Content uploaded by Lourdes Villardón
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lourdes Villardón on May 05, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
The European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences (eISSN: 2301-2218)
Teacher’ Self-Efficacy And Student Learning
Cristina Achurraa*, Lourdes Villardónb
Abstract
The teacher’s perception of their teaching self-efficacy includes a whole set of beliefs
about their own ability to teach and to exert a positive effect on student learning. These
beliefs are linked to behaviour patterns that teachers show in the classroom, and that
establish marked differences in the type of teaching and in the strategies and
methodologies used by teachers in their daily practice. This paper examines the results of a
study in which 71 teachers and over 200 students from the University of Deusto (Spain)
and the Catholic University of Temuco (Chile) took part. The aim of this study was to
analyse teachers’ beliefs and their relationship to students’ perceived learning.
© 2013 Published by C-crcs. Peer-review under responsibility of Editor or Guest Editor of the EJSBS.
Keywords: Teaching self-efficacy; teaching quality; learning outcomes; university students Corresponding
author. Tel.: 00 34 94 4139000; fax: 0034 94 4139089 E-mail address: cristina.achurra@deusto.es
University of Deusto
a, b
, (SPAIN) Avda. Universidades, 24, 48007 Bilbao, (Spain)
http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/FutureAcademy/ejsbs(2301-2218).2012.2.17
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
367
1. Introduction:
One of the major challenges facing university teachers is to adapt and include
student-centred strategies, methodologies and techniques that foster the
competence to be learnt and encourage independent learning.
The success of these teaching activities and practices depends to a great
extent on teachers’ self perception and confidence in their professional capacity to
face up to the changes involved in learning-centred models (Rodríguez, Núñez,
Valle, Blas & Rosario, 2009).
This self perception, called self-efficacy, plays a major role in how teachers
select assignments and activities, shaping their efforts and perseverance when
addressing certain challenges, and even in their emotional response to difficult
situations. Self-efficacy ultimately accounts for a cognitive construct that mediates
between knowledge and action. Along with other variables, this determines the
success of the actions themselves (Prieto, 2003).
1. Effects of self-efficacy on teaching and learning
Numerous studies point out that teachers with high self-efficacy levels are
more open to new ideas, show greater willingness to try new teaching methods,
design and organise their classes better, and are more enthusiastic and satisfied
with their teaching (Allinder, 1994; Ashton, 1985; Bamburg, 2004; Guskey, 1998;
Tschannen-Moran &Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). In short, self-efficacy beliefs affect
368
368
teaching practice and the attitude towards the educational process and therefore, the
quality of teaching and learning.
In recent decades, there has been a huge interest in analysing the relationship
between teachers’ self-efficacy and students’ academic achievement (Chacón,
2006).
McLaughlin y Marsh (1978) were the first researchers to demonstrate the
relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and student achievement (Prieto,
2007). Since then, other scholars on the subject have confirmed this relationship
(Armor et al., 1976; Ashton & Webb, 1986; Caprara, Barabaranello, Steca &
Malone, 2006; Dee and Hoy, 2008; Gibson & Dembo, 1984; Hoy and Wollfolk,
1990; Muijs & Rejnolds, 2001; Ross, 1992; Skaalvik &Skaalvik, 2007; Wolters &
Daugherty, 2007).
However, the perception of efficacy is not only related to students’ outcomes
in terms of performance, but they are also related to motivation (Ashton & Webb,
1986) and to students’ self-perceived efficacy (Anderson, Greene & Loewen, 1988;
Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2007).
2. Purpose of the Study:
The aim of this study was to analyse teachers’ (self-efficacy) beliefs in
relation to university students’ self-perceived learning.
3. Research Methods:
3.1 Sample
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
369
A. Sample of teachers
The study sample consisted of 71 teachers from two universities, 45 (63.4%)
of whom were from the University of Deusto (Spain) and 26 (36.6%) from the
University of Temuco (Chile). The average age of participants was 42.21 years (sd
= 8.56), with a minimum value of 28 and a maximum value of 65. Regarding
gender, 53 were women (74.6%) and 18 men (25.4%).
B. Sample of students
A total of 2,195 students took part in the study. 64.3% (1411) were from the
University of Deusto and 35.7% (784) from Temuco University. The average age
of participants was 20.85 years (sd = 3.11), with a minimum value of 17 and a
maximum value of 63. Regarding gender, 698 were women (31.8%) and 1339 men
(61%). 7.2% of students gave no information on gender.
3.2 Procedure
A. Collection of information from teachers
For the selection of the sample, we contacted lecturers from the University of
Deusto and the Catholic University of Temuco, who were informed about the
research objectives and methodology, and were invited to participate in the study
voluntarily.
The teachers who agreed to participate had to respond on a scale through a
computer application. The application time was approximately 20 minutes. The
scale was used at the beginning of the course.
370
370
B. Collection of information from students
All teachers participating in the study were asked to give one hour of their
teaching time to apply the questionnaire to their students.
This questionnaire was applied in the classroom at the end of the course.
Questionnaires were given to the group and students were allowed approximately
20 minutes to fill them in. Students were informed of the aims of the study, the
confidentiality of the information collected and that participation was voluntary.
The application time was approximately 15 minutes.
3.3 Instruments
Teacher self-efficacy
Teachers were administered the College Teaching Self-Efficacy Scale (Prieto,
2003). This scale is mainly used to assess self-efficacy beliefs in different areas of
teaching practice. This is an instrument composed of 44 items that correspond to 4
fundamental dimensions of university teaching: students’ involvement in learning,
preparing and planning lectures, Interaction with students and the Assessment of
learning and the teaching role itself. For each of the dimensions, teachers
established the extent to which they felt able to carry out the proposed teaching
activities on a 6-point Likert-type response scale (1= little capable, 6 = very
capable).
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
371
The tool has confirmed the factor structure and has shown good internal
consistency in the scales, with alpha coefficients ranging between .83 and .87 and
an overall reliability of α= .95, with a sample of 362 university lecturers (Prieto,
2003). Our study shows alpha coefficients ranging between .86 and .88 and the
overall reliability is .95.
Perceived Learning
Students’ self-perceived learning scale. Students’ self-perceived learning
was collected through a scale developed for this study, which consisted of 11 items
where students had to determine the extent to which they had gained knowledge
and skills. The scale had 4 possible answers (1=nothing 2=a little, 3=fair amount,
4= quite a lot). The reliability found in the instrument was .91.
The tools used for both samples were revised by a team of professionals to
improve the expression and preparation of items, so that they could capture their
meaning to a greater extent, both for the Spanish and the Chilean samples.
3.4. Statistical Analyses
In order to know the level of teachers’ self-efficacy, a number of descriptive
analyses were performed for each of the survey dimensions. The relationship
between self-efficacy and students’ perceptions of their learning was calculated by
Pearson’s r. To determine whether there were significant differences according to
nationality and to the degree of self-efficacy, a variance analysis was performed.
4. Findings:
372
372
4.1 Degree of teacher Self-efficacy
The descriptive analysis of the dimensions that make up the tool is presented
in Table 1. The mean total scale score is set to a value of 5.06 in a possible range of
1 to 6. The mean achieved by the dimensions that make up the scale are between a
value of 4.91 and 5.19, indicating that scores are high.
In none of the cases the asymmetry of the score distribution exceeds the
value 1, although in all cases it is a negative-type asymmetry, indicating a tendency
to accumulate cases with high values.
Although all dimensions have a high score, the highest score is Planning
(5.19) and the lowest is Learning Assessment (4.91), which shows that teachers feel
more self-confident in planning than in the evaluation function.
We analysed teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in relation to the University to
which they belonged. The mean scores and standard deviations are shown in Table
2.
With regard to teachers’ nationality, Chilean teachers score significantly
higher on overall Self-efficacy ( = 5.27) than their Spanish counterparts ( = 4.93).
By specifying dimensions, significant differences were found in the Student’s
involvement (F=13.32 p<.01), Classroom Interaction (F= 8.39 p<.01), Assessment
(F= 9.69 p<.01) and total Self-efficacy (F= 8.41 p<.01) dimensions, but not in the
Planning dimension.
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
373
4.2. Relationship between the level of teacher self-efficacy and perceived
learning outcomes
Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in general and in the Involvement and
Interaction dimensions had a significant, positive, and moderate correlation with
students’ perceived learning outcomes, but not in the Planning and Assessment
dimensions, where the relationship is not significant (see Table 3).
To examine whether there are significant differences in perceived learning
outcomes based on self-efficacy beliefs, we conducted a variance analysis
(ANOVA).
As can be seen in Table 4 with a significance level of p <0.01 and F = 6.17,
we can conclude that teachers with a higher perceived level of overall efficiency,
had students with greater perceptions of learning ( = 2.89) than teachers with lower
levels of efficacy ( = 2.74).
This relationship also appears in the Involvement and Interaction dimension.
That is, when teachers have more confidence in their ability to make students feel
actively involved in their learning process, perceived learning outcomes are higher
( = 2.91) than when the confidence level is lower in this area ( = 2.73).
Similarly, those teachers who feel more able to interact with students and
create a learning environment of trust and mutual respect, achieve a greater
perception of the learning acquired ( = 2.93) by their students than those with
lower perceived efficacy in this dimension ( = 2.71).
374
374
Regarding the effect size, as estimated by Cohen (1988), the differences
between learning outcomes and Overall self-efficacy dimensions, Involvement and
Interaction are great.
This is quite different in the Planning and Assessment dimensions, where the
mean difference between those students of teachers with low and high self-efficacy
does not reveal significant differences in perceived learning.
5. Conclusions:
From the analyses in this study we can conclude that the perceived self-
efficacy of teachers from both universities, Deusto and Temuco, is very high. And
it is particularly high in those strategies related to Planning and to the Interaction
with students and somewhat lower in those strategies related to Student’s active
involvement and to the Assessment of their learning and their own teaching
practice. Similar results were found in a study conducted by Prieto (2005).
These data indicate that beliefs are not necessarily uniform in the various
tasks required of teachers in their professional practice. This conclusion is backed
by the theory proposed by Bandura (1997) and Zimmerman (1996), focused on
how self-efficacy varies depending on the activity or task faced by teachers.
It is further noted that nationality marks significant differences in teachers’
self-efficacy levels. Teachers from Chile had a higher level both in Overall Self-
efficacy and in the dimensions related to Student Involvement in Learning,
Interaction and Assessment than Spanish teachers.
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
375
Similar results were derived from the Teaching and Learning International
Survey (TALIS) run by the OECD, which concluded that Spanish teachers’ self-
efficacy beliefs are usually low in comparison with those of other countries. This
may be partly due to the self-critical character of Spanish teachers (Ministerio,
2009).
Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs are significantly, but moderately related to
students’ perceived learning, except in the Planning and Assessment dimensions.
Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in general and in the Involvement and
Interaction dimensions have a significant, positive, and moderate correlation with
students’ perceived learning outcomes, but not with the Planning and Assessment
dimensions.
Teachers with higher levels of overall efficacy have students with higher
perceived learning levels than teachers with lower self-efficacy levels.
It can be observed that, as teachers feel more confident when successfully
performing the tasks analysed, students also have a higher perception of their
learning achievement, except in the tasks related to Planning and Assessment,
where the level of perceived efficacy does not affect students’ perceived outcomes.
This study could be completed in future research that took into account not
only the level of perceived self-efficacy but also the use teachers make of the
teaching strategies in the classroom. Thus, in addition to perceptions, we would
have data derived from direct observation of teaching.
376
376
Similarly, this study could be further enriched with evidence of learning
undertaken by students and not only with their perception of learning.
Teachers’ tendency to teach according to their self-efficacy beliefs raises a
reflection on practical proposals for the development of training programmes for
university lecturers.
Due to the enormous influence that this construct has on student teaching and
learning, it is essential to create a high sense of efficacy from the teachers’ initial
training since, according to the authors, once the perception of efficacy is
established in teachers’ belief system, this tends to be stable and resistant to change
(Achurra &Villardón, 2012; Chacón, 2004; Pajares 1992; Woolfolk Hoy &
Murphy, 2001).
A possible training intervention in all dimensions, but especially in relation
to the Assessment dimension, an area where teachers have a weaker sense of self-
efficacy, might improve and strengthen beliefs, thus affecting the quality of
university education.
However, despite the relevance that teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs may have
in teaching, they alone do not guarantee the effectiveness of teaching. They must
have the knowledge and skills needed to help students to achieve the desired
learning outcomes. The fact of considering oneself capable of teaching does not
guarantee by itself the quality of teaching; knowledge, training and teaching skills
are essential in any case to promote student learning.
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
377
6. References:
Achurra, C. & Villardón, L. (2012). The relationship between teacher self-
efficacy and their teaching practices. The 4th annual International Conference on
Education and New Learning Technologies. Barcelona (Spain). July, 2012.
Allinder, R. (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the instructional
practices of special education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education and
Special Education, 17, 86−95.
Anderson, R., Greene, M., & Loewen, P. (1988). Relationships among teachers'
and students' thinking skills, sense of efficacy, and student achievement.Alberta
Journal of Educational Research, 34,2, 148-165.
Armor, D., Conroy-Oseguera P., Cox M., King N., McDonnell L., Pascal A.,
Pauly E., & Zellman G. ( 1976). Analysis of the School Preferred Reading
Programs in Selected Los Angeles Minority Schools, REPORT NO. R-2007-
LAUSD. Santa Mónica, CA: Rand Corporation (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. 130 243).
Ashton, P. (1985). Motivation and Teachers´ Sense of Efficacy in C. Ames & R.
Ames (eds.). Research on Motivation in Education II: The Classroom Milieu.
Orlando. FL. Academic Press. 141-174.
Ashton, P. & Webb, R.B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers ´sense of
efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
Bamburg, J. (2004) Raising expectations to improve student learning. Retrieved
in January 2012 from
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/educatrs/leadrshp/le0bam.htm.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York. W.H.
Freeman.
Brouwers, A. & Tomic, W. (2000). A longitudinal study of teacher burnout and
perceived self-efficacy in classroom management. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 16, 239-253.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C. Steca, P. & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teacher self-
efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students' academic
achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of school Psychology, 44, 473-
490.
378
378
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.
Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Coladarci, T. (1992). Teachers' sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching.
Journal of Experimental Education, 60, 4. 323-337.
Chacón, C.T. (2006). Las creencias de autoeficacia: un aporte para la formación
del docente de inglés. Acción pedagógica, 15, 44-54.
Dee, K. & Hoy, W. (2008). "Maybe I can teach those kids." the influence of
contextual factors on student teachers' efficacy beliefs. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 24,1, 166-179.
Dembo, M. & Gibson, S. (1985). Teachers´ Sense of Efficacy: An important
factor in school improvement". Elementary School Journal, 86, 2, 173-184.
Garduño, L., Carrasco, M. & Raccanello. K. (2010). Los formadores de
docentes y la autoeficacia para la enseñanza en una muestra de escuelas normales
en el estado de Puebla. Perfiles Educativos. XXXII. 127, 85-104.
Ghaith, G.& Yaghi, H. (1997). Relationships among experience. teacher
efficacy. and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 451-458.
Gibson, S. & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: a constructo validation.
Journal of educational psychology, 76, 569-582
Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy. self-concept. and attitudes toward the
implementation of innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4,1, 63-69.
Hoy, W. & Woolfolk, A. (1993). Teachers´ Sense of Efficacy and the
Organizational Health of Schools. Elementary School Journal, 93, 4, 355-372.
Hoy. W. & Woolfolk. A. (1990). Socialization of student teachers. American
Educational research Journal, 27, 2, 279-300.
Issaou, G., Ferguson, R. & Van't Hooft, M. (2006). "Using Handheld-
Computers and Probeware in a Science Methods Course: Preservice teachers'
attitudes and self-efficacy". Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14,3,
501-529.
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
379
McLaughlin, N. y Marsh, D. (1978). Staff development and school change.
Teachers College Record, 80, 70-94.
Muijs, D. y Reynolds, D. (2001). Effective Teaching. Evidence and Practice.
London: Sage.
Pajares, F. (1992). Teachers´ beliefs in academic settings. Review of
Educational Research, 66, 4, 543-578.
Prieto, L. (2007). Autoeficacia del profesor universitario. Madrid: Narcea
Prieto, L. (2003). La autoeficacia en el contexto académico. Exploración
bibliográfica comentada. Retrieved in January 2007 from
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/prieto.pdf
Raudenbush, S., Rowen, B. & Cheong, Y. (1992). Contextual effect on the self-
perceived efficacy of high school teachers. Sociology of Education, 65, 150-167.
Rodríguez, S., Núñez, J. C., Valle, A. Blas, R. & Rosario, P. (2009). Auto-
eficacia docente, motivación del profesor y estrategias de enseñanza.
Psychological Writings vol. 3 Retrieved in March 2012 from:
http://www.redalyc.org/src/inicio/ArtPdfRed.jsp?iCve=271020403001.
Ross, J. (1994). Beliefs that make a difference. The originals and impacts of
teacher efficacy. In Garduño, L. Carrasco, M. & Raccanello, K. (2010). Los
formadores de docentes y la autoeficacia para la enseñanza en una muestra de
escuelas normales en el estado de Puebla. Perfiles Educativos. XXXII, 127, 85-104.
Ross, J. (1992).Teacher efficacy and the effect of coaching on student
achievement. Canadian Journal of Educational Research, 17,1, 51-65
Savran, A. & Çakýroðlu, J. (2003). Differencen between Elementary and
Secondary Preservice Science Teachers´Perceived Efficacy Beliefs and their
classroom management beliefs. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational
Technology - TOJET. 2 Retrieved in January 2012 from:
http://www.tojet.net/articles/v2i4/243.pdf
Skaalvik, E.M. & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and
relations with strain factors. perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher
burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 611-625.
TALIS (OCDE) (2009). Estudio Internacional sobre la enseñanza y
aprendizaje. Informe español 2009. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación.
380
380
Tschannen-Moran, M. & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of
self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 23, 6, 944-956.
Tschannen-Moran, M. & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing
an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
Wolters, C. A. & Daugherty, S.G. (2007). Goals structures and teachers' sense
of efficacy: Their relation and association to teaching experience and academic
level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 181-193.
Woolfolk Hoy, A, y P. K. Murphy. (2001). Teaching educational psychology to
the implicit mind. In B. Torff y R. Sterberg (Comps.). Understanding and teaching
the intuitive mind. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Zimmerman, B.J. (1996). Misconceptions, problems, and dimensions in
measuring self-efficacy. Symposium presented at the meeting of the American
Educational Association, New York.
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of Self-Efficacy in University Faculty
Dimensions M SD Asymmetry
Learning Assessment 4.91
0.54
-0.27
Student’s Active
Involvement
5.01
0.64
-0.84
Classroom Interaction
5.13
0.58
-0.81
Teaching Planning 5.19
0.50
-0.59
Overall self-efficacy 5.06
0.51
-0.51
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
381
Table 2. Mean and standard deviations of the Self-efficacy dimensions according to the University.
* Note: The dimensions where significant differences (p<.01) have been found are indicated in italics and bold.
Table 3. Correlations between Self-efficacy and perceived learning outcomes
University
Dimension
Statistics
Deusto,
n=36
Temuco
n=35
M 5.15 5.26 Teaching
planning SD 0.54 0.43
M 4.82 5.35 Student’s
active
involvement
SD 0.68 0.39
M 4.98 5.38 Classroom
interaction SD 0.55 0.55
M 4.77 5.16 Learning
assessment SD 0.56 0.41
M 4.93 5.27 Total Self-
efficacy SD 0.53 0.37
382
382
Table 4. Means and
standard deviation of
perceived learning
outcomes based on
teachers’ self-efficacy
levels.
Dimensions
Self-efficacy
Perceived
Learning
Outcomes. Interactions between Self-
efficacy and perceived learning
outcomes
Pearsons’
correlation
.30
Sig.
(bilateral)
.01
Overall self-
efficacy
N 71
Pearsons’
correlation
.21
Sig.
(bilateral)
.07
Planning
N 71
Pearsons’
Correlation
.35
Sig.
(bilateral)
.00
Involvement
N 71
Pearsons’
Correlation
.40
Sig.
(bilateral)
.00
Interaction
N 71
Pearsons’
Correlation
.21
Sig.
(bilateral)
.07
Assessment
N 71
Cristina Achurra, Lourdes Villardón/ EJSBS
383
Dimensions
Undergraduate
degree
Learning
outcomes
Mean N SD F Sig.
Effect
size
Low 2.74 31 0.19
-.63
Overall self-
efficacy High 2.89 40 0.27
6.17 .01
Low 2.77 36 0.23
-.45
Planning High 2.88 35 0.26
3.47 .06
Low 2.73 35 0.21
-.78
Involvement High 2.91 36 0.25
10.27 .00
Low 2.71 36 0.20
-.97
Interaction High 2.93 35 0.25
16.66 .00
Low 2.78 36 0.22
-.37
Assessment High 2.87 35 0.27
2.01 .16
*Note: The dimensions where significant differences have been found are indicated in italics and bold (p<.01)
