A Comparative Study on Professional Identity and Teacher Professionalism between Chinese and Korean Pre-service Teachers: With a Discussion on the Limitations of Cross-Cultural Comparison
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62051/kcycbc35Keywords:
Pre-service teachers; Professional identity; Teacher professionalism; Measurement invariance; Cross-cultural comparison.Abstract
This study systematically investigates the structural characteristics, group differences, and cross-cultural measurement equivalence of professional identity and teacher professionalism among pre-service teachers in China and Korea. Drawing on a review of the literature, the study constructs a professional identity model encompassing four dimensions, namely professional value, professional affect, professional commitment, and professional behavioral tendency, as well as a teacher professionalism model covering four dimensions: knowledge base, pedagogical ethics, autonomous reflection, and collaborative development. A questionnaire survey was administered to approximately 600 pre-service teachers in each country, yielding a total of 1,182 valid responses. Using confirmatory factor analysis, multi-group measurement invariance testing, and structural equation modeling, the study estimates the reliability and validity of the scales in both national samples and examines configural, metric, and scalar invariance through chi-square difference tests and the "ΔCFI" criterion. Empirical results show that pre-service teachers in both countries demonstrate high levels of professional identity across all subdimensions; however, Chinese pre-service teachers score significantly higher than their Korean peers on the professional value and professional commitment dimensions, while Korean pre-service teachers score slightly higher on the autonomous reflection dimension of teacher professionalism. Measurement invariance testing supports only partial scalar invariance, indicating systematic intercept shifts for certain items across the two national contexts and suggesting that direct mean comparisons may be misleading. The study further discusses the limitations of cross-cultural comparison regarding theoretical assumptions, instrument adaptability, and interpretive boundaries, providing a methodological reference for international dialogue in future teacher education research.
Downloads
References
[1] Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.09.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
[2] Hong, J. Y. (2010). Pre-service and beginning teachers’ professional identity and its relation to dropping out of the profession. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(8), 1530–1543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.05.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.06.003
[3] Evetts, J. (2013). Professionalism: Value and ideology. Current Sociology, 61(5–6), 778–796. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113480518 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113479316
[4] Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
[5] Flores, M. A., & Day, C. (2006). Contexts which shape and reshape new teachers’ identities: A multi-perspective study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(2), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.07.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.09.002
[6] Choi, L. J., & Park, M. Y. (2022). Teaching practicum during COVID-19: Pre-service English language teachers’ professional identities and motivation. SAGE Open, 12(3), 21582440221119472. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221119472 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221119472
[7] van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Sage Publications.
[8] Zhang, C., Liu, Z., & Lo, N. P. K. (2024). The development and validation of the teacher professional identity scale in a Chinese university context. PLOS ONE, 19(3), e0293156. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293156
[9] So, K., & Kang, J. (2014). Curriculum reform in Korea: Issues and challenges for twenty-first century learning. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(4), 795–803. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40299-014-0079-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0161-2
[10] Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
[11] Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
[12] Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[13] Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
[14] Park, H., & Byun, S. Y. (2015). Why some countries attract more high-ability young students to teaching: Cross-national comparisons of students’ expectation of becoming a teacher. Comparative Education Review, 59(3), 523–549. https://doi.org/10.1086/681088 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/681930
[15] Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Transactions on Social Science, Education and Humanities Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
