aiming to construct a conceptual model of teachers’ informal learning. Finally, workplace learning is influenced by context. The participants in this study were K-12 teachers and it would be interesting to examine the studied associations across various career contexts.
10. Practical implications
Several specific suggestions for program design arise from this study. First, the complicated associations between formal and informal learning indicate that different emphases should be considered when designing formal learning programs. For instance, to enhance teachers' informal learning through colleague interaction, it is crucial to ensure that formal learning content and environment satisfy teachers' basic needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness. Before developing the learning program, designers should gain a thorough understanding of teachers' specific needs related to these three aspects. This understanding will enable them to tailor their formal learning programs more effectively. To improve teachers’ interaction with stakeholders such as researchers and parents, formal learning should focus on encouraging teachers to actively take up challenges (i.e. implement innovative teaching methods and engage in collaborative action research) and expand the boundaries of their jobs (i.e. create community partnerships, and design cross-curricular projects).
Our results demonstrate that teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior plays a key role in their informal learning. To date, few programs have explored how to stimulate and support teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior or how to help them tackle the challenges and pressures introduced by new tasks and responsibilities. Therefore, it is crucial to design continuing professional development programs that address gender-specific needs and encourage all teachers to engage in challenge-seeking behaviors. Tailoring these programs to bolster confidence, particularly among female teachers and challenging societal norms that may inhibit women from pursuing new challenges could be essential steps in enhancing teachers’ professional development.
For policymakers and school principals, we suggest that more attention be given to the satisfaction of teachers’ basic needs, especially for teachers with extensive teaching experience. Teachers will obtain more motivation when their basic needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness are satisfied, making them more likely to enact self-initiated and change-oriented behavior and create their own “gain spiral” (Bindl et al., 2019; Deci and Ryan, 2000). In addition, teachers’ challenge-seeking behavior should be recognized and supported in schools. Notably, as such behavior may not directly or immediately lead to desired outcomes, principals could provide safe settings for teachers by giving them sufficient time, space, freedom of decision-making and opportunities to explore innovative ideas or alternative approaches to the curriculum and teaching.
11. Conclusions
This study examines the relationship between in-service teachers’ formal and informal learning in the workplace. The results contribute to the literature in several key ways. First, they reveal the complex impact of formal learning on five types of informal learning, highlighting the nuanced interplay between these learning modalities. Second, they underscore the importance of two mediators, basic need satisfaction and challenge-seeking behavior, in this relationship. The patterns identified in this study offer valuable insights for the design of training programs and policies aimed at promoting teachers’ continuous professional development. Specifically, education program designers can leverage these findings to create more tailored programs that not only emphasize formal learning but also foster environments that support basic need satisfaction and encourage challenge-seeking behavior. By doing so, education programs can better integrate informal learning opportunities, enhancing the overall effectiveness and engagement of professional development initiatives.
Figure 1.The conceptual model of this study
Figure 2.Relationships between formal learning, teachers’ basic need satisfaction, challenge-seeking behavior and informal learning activity (n = 1,886)
Table 1.
Sample demographics (n = 1,886)
| Gender | Age | Experience (years) | Grade | Educational background | School type | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Primary | Secondary | Bachelor’s degree or above | Other | City | Rural | ||
| 543 (28.8%) | 1,343 (71.2%) | 39.64 (SD = 9.03) | 16.50 (SD = 10.13) | 840 (44.5%) | 1,046 (55.5%) | 1,402 (74.3%) | 484 (25.7%) | 1,444 (76.6%) | 442 (23.4%) |
Source:Authors’ own work
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics and correlations between the study variables (n = 1,886)
| Variable | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Descriptive statistics | ||||||||
| Cronbach’s alpha | 0.95 | 0.84 | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.95 | 0.80 | 0.93 | 0.94 |
| M | 2.97 | 3.57 | 3.49 | 3.59 | 4.03 | 3.06 | 3.57 | 4.02 |
| SD | 0.57 | 0.52 | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 1.03 | 0.93 |
| Correlations | ||||||||
| 1. Formal learning | – | |||||||
| 2. Teachers’ basic need satisfaction | 0.41** | – | ||||||
| 3. Challenge-seeking behavior | 0.44** | 0.40** | – | |||||
| 4. Learning through media | 0.34** | 0.35** | 0.59** | – | ||||
| 5. Learning through colleague interaction | 0.33** | 0.30** | 0.44** | 0.63** | – | |||
| 6. Learning through stakeholder interaction | 0.42** | 0.33** | 0.62** | 0.61** | 0.46** | – | ||
| 7. Learning through student interaction | 0.40** | 0.36** | 0.60** | 0.60** | 0.58** | 0.62** | – | |
| 8. Learning through reflection | 0.32** | 0.28** | 0.51** | 0.58** | 0.70** | 0.42** | 0.64** | – |
Notes:*Means the correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed); **means the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Source: Authors’ own work
Table 3.
Bootstrapping standardized indirect effects and 95% confidence intervals of the model (n = 1886)
| Model pathways | Point estimate | p-value | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower 2.5% | Upper 2.5% | |||
| FL → satisfaction → media | 0.05 | 0.000*** | 0.025 | 0.070 |
| FL → CS→ media | 0.22 | 0.000*** | 0.180 | 0.267 |
| FL → satisfaction → CS → media | 0.08 | 0.000*** | 0.062 | 0.100 |
| FL → satisfaction → colleague | 0.06 | 0.000*** | 0.031 | 0.079 |
| FL → CS → colleague | 0.14 | 0.000*** | 0.107 | 0.173 |
| FL → satisfaction → CS → colleague | 0.05 | 0.000*** | 0.038 | 0.065 |
| FL → satisfaction → stakeholder | 0.02 | 0.028* | 0.003 | 0.045 |
| FL → CS → stakeholder | 0.23 | 0.000*** | 0.190 | 0.275 |
| FL → satisfaction → CS → stakeholder | 0.08 | 0.000*** | 0.065 | 0.106 |
| FL → satisfaction → student | 0.04 | 0.001* | 0.016 | 0.057 |
| FL → CS → student | 0.20 | 0.000*** | 0.166 | 0.244 |
| FL → satisfaction → CS → student | 0.07 | 0.000*** | 0.056 | 0.092 |
| FL → satisfaction → reflection | 0.03 | 0.019* | 0.003 | 0.049 |
| FL → CS → reflection | 0.19 | 0.000*** | 0.156 | 0.234 |
| FL → satisfaction → CS → reflection | 0.07 | 0.000*** | 0.054 | 0.089 |
| FL → satisfaction → CS | 0.13 | 0.000*** | 0.100 | 0.157 |
Notes:*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; CI = confidence intervals; FL = means perceived formal learning; satisfaction means teachers’ basic need satisfaction; CS = means challenge-seeking behavior; media means learning through media; colleague means learning through colleague interaction; stakeholder means learning through stakeholder interaction; student means learning through student interaction; reflection means learning through reflection
Source: Authors’ own work
© Emerald Publishing Limited.