Educational reform and the self-efficacy beliefs of teachers implementing nongraded primary school programs

Tenching & Trochr

Pergamon

Ehco~iort. Vol. IO. No. 3, pp. 291~302. 1994 Copyright @ 1994 Elscvicr Scicna Ltd Printed in Grcnt Britnin. All rights reserved 0742-0s I x/94 s7.00 +o.oo

EDUCATIONAL REFORM AND THE SELF-EFFICACY BELIEFS OF TEACHERS IMPLEMENTING NONGRADED PRIMARY SCHOOL PROGRAMS PAUL B. DE MESQUITA and JEFFERY C. DRAKE University of Kentucky, Lexington, U.S.A. Abstract-Primary school teachers were surveyed to determine their sense of efficacy about implementing nongraded primary school programs. The survey assessedattitudes and beliefs of teachers(N = 133) representing 18 school systems undergoing state mandated educational reforms. The survey focused on three areas: (1) educational background and teaching experience;(2) attitudes toward nongraded primary school reforms; and (3) perceived self-efficacy ratings on 21 specific program attributes of the proposed nongraded primary. The influence of experience on attitudes and self-efficacy was also explored. Implications are discussed for preventively addressing teacher needs through teacher education and continuing education programs based on a self-efficacy enhancement model. Suggestions for future research are offered.

Legislated educational reforms and mandated restructuring of schools place demands on teachers to implement innovations for which they may have little understanding or commitment. When faced with the often formidable task of reforming schools, teachersmay view reforms as less than acceptable, express concerns about their adequacy and preparednessto implement innovations as expected,and experienceanxiety or stressaffecting their performance.The success of educational reform, therefore, may depend largely upon the ability of teachersto understand and effectively implement various components of the specific reforms. Recently, teacher beliefs about teaching have been considered to play a more influential role in good teaching performance than previously recognized (Kagan, 1992).For example, teacher self-efficacy beliefs have been found to be associated with a number of successful teaching behaviors (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Gibson & Dembo, 1984) and a willingness to implement innovations in the classroom (Guskey, 1988). Relatedly, previous research on teacher willingness to implement recommended classroom interventions indicates that teachers are more likely to use interventions they believe are acceptable, effective, practical, time efficient, and require little additional technical training (Witt, 291

1986).Therefore,teachers’beliefsthat educational reforms either enhance or detract from the teaching process,as well as teachers’confidence in their ability to perform instructional tasks effectively, may contribute to their overall willingness to implement educational innovations. However, teachers’beliefsregarding the acceptability of educational reforms and their corresponding efficacy beliefs about the implementation of specific reforms, have not beenpreviously studied. Purpose

The purposes of this study were to investigate teachers’attitudes and general efficacy beliefs about educational reform and to determine their personal sense of efficacy about implementing specific primary school reform components.This research attempted to identify areas of concern and potential problems that can be addressed preventively through preservice teacher education and ongoing teacher consultation services that develop and strengthen teachers’efficacy beliefs.Relatedly, the role of teaching experience was explored as a possible influence on teacher’s attitudes toward and willingness to implement primary school reform programs.

292

PAUL

B. DE MESQUITA

Seljl Eficacy

The concept of self-efficacy, as proposed by Bandura (1977, 1982b) has served as the basis for most research on teacher efficacy. Bandura understood the expectation about one’s efficacy to consist of “the conviction that one can successfully execute the behavior required to produce the outcomes” (1977, p.193). Similarly, efficacy beliefs of teachers have been viewed as beliefs that their classroom actions can have a favorable impact on student achievement (Ashton, 1984; Ashton & Webb, 1986). Teacher efficacy has been recognized as an important construct that has been useful in identifying effective teachers, particularly as it is positively related to student achievement (Greenwood, Olejnik, & Parkay, 1990). Efficacy beliefs of teachers have been found to influence certain patterns of classroom behavior such as the amount of effort, persistence,and decisions to employ certain types of instructional strategies (McLaughlin & Marsh, 1978). Teacher self-efficacy has been conceptualized in terms of both general teaching efficacy and personal teaching efficacy (Ashton & Webb, 1986;Gibson & Dembo, 1984;Woolfolk & Hoy, 1990).For instance, some teachersmay feel that certain educational practices may positively affect student achievement but they may not believe that they have the capability to implement these educational practices (Gibson & Dembo, 1984).Therefore, teachersmay feel that a set of school reforms generally are effective, but may have doubts about their personal ability to implement specific reforms in their classroom. Similarly, teachers may believe that they are capable of implementing the proposed educational reforms, but doubt the general efficacy of the reforms. The current period of educational reform in the U.S.A. presents difficult challenges and exciting opportunities for teacher education programs and school consultation services.In Kentucky, underachieving schools, widespread illiteracy, poverty, economic decline, and a court ruling that the inequalities of the educational system were unconstitutional, were factors that prompted the state legislature to enact a landmark school reform bill. The Kentucky Educational Reform Act (KERA, H.B. 940) mandated significant restructuring of schools through the

and JEFFERY

C. DRAKE

implementation of components such as schoolbaseddecision-making, preschool programs, extended school services,family resourceand youth service centers, a comprehensive instructional technology, and performance-basedassessment (Steffy, 1993). At the heart of this comprehensivereform act is a dramatic restructuring of elementary school programs. By 1993-94, each elementary school must restructure grades K-3 into a nongraded primary school program (Anderson & Pavan, 1993;Goodlad & Anderson, 1987).The proposed primary program will be based on developmentally appropriate instructional practicesdesigned to meet the cognitive, social, emotional, aesthetic, and physical needs of the child and to ensure that no student experiencesfailure. Teacher Eficacy ad Educational R
Related to educational reform and school improvement trends, an individual teacher’s senseof efficacy has been found to be an important characteristic determining the effectiveness of change agent projects (Berman & McLaughlin, 1977). Relatedly, teachers’use of instructional approaches such as cooperative learning or mastery learning has been found to result in higher levels of self-efficacy and greater willingness to implement innovations (Guskey, 1988; Wax & Dutton, 1991). In addition, changes in instructional practices (Smylie, 1988) and willingness to use innovative curriculum (Poole, Okeafor, & Sloan, 1989)were also found to be positively related to teachers’sense of self-efficacy. Given the extent of educational reforms, such as those mandated in Kentucky, and given the expanding responsibilities of teachers for implementation, teachers possibly may view school improvement initiatives as generally acceptable but may not feel as capable or as competent in making the specific changes.Under the growing pressures and often trying circumstances of school reform, many teachersmay experiencean increasedlevel of stressassociatedwith a reduced senseof self-efficacyas educators.Understanding the role of efficacy beliefs in teachers’underlying willingness or resistanceto change may enhance the effective implementation of educational reforms.

Educational Reform and Self-EfficacyBeliefs Therefore, this study examined the attitudes and beliefs of elementary school teachers with varying years of experiencewho were responsible for implementing the nongraded primary school program as mandated in the educational reform legislation. The research focused on attitudes toward the acceptability and efficacy of the educational reforms generally, and teachers’beliefs about their efficacy in implementing the specific characteristics of nongraded primary programs. Method Participants

In connection with a series of professional development workshops on educational reforms at the primary school level, 160 elementary school teachers (grades K-3) responsible for implementing nongraded primary school programs were asked to complete a survey on their attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs. The teachers represented 40 elementary schools from 18 county school systems located in the central region of Kentucky. Surveys were completed and returned by 133 certified teachers (83% response rate). All the respondents were female. Classroom teaching experience ranged from 1 to 37 years (M = 13.93, SD = 7.67). Seventeen per cent of the sample held Bachelors degrees. Eighty-four per cent of the participating teachers had advanced degrees(63 % held a Masters degree,20% held a Masters degree plus additional hours, and 1% possesseda doctoral degree).

293

Demographics. Six items were used to gather demographic information. On the first three items teachers furnished infomation about their current teaching assignment, degrees held, and number of years of teaching experience. On the next three items teachers used five-point Likert scales to describe their knowledge of the KERA primary school reforms (Very Unknowledgeable to Very Knowledgeable), the extent to which they were implementing the primary reforms (Not Implementing Any Reforms to Implementing Reforms Completely), and how the primary program compared with their previous teaching experience (Completely Similar to Completely Different). General and personal teaching-eflcacy

belkfs.

General and personal beliefs about teaching efficacy was measured using two items adapted from previous Rand Corporation research on teacher self-efficacy (Armor et a/., 1976; Berman, McLaughlin, Bass, Pauly, & Zellman, 1977). These two items presented statements referring to teachers’ beliefs about teaching efficacy in general as well as personal teaching efficacy (see items 7 and 8 in Table 1). Teachers responded using the following Likert scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Uncertain, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree.

Attitudes. The next six items concerned teachers’attitudes about the efficacy of various aspects of the primary school reforms. These items were based on factors previously reported to influence teachers’willingness to implement classroom interventions (e.g., Reimers, Wacker, & Koeppl, 1987; Witt & Elliot, 1985). These items focused on: overall effectiveness of the Survey primary school reforms, practicality in terms of A survey was developed to assessattitudes and time and effort required, difficulty in meeting the self-efficacy beliefs of primary school teachers individual learning needsof all children, skill and toward nongraded primary school reforms. The technical retraining required, preference for survey employed a Likert scale format and teaching in a nongraded primary vs. traditional gathered demographic, attitudinal, and self-effi- classroom, and ability to cope with additional cacy information. The first section of the survey stresses resulting from reform implementation consisted of 14 demographic and attitude items. (seeitems 9-14 in Table 2). Teachers responded Several of these items were worded in the nega- using the same five-point Likert scale described tive to discourage a response set tendency. The previously. second part of the survey asked teachers to rate SelfefJicacy bekfs. how certain they were about effectively performIn the second part of the ing each of the 21 specific primary program survey an additional 21 items were presented that addressed teachers’personal efficacy beliefs attributes oulined in the reforms.

294

PAUL

B. DE MESQUITA

and JEFFERY

C. DRAKE

Table 1 Percentages for General and Personol Tecrching E@cacy Item Items

SA

A

U

D

SD

7. General Efficacy When it comes right down to it, teachers teaching in KERA primary school programs really won’t be able to do much, because most of the students’ motivation and performance depends on their home environment.

02

07

17

52

23

8. Personal Efficacy If I really try hard as a teacher in a primary school program I can get through to even the most difficult or unmotivated students.

15

50

28

05

02

Note. SA, strong agree; A, agree; U, undecided; D. disagree; SD, strongly disagree.

concerning their implementation of specific aspects of the nongraded primary school reforms (see Table 3). These items were organized into seven categories representing critical attributes of the proposed KERA primary school program: (a) developmentally appropriate practices, (b) multi-age/multi-ability grouping, (c) continuous progress monitoring, (d) authentic assessment, (e) qualitative reporting methods, (f) professional teamwork, and(g) parent involvement. Each item consisted of a program characteristic worded in the form of an “I can” statement (e.g., “I can arrange heterogeneousability groups for instruction”). Following methodology proposed by Bandura (1982a) and later employed by others in educational research (e.g., Guskey, 1987; Schunk, 1984),the teachers rated these items on a scale of O-100 according to how certain they were about effectively performing each particular program attribute (0 = Highly Uncertain, 100 = Highly Certain). Results Demographics

The results for the first three demographic items were reported in a previous section describing the participants’ primary assignment, experience,and degreelevel. On item four, regarding knowledge of the enacted primary school reforms, 16% of the teachers described themselves as either unknowledgeable or very unknowledgeable. Of the 84% remaining, 44%,

34%, and 6% described themselves as knowledgeable,moderately knowledgeable, and very knowledgeable about the proposed primary school program, respectively. On item five, 96 % of the teachersreported they were implementing primary school reforms (45% reported implementing a few reforms, 30% reported implementing about half of the reforms, and 21% had implemented most or all of the mandated reforms). When asked on item 6 how the proposed primary program compared to previous teaching experiences,80% described at least half or more of the primary school program reforms as different from their previous teaching experiences. General and Personal Teaching Eficacy

The responsesfor items 7 and 8 are presented in Table 1. In responding to item 7, concerning their general teaching efficacy, about three-quarters of the teachers agreed that, through the KERA primary school program, teachers could overcome the influence of negative home environments on children’s motivation and school performance. Similarly, on item 8 about twothirds of the teachers reported a high degree of personal efficacy, indicated by their agreement that they could reach even the most difficult or unmotivated student within the context of the proposed program. A T-test comparing the responseson these two items showed there was no statistically significant difference between the -mean ratings for general teaching efficacy (M = 3.87) and personal teaching efficacy (M = 3.70).

Educational

Reform and Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Attitudes Items 9-14 were related to teachers’attitudes toward various aspectsof the acceptability of the KERA primary program. For each of these six itmes, the percentages of teachers’responding Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree,and Strongly Disagree are presented in Table 2. An examination of the responseson item 9 showed that nearly two-thirds of the teachers agreed or strongly agreed that the primary program will be effective in improving the overall school performance of their students. On item 10, 56% of the teachers disagreed that the primary reforms would be too impractical and too timeconsuming, while 21% considered the reforms impractical and the remaining 23% were undecided. Responseson item 11 indicated that only 26% of the teachers felt meeting the individual learning needsof all students within a nongraded primary program would be difficult. In responding to item 12, 83% of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that implementation of the primary reforms required additional skill and technical retraining. Fifty-four per cent of the teachersindicated on item 13 that they preferred teaching in the reformed primary program rather than the traditional elementary classroom arrangment. About a quarter of the teachers were uncertain of their preference and slightly less than a quarter of teachers expressedtheir preference for the traditional graded arrangement. Finally, on item 14,a total of 58 % of the teachers

295

were either uncertain about their ability to cope with additional stressesor felt that they could not cope with additional stresses. Eficacy Ratings on Specific Primary Program Attributes The meansand standard deviations for teacher self-efficacyratings on the 21 specific characteristics of the primary school reforms are presented in Table 3 in rank order from highest to lowest. Overall, these high average ratings and their lim ited range indicated that overall, teachers generally felt certain about their abilities to implement the various characteristics of the primary school reforms. According to this rank ordering, teachersreported their highest senseof efficacy in their abilities to function as a professional team member, facilitate the exchange of information between home and school, and provide developmentally appropriate instructional practices. Teachers reported a comparatively lower senseof efficacy in their abilities to conduct authentic assessments,to provide continuous progressmonitoring, to develop and use qualitative reporting measures,and to arrange multi-age/multi-ability instructional groups. A one-way analysis of variance for repeated measures across all items was computed to ascertain the presence of differences among teachers’self-efficacy ratings. Results indicated there were statistically significant differences, = 12.05,p < .Ol. To explore thesedata F ~20,2600~

Table 2 Percentages of Agreement or Disagreement with Reform for Sk Atritude Items

Items 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

The KERA proposed primary school program will be effective in improving children’s overall school performance. The proposed primary school program changes will be impractical and too time consuming to implement. It will be difficult to meet the individual learning needs of all students within the proposed primary school program. Implementing the proposed primary school reforms requires more skill and technical retraining for teachers. I prefer teaching in the proposed primary school program rather than the traditional elementary classroom. I will be able to cope with the additional stressesthat may result from implementing the primary school program changes.

See Table I for abbreviations.

SA

A

IJ

D

SD

14

48

29

07

02

07

14

23

40

16

08

I8

26

40

09

47

36

II

05

01

20

34

25

14

08

08

35

34

14

IO

296

PAUL

B. DE MESQUITA

and JEFFERY

C. DRAKE

Table 3 Meatu aad Standard Deviations of Teachers ’Self-Ejicacy

Ratings 01121 Primary Program Attrihrtres ia Rank Order

Rank Survey Items 1. 3. 4. 5.

18. 21. 17. 1. 3.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. II.

8. 13. 11. 12. 2. 4.

12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21.

19. 7. 16. 5. 20. 10. 14. 6. 15. 9.

2.

I can cooperate and communicate effectively with professional team members. I can exchange information continuously between home and school. I can deliver instruction through team teaching, collaborative teaching, peer coaching. I can create opportunities for active child involvement, interaction, and exploration. I can vary instructional strategies and approaches such as whole language, cooperative learning, peer tutoring. I can allow students to progress at their own rate. I can use conferencing, observing, and examining multiple work samples IO assess students. 1 can continually assess students throughout classroom activities. I can assess students in ways that reflect actual learning experiences. I can balance teacher-directed and child-initiated activities. 1 can use flexible grouping and regrouping for instruction based on interest, learning style. and problem solving. I can involve parents succcessfully in classroom instruction. I can promote success-oriented, noncompetitive, individualized student progress. I can report pupil progress on the basis of a skill continuum. I can arrange heterogeneous ability groups Ior instruction. I can involve community members as partners in classroom instruction. I can develop alternatives to retention practices. 1 can document social, emotional, physical, aesthetic, and cognitive growth. I can mix various age ranges within instructional activities. I can develop descriptive, narrative, and ongoing reporting methods. 1 an document progress through anecdotal records, observations, portfolios, journals, video, computers.

further, post hoc pairwise comparisons were employed, using Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference procedure. Statistically significant mean differenceswere found betweenself-efficacy ratings on several of the items. Table 4 presents the differences among means for the significant pairwise comparisons. Teachers felt significantly more confident in their teamwork ability compared to their abilities to implement most of the other program practices. Teachers rated their abilities in providing developmentally appropriate practices significantly higher than their ability to conduct authentic assessments,develop qualitative reporting methods, and use continuous progress monitoring. Compared to other critical program attributes, teachers felt significantly less certain about their ability to implement multi-age/multi-ability instructional groupings. Influence of Teaching Experience

Further exploratory analyseswere conducted to determine if teachers’attitudes and sense of

M

SD

87.80 82.88 82.35 82.05

16.50 18.14 17.16 17.72

80.83 80.83 80.30 79.32 78.56 78.26

18.62 16.99 18.41 18.29 17.30 17.32

78.26 78.03 77.69 76.06 75.45 75.30 74.17 71.67 71.37 71.36

17.88 18.92 18.16 19.17 21.73 20.88 21.90 21.51 23.82 19.72

70.76

22.57

self-efficacy regarding implementation of the primary school program reforms differed on the basis of their teaching experience.Teacherswere sorted into four groups using quartiles on the basis of years of teaching experience. Group 1 (n = 35) representedteachers with 1-8 years of experience (M = 4.51, SD = 2.48). Group 2 (n = 33) consisted of individuals with 9-14 years of teaching experience (M = 11.67, SD = 1.63). Group 3 (n = 34) consisted of teachers with 15-18 years of experience (M = 16.74, SD = 1.14).Group 4 (n = 31) had teachers with 19-37 years of experience (M = 23.90, SD = 5.18). Demographics. Analysis of variance was employed to compare thesefour groups acrossthree of the demographic items of the survey pertaining to knowledge of the proposed primary program, degree of program implementation, and comparison of primary program with previous teaching experiences.The results indicated a significant differenceonly on item four, Fo, rz9) = 3.50, p < .02. Pairwise comparisons showed Group 1,

Educational Reform and Self-Efficacy Beliefs

297

Table 4 Dlflcrences Among Means for Significant Pairwise Comparisons of Teacher SelJEficacy Item No.

M

9 15 6 14 10 20 5 16 7 19 4 2 12 11 13 3 8 1 17 21 18

70.76 71.36 71.37 71.67 74.17 75.30 75.45 76.06 77.69 78.03 78.26 78.26 78.56 79.32 80.30 80.83 80.83 82.05 82.35 82.88 87.80

II

13

8.56

9.54 8.94 8.93 8.63

3 10.10 9.47 9.46 9.16

8 10.10 9.47 9.46 9.16

1 11.30 10.69 10.68 10.38

Ratings 17

21

18

11.60 10.99 10.98 10.68

12.10 11.52 11.51 11.21 8.71

17.04 16.44 16.43 16.13 13.63 12.50 12.35 11.74 10.11 9.77 9.54 9.54 9.24 8.48

Tukey HSD = 8.44, p < .01.

the least-experiencedteachers, rated themselves as significantly more knowledgeable of the KERA primary school reforms (A4 = 3.51) than did Group 3, the more-experienced teachers (A4 = 2.91).

program than did teachers in the other three grows, F,,, 12g)= 4.58, p < .OOl.Results further indicated on item 13, the teachers in Group 1 and Group 2, with less experience expressed significantly more positive preferences toward teaching in the reform primary program than Attitudes. Analysis of variance and multiple did teachers in Group 3, who were on average comparisons also were employed to explore the undecided about their preferences, F(,, 12gj= presenceof attitude differences among the four 4.07, p < .Ol. Finally, on item 14, teachers in groups. The group means and standard devi- Group 3 expressedmore uncertainty and lack ations for these six attitude items are presented of confidence in their ability to cope with the in Table 5. Overall, years of teaching experience additional stressesresulting from the implemendid not differentiate teachers’views on item nine, tation of the primary school reforms than did regarding the effectivenessof the proposed pri- teachers in Group 2 who, with less experience, mary school program, and on item 12, regarding felt more positive about their coping ability the need for technical retraining to implement F(,, 12gj= 3.15, p c .03. To aid interpretation, a the program. However, significant differences graphical comparison of these mean ratings by were present on the four remaining attitude groups is provided in Figure 1. items. On item 10, Group 3 teachers tended to SelfEfJicacy. There were no significant difview the reforms as significantly more impractical and time-consuming than did teachers in ferencesfound between the mean ratings of the Group 2, Fo, 12g)= 2.83, p < .04. Similarly, on four experiencegroups on either item 7, general item 11, teachers in Group 3 also felt that it teaching-efficacy, or item 8, personal teachingwould be more difficult to meet the individual efficacy. However, analysis of variance results learning needs of students in the new primary showed differencesamong experiencegroups on

PAUL

B. DE MESQUITA

and JEFFERY

C. DRAKE

Table 5 Mems and Standard Deviations for Sis A/ti!ude Items h,v Teacher Esperierwe Groups

Experience group Attitude items 9.

1

2

3

4

3.91 0.70

3.73 0.76

3.38 I.10

3.58 0.89

2.34 1.14

2.27 0.94

2.94 0.92

2.65 1.36

2.5 1 0.92

2.55 1.06

3.35 I.10

2.58 I .09

4.20 0.96

4.21 0.93

4.35 0.85

4.23 0.80

3.77 1.09

3.76 1.17

3.00 1.23

3.16 1.10

3.29 0.99

3.42 I .03

2.79 1.15

3.23 1.12

Effective in improving children’s performance. M SD

IO. Impractical and too time consuming to implement. M SD

11. Difficulty to meet individual learning needs. M SD

12. Requires more skill and technical retraining. M SD

13. Prefer teaching in the proposed primary program. M SD

14. Able to cope with the additional stresses. M SD

three of the self-efficacy ratings made on the 21 primary program attributes. Group comparisons revealed that the least-experienced teachers, Group 1 (A4 = 83.43), rated themselves as significantly more certain about their ability to balance teacher-directed and child-initiated activities than Group 4, the most-experienced teachers (A4 = 72.58), Fo, iz8) = 2.57, p < .05. Teachers in Group 3 (A4 = 57.88) expressed a significantly lower senseof self-efficacy in their ability to m ix various age ranges within instructional activities than did teacher with less experience in Group 1 (A4 = 79.43) and Group 2 w = 75.w F(3.127) = 5.72, p < .OO.When rating their ability to involve parents successfully in classroom instruction, Group 4, the most experienced teachers, expressed a significantly lower senseof efficacy (it4 = 68.71)than teachers in Group 2 (A4 = 82.73),F(,, iz8) = 3.65,p < .Ol. Discussion Acceptability

of Reforms

sistent with previous research (Guskey, 1988; Poole et al., 1989; Smylie, 1988), the efficacy ratings of the teachers were positively related to their attitudes toward proposed innovative reform practices. Teachers believed that primary school reforms would be effective in improving the school performance of their students. However, the overwhelming majority of the respondents felt strongly that successful implementation would require additional skill and technical retraining. Many teachersindicated concerns or were unsure about the impracticality and additional time required to implement the reforms. Related to concerns about practicality and time constraints, teachers also expresseduncertainty about their ability to cope with additional stressesthat may result from educational reform changes. In combination, the three factors of training, time, and stress may diminish the overall acceptability of the primary school program. If left unaddressed, these concerns may contribute to a growing reluctance to fully implement educational reforms.

Overall, the attitudes of the participating Self-Eficacy Beliefs teachers were generally accepting of the educational reforms currently under implementation Responses on the general teaching efficacy at the primary school level in Kentucky. Con- item indicated that participants held moderately

Educational Reform and Self-Efficacy Beliefs

299

W Group 1 (1-8 years) 0 Group 2 (9-14 years) 0 Group 3 (15-18 years) n Group 4 (19-37 years)

;eable

ive

Imp!

ical

Dif

Need

ining Prefer primary Able to cope

Survey items Figure 1. Means ratings on seven survey items for four teacher groups based on experience.

positive efficacy beliefs about teaching in general. Teachers expressedtheir lowest senseof efficacy

Most agreedthat teacherscould effectively reach even the most difficult and unmotivated students, despite the influence of negative home environments. On the Rand personal teaching efficacy item teachers’personal eticacy beliefs were also moderately positive. This correspondence between their general and personal efficacy ratings suggeststhat these teachers hold consistent beliefs across these two dimensions of an overall senseof teaching efficacy. In addition to their positive general teaching efficacy and personal teaching efficacy beliefs,the moderate to high range of self-efficacy ratings on each of the 21 primary program attributes suggests that these teachers felt capable of implementing most of the specific aspects of the primary reforms. Teachers were confident in their abilities to collaborate with colleaguesand support staff, as well as effectively communicate between home and school. They were also confident, though less so in applying developmentally appropriate instructional practices.

in the areas of performance assessment and hei :rogeneous instructional groupings associated with nongradedness.The findings suggest that theseteacherswere more certain about their knowledge of developmentally appropriate practices than about their skills in implementing authentic assessmentpractices, using continuous progress monitoring methods to document student progress, and grouping students in nongraded arrangements for instruction. Experience Versus Professional Socialization

A secondary interest of this study was to determine if teachers at various stages in their teaching careers held similar or different beliefs regarding the implementation of the nongraded primary program. The results of exploratory analysessuggestedthat where differencesexisted in attitudes toward the reforms, teachers in Group 3, who were considered to be in the mid-stage of their professional careers,tended to

300

PAUL B. DE MESQUITA and JEFFERY C. DRAKE

respond more negatively in comparison to teachers in the earlier and later stages of their careers. Furthermore, the self-efficacy beliefs of teachers varied in three specific areas when their experience was considered. While most teachers were lessconfident in using heterogeneousgroupings, teachers with more experience expressed lower efficacy beliefs in their ability to mix various age ranges within instructional activities. Experience also appeared related to a lower sense of efficacy about involving parents successfully in classroom instruction. This could be a result of more unsuccessfulattempts to involve parents on the part of experienced teachers, due to their longer years of service, while inexperienced teachers still may feel more optimistic about the possibilities for parent involvement. These results are similar to previous research, where a lowered senseof teacher self-efficacy was found to be associated with increased number of years of teaching experience(Brousseau, Book, & Byers, 1988; Dembo & Gibson, 1985; Gibson & Brown, 1982). Yet teachers’ sense of selfefficacy may increase over time as reforms are implemented, similar to the findings of Stein and Wang (1988),who reported that implementation of an instructional innovation may be linked to developmentally over time to increases in teachers’perceptions of self-efficacy. Differences between certain groups of teachers at various stages of their careers were found on several items, with teachersin mid-career tending to be implicated in most of these differences. However, it should be noted that a clear and consistent pattern of significant differences based on teaching experience did not emerge. Years of teaching experience may not provide the most valid explanatory construct for understanding teacher beliefs and teaching behaviors (Kagan, 1992),particularly as they relate to implementation of educational reforms. As suggested by previous research, the connection between teacher efficacy and years in the teaching profession might be studied more fruitfully by examining issues related to the socialization of teachers (Dembo & Gibson, 1985). Nevertheless, if teachers with varying experience or different levels of expertise have differing concerns about accepting educational reforms and implementing instructional innovations, such information will be valuable in understanding the processes by which teachers adopt and

use such innovations mandated with educational reforms. Although a thorough study of these issues was beyond the scope of this survey, the present study clarifies questions for further study. For example, how might self-efficacy play a role in or be influenced by various developmental stages of teaching or do teachers’responses to educational reforms vary depending on their stages of concerns or socialization experiences? Implications for Teacher Education and Training

The findings of this survey point to two major areas of potential difficulty. First, specific skills are needed to successfully implement developmentally appropriate nongraded primary programs. As suggested by lower efficacy ratings, one of the most difficult transisitions appears to be moving from traditional instructional arrangements to mixed-age and mixed ability groupings. Another potential area of concern identified by these teachers was documenting progress in various developmental domains and using continuous progress monitoring method. Based on Bandura’s sources of self-efficacy, applying performance, modeling, and verbal persuasion strategies, training programs could provide teachers with opportunities for observational learning and practice in model nongraded programs with teachers modeling various methods for continued monitoring and documenting of student progress. Second, the expectations associated with implementing new programs, often with insufficient time for preparing and planning or wihtout adequate training, can result in a lack of confidence and increased levels of stress. The relationships between teachers’ sense of efficacy, locus of control, and stress have been identified previously (Parkay, Greenwood, Olejnik, & Proller, 1988). Given the findings of this survey regarding the uncertainty of teachers to cope with the stresses of reforms, more sensitivity is needed concerning the additional demands placed on teachers who are responsible for implementing school improvement programs. Taking a proactive and preventive stance, school systems and schools of education can anticipate the social support and stress management needs of teachers prior to and during stages of educational reform implementation. Skills for recognizing and coping with negative physiological

Educational Reform and Self-EfficacyBeliefs arousal states, such as stress, should be integrated into teacher education and consultation programs. Strategies for reducing anticipated stress and uncertainty might include training in coping skills, as well as awareness,control, and reinterpretation of physiological states. Verbal encouragement and modeling can also be employed to strengthen teachers’sense of efficacy by increasing communication and support through the use of instructional teams, teacher work groups, and collaborative consultation with colleagues or program specialists.

301

lack of research on the efficacy beliefs of teachers within the changing ecological context of educational reform. From a self-efficacy perspective, teacher education and consultation should place primary focus on empowering current and future teachers with an increased senseof control over the ecological factors surrounding their instructional circumstances. Teacher efficacy has been reported to be related to perceptions of control over their instructional environment (Fletcher, 1990),in which case the importance of teachers’ participation in school-based decision-making regarding curriculum and instructional grouping should be emphasized. Future Research Future educational reforms that fail to acThe findings of this study point to the need knowledge the importance of teacher efficacy for additional research efforts to understand the may be precisely destined for failure (Sarason, reciprocal interaction between teacher efficacy 1990). As pointed out by Ashton and Webb beliefs and the successor failure of educational (1986)it may be futile to impose minor superficial reforms and school restructuring programs. Al- changesthat focus only on the individual teacher, though the generalizability of these results are without regard to the social-psychological conlimited by the lack of a random sample, the ditions that influence a teacher’s senseof efficacy. participants, however, were representative of Comprehensive educational restructuring efforts teachers with a broad range of experience who may be most successful when they transform were required to implement nongraded primary school environments into empowering cultures school programs in one state in the midwestern that encourage individual self-efficacyin teachers region of the U.S.A. More investigations com- as well as in learners (Holtzman, 1992). bining surveys with qualitative methods, such as interview and observation, are required to validate the applicability of Bandura’s model of References self-efficacy for teachers and to determine the kinds of general and personal efficacy beliefs that Anderson, R. H., & Pavan, B. N. (1993). Nongradedness: foster teachers’acceptance and implementation Helping it to happen. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing of educational innovations. co. Similarly, future investigations should con- Armor, D., Conroy-Osquera, P., Cox, M., McDonnell, L., Pascal, A., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1976). Atral~~sisof rhe sider how the structures and organizational school referred reading programs in selected Los Angeles health of schools might be related to teacher minority SC/IOO/S (R-2007-LAUSD). Santa Monica, CA: efficacy beliefs (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1993). For The Rand Corporation. instance, which school structures either facilitate Ashton, P. T. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of or hinder teacher opportunities for empowerTeacher Education, 35(5), 28-32. ment, participation in school policy decision- Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Makiry a difference: making, and collaborative teamwork with colTeucher’s sense of eficacy in student achievement. New York: Longman. leagues, administrators, and parents? Finally, there is a need for incorporating self-efficacy Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psycltological Reoiew, 84, 191-215. constructs into training models by which preser- Bandura, A. (1982a). The assessment and predictive genervice and inservice programs, and reform efforts, ality of self-percepts ofefficacy. Journal of Behauior therapy can be evaluated. and Experimental Psychiatry, 13, 195-199. While the need for understanding the relation- Bandura, A. (1982b). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147. ship between teacher self-efficacy and educationP., SCMcLaughlin, M. W. (1977). Federalprograms al reform through an ecological research per- Berman, supporting educational change. Vol. III: Factors aflecting spective has been recognized (Ashton & Webb, implementation and continuation (Report #R-1589/7HEW). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation. 1986; Hoy & Woolfolk, 1993), there has been a

302

PAUL

B. DE MESQUITA

Berman, P., McLaughlin, M. W., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federulprogrntm supporting ehrco~iorrul change. Vol. VII: Factors aficring it,lplet,le,lrclrio,r and conrhtution. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation. Brousseau, B. A., Book, C.. & Byers. J. L. (1988). Teacher beliefs and the culture of teaching. Jomml qf Teacher Educafion, 39(6), 33-39. Dembo, M. H., & Gibson, S. (1985). Teachers’ sense of efficacy: An important factor in school improvement. The Eletnentnry School Jortrnnl, 86, 173- 184. Fletcher, S. (1990. August). The relationship of rlw school environment fo reacher eficncjj. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, MA. Gibson, S., & Brown, R. (1982, November). Tethers ’sense o/eficacy: Changes due to esperience. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the California Educational Research Association, Sacramento. Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Edtrcarional Psychology. 16, 569-582. Goodlad, J. I., & Anderson, R. H. (1987). The nongraded eletnenrory school. New York: Teacher’s College Press. Greenwood, G. E., Olejnik, S. F., & Parkkay, F. W. (1990). Relationships between four teacher efficacy belief patterns and selected teacher characteristics. Journal of Research and Deueloprnenr it1 Edeucation, 23, 102-106. Guskey, T. R. (1987). Context variables that affect measures of teacher efficacy. Journul o/Educntionnl Research, 81( 1). 41-47. Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Tecrching and Teacher Education, 4, 63-69. Holtzman, W. H. (1992). School o//heftt,rure. The University of Texas at Austin: American-Psychological Association and the Hong Foundation for Mental Health. Hoy, W. K., E Woolfolk, A. E. (1993). Teachers sense of efficacy and the organizational health of schools. The Elentenrury School Journal, 93, 355-372. Kagan, D. M. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educuiional Psychologist, 21, 65-90. Kentucky Educational Reform Act. (1990). General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, H.B. 940. 4761-655.

and JEFFERY

C. DRAKE

McLaughlin, M. W.. & Marsh, D. D. (1978). Staff development and school change. Tecrclrers College Record, 80, 70-94. Parkay, F. W., Greenwood, G., Olejnik, S., & Proller, N. (1988). A study of the relationships among teacher efficacy, locus of control, and stress. Jounml of Research mrd Developmen/ in Edmarion, 21(4), 13-22. Poole, M. B., Okeafor, K., & Sloan, E. C. (1989, March). Teachers ’inrerocriorls. personrrl gficucy. md change impleruertrrrrion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. Reimers, T. M., Wacker, D. P., & Kopeppl, G. (1987). Acceptability of behavioral treatments: A review of the literature. S&ool Ps~~+ology Reoiew, 16, 212-227. Sarason. S. B. (1990). The nredicrclble fuilrrre ol‘ edtrcarional reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Schunk, D. (1984). Enhancing self-efficacy and achievement through rewards and goals: Motivational and informational effects. Jocowl o/ Educarioual Research, 78, 29-34. Smylie, M. A. (1988). The enhancement of function of staff development: Organizational and psychological antecedents to individual teacher change. Arttericcra Educntiomd Research Jourtml, 25, I-30. Steffy, B. E. (1993). The Ke(erlfuckyeducofiorl rqftirrn: Lessons for America Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing Co. Stein, M. K., & Wang, M. C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: The process of teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Edmwtion. 4. 17 l- 187. Wax, A. S., & Dutton, M. M. (April, 1991). The reh/iohip between teoclrer use oJ‘coopero/ive leonling and teacher efiicocjl. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. Witt. J. C. (1986). Teacher’s resistance to the use of schoolbased interventions. Journul of School Psychology, 24, 3744. Win. J. C., & Elliot, S. N. (1985). Acceptability of classroom intervention strategies, In T. Kratochwill (Ed.), Adwnces in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 251-288). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Jownol q/ Educoriorml Psychology, 82, 8 1-9 1. Submitted 10 February 1993 Accepted 22 June 1993