- Email: [email protected]
The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in Language Institutes
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
System 37 (2009) 708–718 www.elsevier.com/locate/system
The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in Language Institutes Fatemeh Moafian *, Afsaneh Ghanizadeh English Faculty, Azad University, Mashhad, Iran Received 17 February 2009; received in revised form 26 May 2009; accepted 11 June 2009
Abstract The study reported in this paper was conducted to examine the relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in Language Institutes. To this end, 89 EFL teachers were selected from different Language Institutes in Mashhad, a city in north-east of Iran. The participants were asked to complete the ‘‘Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale” and the ‘‘Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire”. Data analysis and statistical calculations revealed that there is a significant relationship between the teachers’ emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy. To investigate which components of emotional intelligence might have more predictive power in predicting teacher’s self-efficacy, regression analysis was run. Three subscales of emotional intelligence – emotional self-awareness, interpersonal-relationship, and problem solving – were found to be good predictors of teacher self-efficacy. The conclusions and implications of the research were discussed with reference to the earlier findings. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Emotional intelligence; English language teachers; Language institutes; Questionnaire; Self-efficacy
1. Introduction There is substantial evidence from recent research that teachers have great potential to affect students’ educational outcomes (Anderson, 2004). The teachers’ role is not limited to the transmission of knowledge. It encompasses teaching learners how to learn and includes boosting their confidence, motivating, enhancing self-esteem and organizing an appropriate learning environment (Williams and Burden, 2000). Studying affective characteristics among teachers is, therefore, one promising area of research that has the potential to shed light on what constitutes effective teaching. Wubbels and Levy (1991) contended that there is a strong relationship between teachers’ affective traits and learners’ emotional achievement. Furthermore, Mortiboys (2005)
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 5116614752, mobile: +98 9355691781. E-mail addresses: f_moafi[email protected] (F. Moafian), [email protected] (A. Ghanizadeh).
0346-251X/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.system.2009.09.014
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
709
argued that the way the teacher manipulates his/her own emotions and those of learners will increase the chances of learners’ engagement, motivation, and collaboration. A number of studies (e.g., Boyatzis, 2006; Carmeli, 2003; Schutte et al., 1998) have reported a positive relationship between different affective traits, in particular, emotional intelligence (EI), and job attitudes such as affective commitment. Affective commitment, one of the core constructs of carrier and organizational commitment, is defined as ‘‘positive feelings of identification with, attachment to and involvement in the work of the organization” (Meyer and Allen, 1984, p. 292). As Carmeli (2003) noted, emotionally intelligent individuals are expected to recognize, manage, and use their emotions to manipulate the ensuing obstacles and prevent their negative effects on attitudes towards their profession (cited in Salami (2007)). This is particularly true when it comes to professions such as teaching, with its high levels of complexity and constant interaction. Nevertheless, a review of the literature on teachers’ EI and its role in shaping their attitudes and beliefs, in particular their level of self-efficacy, reveals that EI has not received enough attention in the realm of EFL teaching. Definitely, the dearth of research in this area provides a sufficient reason to undertake further investigation into examining the relationship between EFL teachers’ EI and their self-efficacy expectations. 2. Review of the literature on EI 2.1. The origin and definition of EI The history of EI originated from the concept of social intelligence. Thorndike in 1920 viewed EI through the lens of social intelligence and he mentioned that social intelligence is the ability to empathize with others and act wisely in human relationships (cited in Goleman (1998)), but his views were not taken seriously until years later. In 1948, emotional thought was considered to be in the realm of intelligence. No serious attempt was taken in this field until the mid years of the 1980s, when Thorndike’s view was born again in the works of Howard Gardner (Goleman, 1998). Gardner (1983) introduced eight different types of intelligences, one of which, the personal intelligence, made way for the extensive development of EI. Finally, in 1990 Mayer and Salovey, based on Gardner’s view and emphasis on individual differences, introduced their complete model of EI and defined it thoroughly (Bar-On, 1997). Mayer and Salovey’s findings of EI were popularized in Daniel Goleman’s books, emotional intelligence and working with emotional intelligence in the years 1995 and 1998, respectively. Later on Bar-On suggested that since EI is an important element in one’s life showing and predicting success, there is a dire need to measure, operationalize and quantify this construct (Bar-On, 1997). In fact, finding a way to measure and enhance EI seemed to be inevitable. In the year 1997, Bar-On, using his psychological experiences, made his emotional quotient (EQ) questionnaire which is an appropriate test to measure EI. Bar-On coined the term EQ for his measure. He defined EI as a collection of capabilities, competencies and non-cognitive skills that have an effect on a person’s abilities to gain success in the face of environmental pressures. In other words, he believed that EI is the ability to understand emotions and how such emotions influence interpersonal relationships (Bar-On, 2000). 2.2. Bar-On model of EI Bar-On (2000) believed that EI is a non-cognitive intelligence which is an important factor in determining one’s ability to succeed in life and get along in the world. Bar-On identified five major scales and 15 subscales which contribute to the emotional energy and self motivation required to cope with daily environmental demands and difficulties as follows: (1) Intrapersonal: managing oneself, the ability to know one’s emotions. (a) Emotional self-awareness (the ability to be aware of, recognize and understand one’s emotions). (b) Assertiveness (the ability to express one’s feelings, beliefs, thoughts and to defend one’s right). (c) Self-regard (the ability to be aware of, understand, accept and respect oneself). (d) Self-actualization (the ability to realize and reach one’s potential). (e) Independence (the ability to be self-directed and self-reliant in one’s thinking and actions and to be free from emotional dependency).
710
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
(2) Interpersonal: managing relationships with others. (a) Empathy (the ability to understand and appreciate others’ feelings). (b) Interpersonal-relationship (the ability to establish and maintain mutually satisfying relationships that are characterized by emotional closeness and intimacy and by giving and receiving affection). (c) Social responsibility (the ability to demonstrate oneself as a cooperative, contributing and constructive member of one’s social group). (3) Adaptability: ability to adjust to change. (a) Problem solving (the ability to effectively solve problems). (b) Reality testing (the ability to validate one’s feelings and thoughts by assessing the correspondence between what is subjectively experienced and what objectively exists). (c) Flexibility (the ability to adjust one’s feelings/thoughts to change). (4) Stress management: controlling stress (a) Stress tolerance (the ability to manage one’s strong emotions, adverse events, and stressful conditions by positively coping with problems). (b) Impulse control (the ability to control one’s emotions and resist an impulse to act). (5) General mood: the ability to be optimistic and positive as well as to enjoy life. (a) Happiness (the ability to feel satisfied with life and to have fun). (b) Optimism (the ability to look at the brighter side of life and maintain a positive attitude in the face of problems). 3. Review of the literature on self-efficacy 3.1. Sources of self-efficacy beliefs Perceived self-efficacy, i.e., ‘‘beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required producing given attainments” (Bandura, 1997, p. 3), can be developed by four main sources of influence. Bandura (1997) postulated these sources of efficacy expectations as: mastery experience, also called enactive self-mastery, vicarious experience, also called role-modeling, social or verbal persuasion, and arousal or physiological and emotional states. The most prevailing and powerful influence on efficacy is mastery experience through which successful performance of the behavior increases self-efficacy for that behavior. The perception that a performance has been successful enhances perceived self-efficacy and ensures future proficiency and success. In contrast, the perception that a performance has been a failure weakens efficacy beliefs and leads to the expectation that future performance will also be inefficient (Bandura, 1997). The second influential factor originates from observing other similar people perform a behavior successfully. It provides people with ideas about successful manner. In contrast, observing similar people who fail lowers the individual’s confidence and subsequently undermines their efforts (Bandura, 1997). A third source of influence is social or verbal persuasion received from others. Successful persuaders foster people’s beliefs in their capabilities, while at the same time, ensure that the visualized success is achievable. Negative persuasion, on the other hand, may tend to defeat and lower self-beliefs. The most contributing effect of social persuasion pivots around initiating the task, attempting new strategies, and trying hard to succeed (Pajares, 2002). Psychological and affective states, such as stress, anxiety, and excitement also provide information about efficacy perception and boost the feeling of proficiency. Hence, trying to reduce an individual’s stress and anxiety and modify negative debilitative states to positive facilitative states plays an influential role in amending perceived self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997). 3.2. Teacher’s self-efficacy A teacher’s sense of efficacy has been found to be associated with student characteristics such as motivation, achievement, and efficacy (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Teacher efficacy is defined as ‘‘the teacher’s belief in his or her capability to organize and execute courses of action required to successfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular context” (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998, p. 22).
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
711
A plethora of studies has demonstrated the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and their instructional behaviors. For instance, Pajares (1992) found a strong relationship between teachers’ educational beliefs and their lesson planning, instructional decisions, classroom practices, and subsequent teaching behaviors. He concluded that ‘‘beliefs are far more influential than knowledge in determining how individuals organize and define tasks and problems and are stronger predictors of behavior” (Pajares, 1992, p. 311). On the other hand, teachers with a low level of efficacy have been found to be cynical not only about their own abilities, but also the abilities of their students and colleagues (Siebert, 2006). They also tend to undermine students’ cognitive development as well as students’ judgments of their own capabilities (Pajares and Schunk, 2001, cited in Siebert (2006)). To determine how teachers’ efficacy affects student achievement, Ross (1994) scrutinized 88 teacher efficacy studies and contended that teachers with a higher sense of efficacy are more likely to: (1) learn and use new approaches and strategies for teaching, (2) use management techniques that enhance student autonomy and diminish student control, (3) provide special assistance to low achieving students, (4) build students’ self perceptions of their academic skills, (5) set attainable goals, and (6) persist in the face of student failure (cited in Woolfolk Hoy and Spero (2000, p. 6)) In essence, the abovementioned studies point towards the perception that teachers’ efficacy beliefs are decisive in constructing an educational atmosphere that incites students’ achievement. 3.2.1. Purpose of the study As noted earlier, much research has been conducted on EI (e.g., Brackett and Salovey, 2006; Carmeli, 2003; Schutte et al., 1998) and on self-efficacy (e.g., Ross, 1994; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998), but little (Chan, 2004; Fabio and Palazzeschi, 2008; Penrose et al., 2007) has been carried out or reported on the relationship between these two; however, those studies are limited to the L1 environment. Since these two factors, EI and efficacy, are of current concern in all levels of education (Gil-Olarte et al., 2006; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998) and since they contribute to teaching effectiveness (Mortiboys, 2005; Pajares, 1992), it seems that some research should be carried out in the EFL realm to examine if and how these two factors are related. In summary, the present study seeks to investigate the relationship between EFL teachers’ EI and their self-efficacy beliefs. It also seeks to determine how much teachers’ EI contributes to the prediction of their sense of efficacy. To this end, the following two research questions were posed and investigated in this study: (1) Is there any relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and their sense of self-efficacy? (2) Is there any relationship between the different subscales of teachers’ EQ and self-efficacy? 4. Method 4.1. Participants The participants consisted of 89 Iranian EFL teachers aged between 20 and 45 years old (M = 26.87, SD = 5.09) with 1–20 years of teaching experience (M = 5.53, SD = 3.5). There were 73 females and 16 males from different socio-economic backgrounds. They mostly majored in different branches of English – English Literature (20 B.A., 1 M.A.), English Teaching (13 B.A., 18 M.A.), English Translation (6 B.A.) – and those teachers who did not major in English were duly qualified to teach it. 4.2. Instruments 4.2.1. Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (long form) Reviewing the existing measures on teacher’s self-efficacy (such as, the Webb Efficacy Scale developed by Ashton et al. (1982), including seven items; the teacher efficacy scale by Gibson and Dembo (1984), including 30 items on a 6 point Likert scale; and Bandura’s teacher efficacy scale, 1997, comprising 30 items on a 9 point scale), the researchers decided to utilize the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale designed by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy, due to its comprehensiveness, integrity, and ease of administration. The Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale, also called Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES), encompasses two versions: long form
712
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Table 1 Reliability reports of OSTES.
OSTES F1 F2 F3
Mean
SD
Alpha
7.1 7.3 7.3 6.7
0.94 1.1 1.1 1.1
0.94 0.87 0.91 0.90
(including 24 items) and short form (including 12 items). In the current study the long form was applied which includes three subscales: (1) efficacy in student engagement (F1), (2) efficacy in instructional strategies (F2), and (3) efficacy in classroom management (F3). Each subscale loads equally on eight items, and every item is measured on a 9 point scale anchored with the notations: ‘‘nothing, very little, some influence, quite a bit, a great deal.” This scale seeks to capture the multi-faceted nature of teachers’ efficacy beliefs in a concise manner, without becoming too specific or too general (see Appendix). The total reliability and the reliability of each individual factor – reported by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) – are depicted in Table 1. In this study, the total reliability of the questionnaire was calculated via Cronbach’s alpha which was found to be 0.91. 4.2.2. EQ test To evaluate language teachers’ EI, the researchers employed the ‘‘Bar-On EI test” which was designed by Bar-On in 1980. The Bar-On EI test, called the emotional quotient inventory (EQ-I), is a self report measure of emotionally and socially intelligent behavior that provides an estimate of emotional-social intelligence (BarOn, 1997). The test includes 133 items in the form of short sentences which measure five broad areas of skills and 15 factorial components (discussed in Bar-On’s model). The questionnaire takes nearly 40 min to complete. It employs a 5 point response scale with a textual response format ranging from ‘very seldom’ or ‘not true of me’ to ‘very often’ or ‘true of me’. Each item has the value of 5 ranging to 1. In the present study, a Persian version of the EQ test was applied. According to Dehshiri (2003), this test and its subscales do have reliability and validity in Iranian culture. To analyze the questionnaire in Iran, Dehshiri chose a group of 250 university students in Tehran and analyzed the norms of the test. As he states, the questionnaire has generally good internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and construct validity. With the adapted version in Iran, the Cornbach’s alpha coefficient was found to be 0.76 and the results of the factor analysis provided some support for the inventory hypothesized structure (Dehshiri, 2003). In this study, the total reliability of the questionnaire, estimated via Cronbach’s alpha, was 0.80. 4.3. Data collection The study was carried out in several private Language Institutes (Marefat, Kish, Kish Air, College, Jahad-edaneshgahi, and ILI) in Mashhad between May 2008 and September 2008. The Institutes were selected based on credibility and feasibility criteria. These language institutes are among the most creditable Language Institutes in Mashhad. Besides, since the researchers have already taught or were teaching in the aforementioned Institutes, they benefited from the voluntary and warm participation and cooperation of the teachers. The participants were asked to take the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale and the EQ test. They took the questionnaires home, filled them in and submitted them to the researchers within a week. 180 questionnaires (90 EQ questionnaires & 90 efficacy questionnaires) were distributed, out of which 178 were returned to the researchers. To receive the reliable data, the researchers explained the purpose of completing the questionnaires and assured the participants that their data would be confidential; besides, the participants’ questionnaires were coded numerically and the confidentiality and anonymity considerations were observed. 4.4. Data analysis To ensure the normality of the distribution, descriptive statistics was employed. To determine the role of teachers’ EQ in their self-efficacy, a Pearson product-moment correlation was applied to the data. To find
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
713
Table 2 Descriptive statistics of EQ and self-efficacy.
EQ Self-efficacy
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
SD
89 89
349 116
572 208
470.16 166.68
53.68 18.56
Table 3 The results of correlation between teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy. Total self-efficacy Total EQ *
0.526*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05.
Table 4 The results of correlation between components of teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy. Self-efficacy Emotional self-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Self-actualization Independence Empathy Interpersonal-relationship Social responsibility Problem solving Reality testing Flexibility Stress tolerance Impulse control Happiness Optimism *
0.243* 0.360* 0.365* 0.298* 0.271* 0.280* 0. 459* 0.247* 0.406* 0.352* 0.381* 0.481* 0.376* 0.480* 0. 471*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05.
out which components of EQ might have more predictive power in predicting teachers’ self-efficacy, a regression analysis was run. 5. Results Table 2 summarizes the descriptive results of the two instruments – EQ and self-efficacy questionnaires – used in this study. To investigate the correlation between teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy, a Pearson product-moment correlation was applied. The results of correlation revealed that there is a significant correlation between EFL teachers’ EQ and their scores in self-efficacy (r = 0.526, p < 0.05) (see Table 3). It was also found that there is a statistically significant relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ self-efficacy and the 15 subscales which compose the total EQ. The relevant results are as follows: self-efficacy and (1) emotional self-awareness (r = 0.243, p < 0.05), (2) assertiveness (r = 0.360, p < 0.05), (3) self-regard (r = 0.365, p < 0.05), (4) self-actualization (r = 0.298, p < 0.05), (5) independence (r = 0.271, p < 0.05), (6) empathy (r = 0.280, p < 0.05), (7) interpersonal-relationship (r = 0.459, p < 0.05), (8) social responsibility (r = 0.247, p < 0.05), (9) problem solving (r = 0.406, p < 0.05), (10) reality testing (r = 0.352, p < 0.05), (11) flexibility (r = 0.381, p < 0.05), (12) stress tolerance (r = 0.481, p < 0.05), (13) impulse control (r = 0.376, p < 0.05), happiness (r = 0.480, p < 0.05), optimism (r = 0.471, p < 0.05) (see Table 4). To investigate which components of EQ might have more predictive power in predicting teacher’s self-efficacy and how other components contribute to this model, a regression analysis was run. As Table 5 illustrates, three subscales of EQ – emotional self-awareness, interpersonal-relationship, and problem solving – were
714
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Table 5 The results of regression analysis for teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy. Model
1 (Constant) Emotional self-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Self-actualization Independence Empathy Interpersonal-relationships Social responsibility Problem solving Reality testing Flexibility Stress tolerance Impulse control Happiness Optimism
Unstandardized coefficients
Standardized coefficients
B
Std. error
Beta
89.817 1.177 0.734 0.369 0.839 0.629 0.271 1.494 0.597 1.200 0.498 0.852 1.013 0.373 0.787 0.342
20.628 0.502 0.619 0.494 0.480 0.559 0.622 0.516 0.576 0.419 0.444 0.539 0.541 0.412 0.631 0.624
0.336 0.161 0.088 0.237 0.136 0.057 0.473 0.125 0.377 0.161 0.247 0.333 0.139 0.222 0.085
t
Sig.
4.354 2.347 1.187 0.747 1.747 1.126 0.435 2.898 1.038 2.864 1.122 1.581 1.873 0.906 1.247 0.548
0.000 0.022 0.239 0.457 0.085 0.264 0.665 0.005 0.303 0.005 0.266 0.118 0.065 0.368 0.216 0.585
Table 6 R2 table for EQ as the predictor of teachers’ self-efficacy. Model
R
R2
Adjusted R2
Std. error of the estimate
1
0.672a
0.451
0.338
15.098
Predictors: (Constant), optimism, social responsibility, self-regard, reality testing, problem solving, independence, empathy, assertiveness, self-actualization, flexibility, emotional self-awareness, impulse control, interpersonal relationships, stress tolerance, and happiness.
found to be good predictors of the dependent variable (self-efficacy). Among these three, emotional self-awareness was found to be the negative predictor while interpersonal-relationship and problem solving were found to be positive predictors of teachers’ self-efficacy (see Table 5). Table 6 displays the model summary statistics. The results indicate that the model containing all of the components of the EQ test can predict 45% of the dependent variable, i.e., teachers’ self-efficacy. The R value is 0.62 which shows the multiple correlation coefficients between teachers’ self-efficacy and the components of the EQ test. Its square value is 0.45. It indicates that about 45% of the variation in teaching efficacy can be explained by taking EI into account (see Table 6). 6. Discussion As stated earlier, the present study intends to investigate if there is any relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ EI and their sense of efficacy beliefs in Language Institutes. The results revealed that there is a significant positive relationship between EI and teaching efficacy. The size of this correlation indicates that generally high levels of EI are related to high levels of teacher efficacy. This is consistent with previous theoretical and empirical studies, though limited in the domain of L1 context, and quite spare in L2 context. Bandura (1997) discussed that ‘‘somatic information conveyed by physiological and emotional states” gives rise to efficacy beliefs (p. 106). Sutton and Wheatley (2003) proposed that part of the variation in teacher efficacy is due to variance in teachers’ emotions. In a similar study, Chan (2004) found that self-efficacy beliefs were significantly predicted by the components of EI (cited in Penrose et al. (2007)). The results of the present study also confirm the findings of Penrose et al. (2007) that there is a moderate association between EI and teacher selfefficacy of primary and secondary school teachers. They also contended that gender, age, and length of teaching experience did not moderate this relationship. To further analyze the construct of EI and its relation to occupational self-efficacy, Fabio and Palazzeschi (2008) conducted research on 169 Italian teachers and indicated that teacher self-efficacy was best explained by the intrapersonal dimension of EI.
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
715
Regarding the second research question, the findings revealed that among the 15 components of EQ, interpersonal-relationship and problem solving have the highest positive correlation with teacher efficacy. This is hardly surprising since according to current humanistic approaches of education, the teacher is not just a transmitter of information; there should also be a sound affective relationship between teachers and students. Wubbels et al. (1991) deemed the relationship between teacher and students the most significant aspect of classroom atmosphere. This is more evident in EFL settings, and even crucial in private Institutes where pair work, group work and discussion are the norm. In such a classroom, teacher’s support, empathy and cooperation are indispensable ingredients. Thus, the more the teacher attempts at creating an interactive supportive atmosphere, the more efficacious s/he feels in her/his capability to organize and execute courses of action required to successfully accomplish teaching tasks. This interactive aspect of L2 teaching in Institutes calls for reflective teachers who are able to recognize and respond appropriately to students’ emotions, motivate students who are reluctant to cooperate as a result of repressed fear or anxiety, and provide appropriate challenges for very capable students. Needless to say, these mentioned abilities are all manifestations of teachers’ problem solving competence. On the other hand, it was found that, among the components of EQ, emotional self-awareness is a negative predictor of teacher self-efficacy. The reason why emotional self-awareness is a negative predictor may be due to the fact that in the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale there is no item related to identifying, stating and sharing teachers’ personal emotions. Rather, the scale seeks to discern teachers’ efficacy beliefs concerning student engagement, instructional strategies, and classroom management. To boost students’ engagement and to enhance mutually satisfactory relationships, teachers do not necessarily state their personal emotions overtly; instead, they normally attempt to identify students’ emotions, modify inhibition and debilitative emotional states to initiation and facilitative emotions, and calm and motivate defiant students. In summary, this study enriches the literature regarding teachers’ EI and self-efficacy by exploring the existence and extent of the relationship between these two affective aspects in EFL contexts. Typically in EFL contexts, establishing interaction with and among students, enhancing group dynamics, reducing inhibition and anxiety, and facilitating empathetic communication, are indispensable components of the EFL teachers’ profession. 7. Conclusions In essence, the yielded results of the current study lead to the conclusion that enhancing teachers’ EI tends to have a positive influence on their sense of efficacy. This in turn may lead to effective teaching and accordingly to successful student achievement since a strong sense of teacher efficacy has been found to be associated with teachers’ pedagogical success (Ghanizadeh and Moafian, in press) and student characteristics such as motivation, achievement, and efficacy (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Previous studies have also pointed to the role of teacher efficacy in shaping students’ attitudes toward school and subject matter, i.e., the higher the teaching efficacy of a teacher, the greater the students’ interest in school and learning materials (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Hence, it is expected that encouraging and assisting teachers to gauge, manipulate, and improve their emotional stands, create greater student satisfaction with teachers and schools. According to Bar-on (2000), EI develops over time and can be improved through training, programming, and therapy. In light of the obtained results and by considering Bar-on’s views, we can justify exploiting and developing courses for EFL teachers focusing on skills associated with EI. These courses are expected to help teachers manipulate their emotions appropriately, shift undesirable emotional states to more productive ones, understand the link between emotions, thoughts and actions, attract and sustain rewarding interpersonal relationships in the classroom, and be sensitive to students’ emotions. The findings of the current study, however, must be treated with caution. To the researchers’ best knowledge, this is the first attempt to explore the relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy in an Institutional context. Thus, this study should be replicated to find out whether similar results can be obtained elsewhere. In addition, in this study, teachers’ gender was not considered. In terms of the relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and self-efficacy with respect to their gender, the research should be done with sufficient numbers of participants of each sex. Since this study was conducted only in private Language Institutes, further research needs to be carried out at high schools in order to compare the results.
716
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Appendix. Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (long form)
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
717
References Anderson, L., 2004. Increasing Teacher Effectiveness, second ed. UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning. (retrieved July 2007). Ashton, P.T., Olejnik, S., Crocker, L., McAuliffe, M., 1982. Measurement problems in the study of teachers’ sense of efficacy. In: Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. Bandura, A., 1997. Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman, New York, NY. Bar-On, R., 1997. The Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-I): Technical Manual. Multi-Health Systems, Toronto. Bar-On, R., 2000. Emotional and social intelligence. Insights from the emotional quotient inventory (EQ-I). In: Bar-On, R., Parker, J.D. (Eds.), The Handbook of Emotional Intelligence. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 363–388. Boyatzis, R.E., 2006. Using tipping points of emotional intelligence and cognitive competencies to predict financial performance of leaders. Psicothema 18 (Suppl.), 124–131. Brackett, M.A., Salovey, P., 2006. Measuring emotional intelligence with the Mayer–Salovey–Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Psicothema 18 (Suppl.), 34–41. Carmeli, A., 2003. The relationship between emotional intelligence and work attitudes, behavior and outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology 18 (8), 788–813. Chan, D.W., 2004. Perceived emotional intelligence and self-efficacy among Chinese secondary school teachers in Hong Kong. Personality and Individual Differences 36 (8), 1781–1795. Dehshiri, R., 2003. The Reliability and Validity of EQ-I in Iran’s Context, Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Allame Tabatabaee University, Tehran, Iran. Fabio, A.D., Palazzeschi, L., 2008. Emotional intelligence and self-efficacy in a sample of Italian high school teachers. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal 36 (3), 315–326. Gardner, H., 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, New York. Ghanizadeh, A., Moafian, F., in press. The relationship between iranian EFL teachers’ sense of self-efficacy and their pedagogical success in Language Institutes. Asian EFL Journal. Gibson, A., Dembo, M., 1984. Teacher efficacy: a construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology 76 (4), 569–582. Gil-Olarte, P., Palomera, R., Brackett, M.A., 2006. Relating emotional intelligence to social competence and academic achievement in high school students. Psicothema 18 (Suppl.), 118–123. Goleman, D., 1995. Emotional Intelligence. Bantam, New York. Goleman, D., 1998. Working with Emotional Intelligence. Bantam, New York. Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., 1984. Testing the side-bet theory of organizational commitment: some methodological considerations. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance 17, 289–298. Mortiboys, A., 2005. Teaching with Emotional Intelligence: A Step-by-Step Guide for Higher and Further Education Professionals. Routledge, London. Pajares, M.F., 1992. Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: clearing up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research 62 (3), 307–332. Pajares, M.F., 2002. Self-efficacy Beliefs in Academic Contexts: An Outline. (retrieved September 2008). Pajares, F., Schunk, D., 2001. Self-beliefs and school success: self-efficacy, self-concept, and school achievement. In: Riding, R., Rayner, S. (Eds.), Perception. Ablex Publishing, London, pp. 239–266. Penrose, A., Perry, C., Bell, I., 2007. Emotional intelligence and teacher self-efficacy: the contribution of teacher status and length of experience. Issues in Educational Research 17 (1), 107–126. Ross, J.A., 1994. Beliefs that make a difference: the origins and impacts of teacher efficacy. In: Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies. Salami, S.O., 2007. Relationship of emotional intelligence and self-efficacy to work attitudes among secondary school teachers in southwestern Nigeria. Essays in Education 20, 43–56. Schutte, N.S., Malouff, J.M., Hall, L.E., Haggerty, D.J., Cooper, J.T., Golden, C.J., Dornheim, L., 1998. Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences 25, 167–177. Siebert, M.C., 2006. An Examination of Students’ Perceptions of Goal Orientation in the Classroom and Teachers’ Beliefs about Intelligence and Teacher Efficacy, Ph.D. Dissertation. Kansas State University, UMI Number: 3244639. Sutton, R.E., Wheatley, K.F., 2003. Teachers’ emotions and teaching: a review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review 15 (4), 327–358. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., 2001. Teacher efficacy: capturing and elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education 17, 783–805. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., Hoy, W.K., 1998. Teacher efficacy: its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research 68, 202–248. Thorndike, R.K., 1920. Intelligence and its uses. Harper’s Magazine 140, 227–335. Williams, M., Burden, R., 2000. Psychology for language teachers: a social constructivist approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Woolfolk Hoy, A.W., Spero, R.B., 2000. Changes in Teacher Efficacy during the Early Years of Teaching: An Exploratory Study. (retrieved July 2007).
718
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Wubbels, T., Levy, J., 1991. A comparison of interpersonal behaviour of Dutch and American Teachers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 15, 1–18. Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., Hooymayers, H., 1991. Interpersonal teacher behaviour in the classroom. In: Faser, B.J., Walberg, H.J. (Eds.), Educational Environments: Evaluation, Antecedents and Consequences. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 141–160.
System 37 (2009) 708–718 www.elsevier.com/locate/system
The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in Language Institutes Fatemeh Moafian *, Afsaneh Ghanizadeh English Faculty, Azad University, Mashhad, Iran Received 17 February 2009; received in revised form 26 May 2009; accepted 11 June 2009
Abstract The study reported in this paper was conducted to examine the relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy in Language Institutes. To this end, 89 EFL teachers were selected from different Language Institutes in Mashhad, a city in north-east of Iran. The participants were asked to complete the ‘‘Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale” and the ‘‘Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire”. Data analysis and statistical calculations revealed that there is a significant relationship between the teachers’ emotional intelligence and their self-efficacy. To investigate which components of emotional intelligence might have more predictive power in predicting teacher’s self-efficacy, regression analysis was run. Three subscales of emotional intelligence – emotional self-awareness, interpersonal-relationship, and problem solving – were found to be good predictors of teacher self-efficacy. The conclusions and implications of the research were discussed with reference to the earlier findings. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Emotional intelligence; English language teachers; Language institutes; Questionnaire; Self-efficacy
1. Introduction There is substantial evidence from recent research that teachers have great potential to affect students’ educational outcomes (Anderson, 2004). The teachers’ role is not limited to the transmission of knowledge. It encompasses teaching learners how to learn and includes boosting their confidence, motivating, enhancing self-esteem and organizing an appropriate learning environment (Williams and Burden, 2000). Studying affective characteristics among teachers is, therefore, one promising area of research that has the potential to shed light on what constitutes effective teaching. Wubbels and Levy (1991) contended that there is a strong relationship between teachers’ affective traits and learners’ emotional achievement. Furthermore, Mortiboys (2005)
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 5116614752, mobile: +98 9355691781. E-mail addresses: f_moafi[email protected] (F. Moafian), [email protected] (A. Ghanizadeh).
0346-251X/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.system.2009.09.014
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
709
argued that the way the teacher manipulates his/her own emotions and those of learners will increase the chances of learners’ engagement, motivation, and collaboration. A number of studies (e.g., Boyatzis, 2006; Carmeli, 2003; Schutte et al., 1998) have reported a positive relationship between different affective traits, in particular, emotional intelligence (EI), and job attitudes such as affective commitment. Affective commitment, one of the core constructs of carrier and organizational commitment, is defined as ‘‘positive feelings of identification with, attachment to and involvement in the work of the organization” (Meyer and Allen, 1984, p. 292). As Carmeli (2003) noted, emotionally intelligent individuals are expected to recognize, manage, and use their emotions to manipulate the ensuing obstacles and prevent their negative effects on attitudes towards their profession (cited in Salami (2007)). This is particularly true when it comes to professions such as teaching, with its high levels of complexity and constant interaction. Nevertheless, a review of the literature on teachers’ EI and its role in shaping their attitudes and beliefs, in particular their level of self-efficacy, reveals that EI has not received enough attention in the realm of EFL teaching. Definitely, the dearth of research in this area provides a sufficient reason to undertake further investigation into examining the relationship between EFL teachers’ EI and their self-efficacy expectations. 2. Review of the literature on EI 2.1. The origin and definition of EI The history of EI originated from the concept of social intelligence. Thorndike in 1920 viewed EI through the lens of social intelligence and he mentioned that social intelligence is the ability to empathize with others and act wisely in human relationships (cited in Goleman (1998)), but his views were not taken seriously until years later. In 1948, emotional thought was considered to be in the realm of intelligence. No serious attempt was taken in this field until the mid years of the 1980s, when Thorndike’s view was born again in the works of Howard Gardner (Goleman, 1998). Gardner (1983) introduced eight different types of intelligences, one of which, the personal intelligence, made way for the extensive development of EI. Finally, in 1990 Mayer and Salovey, based on Gardner’s view and emphasis on individual differences, introduced their complete model of EI and defined it thoroughly (Bar-On, 1997). Mayer and Salovey’s findings of EI were popularized in Daniel Goleman’s books, emotional intelligence and working with emotional intelligence in the years 1995 and 1998, respectively. Later on Bar-On suggested that since EI is an important element in one’s life showing and predicting success, there is a dire need to measure, operationalize and quantify this construct (Bar-On, 1997). In fact, finding a way to measure and enhance EI seemed to be inevitable. In the year 1997, Bar-On, using his psychological experiences, made his emotional quotient (EQ) questionnaire which is an appropriate test to measure EI. Bar-On coined the term EQ for his measure. He defined EI as a collection of capabilities, competencies and non-cognitive skills that have an effect on a person’s abilities to gain success in the face of environmental pressures. In other words, he believed that EI is the ability to understand emotions and how such emotions influence interpersonal relationships (Bar-On, 2000). 2.2. Bar-On model of EI Bar-On (2000) believed that EI is a non-cognitive intelligence which is an important factor in determining one’s ability to succeed in life and get along in the world. Bar-On identified five major scales and 15 subscales which contribute to the emotional energy and self motivation required to cope with daily environmental demands and difficulties as follows: (1) Intrapersonal: managing oneself, the ability to know one’s emotions. (a) Emotional self-awareness (the ability to be aware of, recognize and understand one’s emotions). (b) Assertiveness (the ability to express one’s feelings, beliefs, thoughts and to defend one’s right). (c) Self-regard (the ability to be aware of, understand, accept and respect oneself). (d) Self-actualization (the ability to realize and reach one’s potential). (e) Independence (the ability to be self-directed and self-reliant in one’s thinking and actions and to be free from emotional dependency).
710
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
(2) Interpersonal: managing relationships with others. (a) Empathy (the ability to understand and appreciate others’ feelings). (b) Interpersonal-relationship (the ability to establish and maintain mutually satisfying relationships that are characterized by emotional closeness and intimacy and by giving and receiving affection). (c) Social responsibility (the ability to demonstrate oneself as a cooperative, contributing and constructive member of one’s social group). (3) Adaptability: ability to adjust to change. (a) Problem solving (the ability to effectively solve problems). (b) Reality testing (the ability to validate one’s feelings and thoughts by assessing the correspondence between what is subjectively experienced and what objectively exists). (c) Flexibility (the ability to adjust one’s feelings/thoughts to change). (4) Stress management: controlling stress (a) Stress tolerance (the ability to manage one’s strong emotions, adverse events, and stressful conditions by positively coping with problems). (b) Impulse control (the ability to control one’s emotions and resist an impulse to act). (5) General mood: the ability to be optimistic and positive as well as to enjoy life. (a) Happiness (the ability to feel satisfied with life and to have fun). (b) Optimism (the ability to look at the brighter side of life and maintain a positive attitude in the face of problems). 3. Review of the literature on self-efficacy 3.1. Sources of self-efficacy beliefs Perceived self-efficacy, i.e., ‘‘beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required producing given attainments” (Bandura, 1997, p. 3), can be developed by four main sources of influence. Bandura (1997) postulated these sources of efficacy expectations as: mastery experience, also called enactive self-mastery, vicarious experience, also called role-modeling, social or verbal persuasion, and arousal or physiological and emotional states. The most prevailing and powerful influence on efficacy is mastery experience through which successful performance of the behavior increases self-efficacy for that behavior. The perception that a performance has been successful enhances perceived self-efficacy and ensures future proficiency and success. In contrast, the perception that a performance has been a failure weakens efficacy beliefs and leads to the expectation that future performance will also be inefficient (Bandura, 1997). The second influential factor originates from observing other similar people perform a behavior successfully. It provides people with ideas about successful manner. In contrast, observing similar people who fail lowers the individual’s confidence and subsequently undermines their efforts (Bandura, 1997). A third source of influence is social or verbal persuasion received from others. Successful persuaders foster people’s beliefs in their capabilities, while at the same time, ensure that the visualized success is achievable. Negative persuasion, on the other hand, may tend to defeat and lower self-beliefs. The most contributing effect of social persuasion pivots around initiating the task, attempting new strategies, and trying hard to succeed (Pajares, 2002). Psychological and affective states, such as stress, anxiety, and excitement also provide information about efficacy perception and boost the feeling of proficiency. Hence, trying to reduce an individual’s stress and anxiety and modify negative debilitative states to positive facilitative states plays an influential role in amending perceived self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997). 3.2. Teacher’s self-efficacy A teacher’s sense of efficacy has been found to be associated with student characteristics such as motivation, achievement, and efficacy (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Teacher efficacy is defined as ‘‘the teacher’s belief in his or her capability to organize and execute courses of action required to successfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular context” (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998, p. 22).
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
711
A plethora of studies has demonstrated the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and their instructional behaviors. For instance, Pajares (1992) found a strong relationship between teachers’ educational beliefs and their lesson planning, instructional decisions, classroom practices, and subsequent teaching behaviors. He concluded that ‘‘beliefs are far more influential than knowledge in determining how individuals organize and define tasks and problems and are stronger predictors of behavior” (Pajares, 1992, p. 311). On the other hand, teachers with a low level of efficacy have been found to be cynical not only about their own abilities, but also the abilities of their students and colleagues (Siebert, 2006). They also tend to undermine students’ cognitive development as well as students’ judgments of their own capabilities (Pajares and Schunk, 2001, cited in Siebert (2006)). To determine how teachers’ efficacy affects student achievement, Ross (1994) scrutinized 88 teacher efficacy studies and contended that teachers with a higher sense of efficacy are more likely to: (1) learn and use new approaches and strategies for teaching, (2) use management techniques that enhance student autonomy and diminish student control, (3) provide special assistance to low achieving students, (4) build students’ self perceptions of their academic skills, (5) set attainable goals, and (6) persist in the face of student failure (cited in Woolfolk Hoy and Spero (2000, p. 6)) In essence, the abovementioned studies point towards the perception that teachers’ efficacy beliefs are decisive in constructing an educational atmosphere that incites students’ achievement. 3.2.1. Purpose of the study As noted earlier, much research has been conducted on EI (e.g., Brackett and Salovey, 2006; Carmeli, 2003; Schutte et al., 1998) and on self-efficacy (e.g., Ross, 1994; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998), but little (Chan, 2004; Fabio and Palazzeschi, 2008; Penrose et al., 2007) has been carried out or reported on the relationship between these two; however, those studies are limited to the L1 environment. Since these two factors, EI and efficacy, are of current concern in all levels of education (Gil-Olarte et al., 2006; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998) and since they contribute to teaching effectiveness (Mortiboys, 2005; Pajares, 1992), it seems that some research should be carried out in the EFL realm to examine if and how these two factors are related. In summary, the present study seeks to investigate the relationship between EFL teachers’ EI and their self-efficacy beliefs. It also seeks to determine how much teachers’ EI contributes to the prediction of their sense of efficacy. To this end, the following two research questions were posed and investigated in this study: (1) Is there any relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and their sense of self-efficacy? (2) Is there any relationship between the different subscales of teachers’ EQ and self-efficacy? 4. Method 4.1. Participants The participants consisted of 89 Iranian EFL teachers aged between 20 and 45 years old (M = 26.87, SD = 5.09) with 1–20 years of teaching experience (M = 5.53, SD = 3.5). There were 73 females and 16 males from different socio-economic backgrounds. They mostly majored in different branches of English – English Literature (20 B.A., 1 M.A.), English Teaching (13 B.A., 18 M.A.), English Translation (6 B.A.) – and those teachers who did not major in English were duly qualified to teach it. 4.2. Instruments 4.2.1. Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (long form) Reviewing the existing measures on teacher’s self-efficacy (such as, the Webb Efficacy Scale developed by Ashton et al. (1982), including seven items; the teacher efficacy scale by Gibson and Dembo (1984), including 30 items on a 6 point Likert scale; and Bandura’s teacher efficacy scale, 1997, comprising 30 items on a 9 point scale), the researchers decided to utilize the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale designed by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy, due to its comprehensiveness, integrity, and ease of administration. The Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale, also called Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES), encompasses two versions: long form
712
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Table 1 Reliability reports of OSTES.
OSTES F1 F2 F3
Mean
SD
Alpha
7.1 7.3 7.3 6.7
0.94 1.1 1.1 1.1
0.94 0.87 0.91 0.90
(including 24 items) and short form (including 12 items). In the current study the long form was applied which includes three subscales: (1) efficacy in student engagement (F1), (2) efficacy in instructional strategies (F2), and (3) efficacy in classroom management (F3). Each subscale loads equally on eight items, and every item is measured on a 9 point scale anchored with the notations: ‘‘nothing, very little, some influence, quite a bit, a great deal.” This scale seeks to capture the multi-faceted nature of teachers’ efficacy beliefs in a concise manner, without becoming too specific or too general (see Appendix). The total reliability and the reliability of each individual factor – reported by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) – are depicted in Table 1. In this study, the total reliability of the questionnaire was calculated via Cronbach’s alpha which was found to be 0.91. 4.2.2. EQ test To evaluate language teachers’ EI, the researchers employed the ‘‘Bar-On EI test” which was designed by Bar-On in 1980. The Bar-On EI test, called the emotional quotient inventory (EQ-I), is a self report measure of emotionally and socially intelligent behavior that provides an estimate of emotional-social intelligence (BarOn, 1997). The test includes 133 items in the form of short sentences which measure five broad areas of skills and 15 factorial components (discussed in Bar-On’s model). The questionnaire takes nearly 40 min to complete. It employs a 5 point response scale with a textual response format ranging from ‘very seldom’ or ‘not true of me’ to ‘very often’ or ‘true of me’. Each item has the value of 5 ranging to 1. In the present study, a Persian version of the EQ test was applied. According to Dehshiri (2003), this test and its subscales do have reliability and validity in Iranian culture. To analyze the questionnaire in Iran, Dehshiri chose a group of 250 university students in Tehran and analyzed the norms of the test. As he states, the questionnaire has generally good internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and construct validity. With the adapted version in Iran, the Cornbach’s alpha coefficient was found to be 0.76 and the results of the factor analysis provided some support for the inventory hypothesized structure (Dehshiri, 2003). In this study, the total reliability of the questionnaire, estimated via Cronbach’s alpha, was 0.80. 4.3. Data collection The study was carried out in several private Language Institutes (Marefat, Kish, Kish Air, College, Jahad-edaneshgahi, and ILI) in Mashhad between May 2008 and September 2008. The Institutes were selected based on credibility and feasibility criteria. These language institutes are among the most creditable Language Institutes in Mashhad. Besides, since the researchers have already taught or were teaching in the aforementioned Institutes, they benefited from the voluntary and warm participation and cooperation of the teachers. The participants were asked to take the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale and the EQ test. They took the questionnaires home, filled them in and submitted them to the researchers within a week. 180 questionnaires (90 EQ questionnaires & 90 efficacy questionnaires) were distributed, out of which 178 were returned to the researchers. To receive the reliable data, the researchers explained the purpose of completing the questionnaires and assured the participants that their data would be confidential; besides, the participants’ questionnaires were coded numerically and the confidentiality and anonymity considerations were observed. 4.4. Data analysis To ensure the normality of the distribution, descriptive statistics was employed. To determine the role of teachers’ EQ in their self-efficacy, a Pearson product-moment correlation was applied to the data. To find
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
713
Table 2 Descriptive statistics of EQ and self-efficacy.
EQ Self-efficacy
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
SD
89 89
349 116
572 208
470.16 166.68
53.68 18.56
Table 3 The results of correlation between teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy. Total self-efficacy Total EQ *
0.526*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05.
Table 4 The results of correlation between components of teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy. Self-efficacy Emotional self-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Self-actualization Independence Empathy Interpersonal-relationship Social responsibility Problem solving Reality testing Flexibility Stress tolerance Impulse control Happiness Optimism *
0.243* 0.360* 0.365* 0.298* 0.271* 0.280* 0. 459* 0.247* 0.406* 0.352* 0.381* 0.481* 0.376* 0.480* 0. 471*
Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.05.
out which components of EQ might have more predictive power in predicting teachers’ self-efficacy, a regression analysis was run. 5. Results Table 2 summarizes the descriptive results of the two instruments – EQ and self-efficacy questionnaires – used in this study. To investigate the correlation between teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy, a Pearson product-moment correlation was applied. The results of correlation revealed that there is a significant correlation between EFL teachers’ EQ and their scores in self-efficacy (r = 0.526, p < 0.05) (see Table 3). It was also found that there is a statistically significant relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ self-efficacy and the 15 subscales which compose the total EQ. The relevant results are as follows: self-efficacy and (1) emotional self-awareness (r = 0.243, p < 0.05), (2) assertiveness (r = 0.360, p < 0.05), (3) self-regard (r = 0.365, p < 0.05), (4) self-actualization (r = 0.298, p < 0.05), (5) independence (r = 0.271, p < 0.05), (6) empathy (r = 0.280, p < 0.05), (7) interpersonal-relationship (r = 0.459, p < 0.05), (8) social responsibility (r = 0.247, p < 0.05), (9) problem solving (r = 0.406, p < 0.05), (10) reality testing (r = 0.352, p < 0.05), (11) flexibility (r = 0.381, p < 0.05), (12) stress tolerance (r = 0.481, p < 0.05), (13) impulse control (r = 0.376, p < 0.05), happiness (r = 0.480, p < 0.05), optimism (r = 0.471, p < 0.05) (see Table 4). To investigate which components of EQ might have more predictive power in predicting teacher’s self-efficacy and how other components contribute to this model, a regression analysis was run. As Table 5 illustrates, three subscales of EQ – emotional self-awareness, interpersonal-relationship, and problem solving – were
714
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Table 5 The results of regression analysis for teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy. Model
1 (Constant) Emotional self-awareness Assertiveness Self-regard Self-actualization Independence Empathy Interpersonal-relationships Social responsibility Problem solving Reality testing Flexibility Stress tolerance Impulse control Happiness Optimism
Unstandardized coefficients
Standardized coefficients
B
Std. error
Beta
89.817 1.177 0.734 0.369 0.839 0.629 0.271 1.494 0.597 1.200 0.498 0.852 1.013 0.373 0.787 0.342
20.628 0.502 0.619 0.494 0.480 0.559 0.622 0.516 0.576 0.419 0.444 0.539 0.541 0.412 0.631 0.624
0.336 0.161 0.088 0.237 0.136 0.057 0.473 0.125 0.377 0.161 0.247 0.333 0.139 0.222 0.085
t
Sig.
4.354 2.347 1.187 0.747 1.747 1.126 0.435 2.898 1.038 2.864 1.122 1.581 1.873 0.906 1.247 0.548
0.000 0.022 0.239 0.457 0.085 0.264 0.665 0.005 0.303 0.005 0.266 0.118 0.065 0.368 0.216 0.585
Table 6 R2 table for EQ as the predictor of teachers’ self-efficacy. Model
R
R2
Adjusted R2
Std. error of the estimate
1
0.672a
0.451
0.338
15.098
Predictors: (Constant), optimism, social responsibility, self-regard, reality testing, problem solving, independence, empathy, assertiveness, self-actualization, flexibility, emotional self-awareness, impulse control, interpersonal relationships, stress tolerance, and happiness.
found to be good predictors of the dependent variable (self-efficacy). Among these three, emotional self-awareness was found to be the negative predictor while interpersonal-relationship and problem solving were found to be positive predictors of teachers’ self-efficacy (see Table 5). Table 6 displays the model summary statistics. The results indicate that the model containing all of the components of the EQ test can predict 45% of the dependent variable, i.e., teachers’ self-efficacy. The R value is 0.62 which shows the multiple correlation coefficients between teachers’ self-efficacy and the components of the EQ test. Its square value is 0.45. It indicates that about 45% of the variation in teaching efficacy can be explained by taking EI into account (see Table 6). 6. Discussion As stated earlier, the present study intends to investigate if there is any relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ EI and their sense of efficacy beliefs in Language Institutes. The results revealed that there is a significant positive relationship between EI and teaching efficacy. The size of this correlation indicates that generally high levels of EI are related to high levels of teacher efficacy. This is consistent with previous theoretical and empirical studies, though limited in the domain of L1 context, and quite spare in L2 context. Bandura (1997) discussed that ‘‘somatic information conveyed by physiological and emotional states” gives rise to efficacy beliefs (p. 106). Sutton and Wheatley (2003) proposed that part of the variation in teacher efficacy is due to variance in teachers’ emotions. In a similar study, Chan (2004) found that self-efficacy beliefs were significantly predicted by the components of EI (cited in Penrose et al. (2007)). The results of the present study also confirm the findings of Penrose et al. (2007) that there is a moderate association between EI and teacher selfefficacy of primary and secondary school teachers. They also contended that gender, age, and length of teaching experience did not moderate this relationship. To further analyze the construct of EI and its relation to occupational self-efficacy, Fabio and Palazzeschi (2008) conducted research on 169 Italian teachers and indicated that teacher self-efficacy was best explained by the intrapersonal dimension of EI.
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
715
Regarding the second research question, the findings revealed that among the 15 components of EQ, interpersonal-relationship and problem solving have the highest positive correlation with teacher efficacy. This is hardly surprising since according to current humanistic approaches of education, the teacher is not just a transmitter of information; there should also be a sound affective relationship between teachers and students. Wubbels et al. (1991) deemed the relationship between teacher and students the most significant aspect of classroom atmosphere. This is more evident in EFL settings, and even crucial in private Institutes where pair work, group work and discussion are the norm. In such a classroom, teacher’s support, empathy and cooperation are indispensable ingredients. Thus, the more the teacher attempts at creating an interactive supportive atmosphere, the more efficacious s/he feels in her/his capability to organize and execute courses of action required to successfully accomplish teaching tasks. This interactive aspect of L2 teaching in Institutes calls for reflective teachers who are able to recognize and respond appropriately to students’ emotions, motivate students who are reluctant to cooperate as a result of repressed fear or anxiety, and provide appropriate challenges for very capable students. Needless to say, these mentioned abilities are all manifestations of teachers’ problem solving competence. On the other hand, it was found that, among the components of EQ, emotional self-awareness is a negative predictor of teacher self-efficacy. The reason why emotional self-awareness is a negative predictor may be due to the fact that in the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale there is no item related to identifying, stating and sharing teachers’ personal emotions. Rather, the scale seeks to discern teachers’ efficacy beliefs concerning student engagement, instructional strategies, and classroom management. To boost students’ engagement and to enhance mutually satisfactory relationships, teachers do not necessarily state their personal emotions overtly; instead, they normally attempt to identify students’ emotions, modify inhibition and debilitative emotional states to initiation and facilitative emotions, and calm and motivate defiant students. In summary, this study enriches the literature regarding teachers’ EI and self-efficacy by exploring the existence and extent of the relationship between these two affective aspects in EFL contexts. Typically in EFL contexts, establishing interaction with and among students, enhancing group dynamics, reducing inhibition and anxiety, and facilitating empathetic communication, are indispensable components of the EFL teachers’ profession. 7. Conclusions In essence, the yielded results of the current study lead to the conclusion that enhancing teachers’ EI tends to have a positive influence on their sense of efficacy. This in turn may lead to effective teaching and accordingly to successful student achievement since a strong sense of teacher efficacy has been found to be associated with teachers’ pedagogical success (Ghanizadeh and Moafian, in press) and student characteristics such as motivation, achievement, and efficacy (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Previous studies have also pointed to the role of teacher efficacy in shaping students’ attitudes toward school and subject matter, i.e., the higher the teaching efficacy of a teacher, the greater the students’ interest in school and learning materials (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Hence, it is expected that encouraging and assisting teachers to gauge, manipulate, and improve their emotional stands, create greater student satisfaction with teachers and schools. According to Bar-on (2000), EI develops over time and can be improved through training, programming, and therapy. In light of the obtained results and by considering Bar-on’s views, we can justify exploiting and developing courses for EFL teachers focusing on skills associated with EI. These courses are expected to help teachers manipulate their emotions appropriately, shift undesirable emotional states to more productive ones, understand the link between emotions, thoughts and actions, attract and sustain rewarding interpersonal relationships in the classroom, and be sensitive to students’ emotions. The findings of the current study, however, must be treated with caution. To the researchers’ best knowledge, this is the first attempt to explore the relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and their self-efficacy in an Institutional context. Thus, this study should be replicated to find out whether similar results can be obtained elsewhere. In addition, in this study, teachers’ gender was not considered. In terms of the relationship between EFL teachers’ EQ and self-efficacy with respect to their gender, the research should be done with sufficient numbers of participants of each sex. Since this study was conducted only in private Language Institutes, further research needs to be carried out at high schools in order to compare the results.
716
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Appendix. Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (long form)
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
717
References Anderson, L., 2004. Increasing Teacher Effectiveness, second ed. UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning.
718
F. Moafian, A. Ghanizadeh / System 37 (2009) 708–718
Wubbels, T., Levy, J., 1991. A comparison of interpersonal behaviour of Dutch and American Teachers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 15, 1–18. Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., Hooymayers, H., 1991. Interpersonal teacher behaviour in the classroom. In: Faser, B.J., Walberg, H.J. (Eds.), Educational Environments: Evaluation, Antecedents and Consequences. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 141–160.