Development and Validation of a Philosophy-Based Language Teaching Profile Scale (PBLT-PS) for Pre-Service English Teachers

https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlls.v8i5.2724

Authors

Keywords:

philosophy-based language teaching, pre-service English teachers, development and validation

Abstract

Philosophy-based language teaching (PBLT) integrates philosophical concepts into language instruction, yet it remains undervalidated due to the absence of an instrument measuring philosophical standpoints. This study developed and validated a Philosophy-based Language Teaching Profile Scale (PBLT-PS) using a quantitative design with Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) to assess its factorial validity and reliability. Participants were 100 purposively selected pre-service English teachers from a Philippine state college who completed an expert-validated, pilot-tested 30-item questionnaire. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure (0.869) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (?² = 5269.610, p < .001) confirmed the data’s suitability for factor analysis. EFA yielded a three-factor structure retaining 28 items: Factor 1 (11 items) accounted for 68.84% of the variance, Factor 2 (9 items) for 8.90%, and Factor 3 (8 items) for 4.43%, together explaining 82.16% of the total variance. Cronbach’s alpha exceeded .975 for each factor, indicating excellent internal consistency. These results demonstrate that the PBLT-PS possesses a psychometrically sound, three-dimensional structure, providing teacher educators and researchers with a validated instrument for assessing pre-service English teachers’ philosophical orientations toward language teaching. As validation relied on EFA alone, future research should conduct confirmatory factor analysis with an independent sample to statistically corroborate this structure.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2026-08-07

How to Cite

Palmerola, E. D. . (2026). Development and Validation of a Philosophy-Based Language Teaching Profile Scale (PBLT-PS) for Pre-Service English Teachers. International Journal of Language and Literary Studies, 8(5), 194–210. https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlls.v8i5.2724