ArticlePDF Available

Slovak Pre-Service Teacher Self-Efficacy: Theoretical and Research Considerations



The concept of self-efficacy was originally developed by Albert Bandura, and has been defined as a personal belief that one is capable of performing in an appropriate and effective manner to attain certain goals. As such, self-efficacy is a self-system that controls most personal activity, including appropriate use of professional knowledge and skills. Teacher self-efficacy is a belief that teachers have about their abilities and skills as educators. Teacher self-efficacy has been shown to be an important characteristic of the teacher and one strongly related to success in teaching. Unfortunately, however, effective measurement of teacher self-efficacy has been limited in part by geography. Therefore, described herein is a validation study for the Teacher efficacy Scale in Slovakia. A shortened version of the original Gibson and Dembo questionnaire was translated into Slovak and administered to a sample of pre-service teachers in Bratislava. The obtained score data were factor-analyzed. Two relatively independent factors emerged: personal teaching efficacy and general teaching efficacy. The two factors accounted for 43.4 % of the explained variance and the coefficient alpha for each factor was.73. Preservice students' scores on both teaching self-efficacy and general teaching efficacy exceeded the midpoint of the scales, indicating they had positive self-efficacy. Comparisons with other studies with similar samples in three countries showed surprisingly similar results.
Gavora, Peter Slovak pre-service teacher self-efficacy : theoretical and research considerations.
In: The New educational Review. Vol. 21, No.. 2 (2010), pp. 17-30
Slovak Pre-Service Teacher Self-Efficacy: Theoretical and Research Considera-
Peter Gavora
The concept of self-efficacy was originally developed by Albert Bandura, and has been
defined as the personal belief that one is capable of performing in an appropriate and effective
manner to attain certain goals. As such, self-efficacy is a self-system that controls most per-
sonal activity, including appropriate use of professional knowledge and skills. Teacher self-ef-
ficacy is the belief that teachers have about their abilities and skills as educators. Teacher self-
efficacy has been shown to be an important characteristic of the teacher and one strongly re-
lated to success in teaching. Unfortunately, however, effective measurement of teacher self-
efficacy has been limited in part by geography. Therefore, described herein is a validation
study for the Teacher Efficacy Scale in Slovakia. A shortened version of the original Gibson
and Dembo questionnaire was translated into Slovak and administered to a sample of pre-ser-
vice teachers in Bratislava. The obtained score data were factor-analyzed. Two relatively in-
dependent factors emerged: personal teaching efficacy and general teaching efficacy. The two
factors accounted for 43.4 % of the explained variance and the coefficient alpha for each
factor was .73. Pre-service students’ scores on both teaching self-efficacy and general teach-
ing efficacy exceeded the midpoint of the scales, indicating they had positive self-efficacy.
Comparisons to other studies with similar samples in three countries showed surprisingly sim-
ilar results.
Key words: pre-service teachers, self-efficacy, social cognitive theory, efficacy expectations,
outcome expectations, Teacher Efficacy Scale, personal teaching efficacy, general teaching
Educational research has long been focused on attempting to identify factors that affect, and
specifically improve, teacher effectiveness. Questions addressed have included what personal
qualities do teachers actually possess, what are the ideal qualities of an effective teacher, and
what is the nature and extent of the differences between the ideal and real qualities of teach-
ers? A large portion of this research stream has been devoted to determining what educational
and subject matter knowledge and skills the teacher has, or should have, to be effective and
successful (e.g., Kolektív autorov, 2006; Lukášová-Kantorková, 2003; Spilková, 1997). How-
ever, there are other teacher characteristics besides professional knowledge and skills that are
important in teaching. In this paper we concentrate on teacher self-efficacy, a self-regulatory,
relatively broad, psychological belief system that influences most teacher behaviour, includ-
ing teaching performance.
The Nature of Teacher Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is the personal belief that one is capable of performing in an appropriate and
effective manner to attain certain goals (Ormrod, 2006). It exists in many domains of human
functioning, including both professional and private behaviour. Specifically in an educational
context, teacher self-efficacy is the teacher’s personal (i.e., self-perceived) belief in ability to
plan instruction and accomplish instructional objectives. It is in effect the conviction the
teacher has about his/her ability to teach pupils efficiently and effectively.
Teacher self-efficacy should be distinguished from teacher “competence,” which is usually in-
terpreted and/or applied to refer to (only) the teacher’s professional knowledge and skills.
Teacher self-efficacy is a broader concept, and in fact high self-efficacy underlies and enables
successful use of professional knowledge and skills, or conversely, low self-efficacy inhibits
effective use of professional knowledge and skills. Thus, teacher self-efficacy is a strong self-
regulatory characteristic that enables teachers to use their potentials to enhance pupils’
learning. It should be acknowledged that teacher self-efficacy is related to “perseverance;” the
stronger the self-efficacy, the greater the perseverance -- and the greater the perseverance, the
greater the likelihood that the teaching behaviours will be successful.
Teacher self-efficacy is a construct that was developed within the context of Bandura’s social-
cognitive theory. Bandura defined self-efficacy as the belief about one’s own capabilities to
organize and execute a certain task (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy beliefs influence thought
patterns and emotions, which in turn enable or inhibit actions. According to Bandura’s theory,
self-efficacy has two components: efficacy expectation and outcome expectancy. The
former is the conviction that one has the ability, knowledge, and skills to successfully execute
the behaviour or actions required to produce the desired outcome(s). The latter represents a
person’s estimate of the likely consequences (impact) of performing a task at the self-expec-
ted level of performance. That is, outcome expectancy is the belief that a given behaviour or
action will indeed lead to expected outcome(s). To be successful, the teacher must have both
high efficacy expectations and high outcome expectancy. If the teacher has the former and not
the latter, it is unlikely that the teacher will be successful teacher even if the teacher is profes-
sionally well-qualified.
According to Bandura’s theory, four sources” enhance development of high teacher self-effic-
acy: (a) mastery learning experiences, (b) vicarious experiences, (c) social persuasion, and (d)
physiological and emotional states.
Mastery teaching experiences are situations in which teachers demonstrate their own
teaching success, thus proving that they are competent teachers. “Enacted mastery (teach-
ing) experiences are the most influential source of [self-] efficacy information because
they provide the most authentic evidence of whether one can muster whatever it takes to
succeed. Success builds a robust belief in one’s personal efficacy” (Bandura, 1997, p. 80).
Basically, as the adage indicates, nothing succeeds like success.
Whenever teachers engage in teaching activities, they interpret their results and use these
interpretations to develop beliefs about their ability to engage in similar activities. If these
activities are consistently successful, they tend to raise self-efficacy or, conversely, if
these activities typically produce failure, self-efficacy is likely to be lowered. Therefore, if
a teacher initially has a low sense of efficacy, it will bring doubt about his/her abilities.
Such doubt likely will result in failure in teaching, and also reinforce low self-efficacy.
Further information about discordance between self-efficacy and action can be found in
Bandura (1997). Also, Zelina (1995) discussed the relationship between self-concept and
self-efficacy, and the importance of self-reflection in building self-efficacy.
Vicarious experience is learning from observation of the successes of other teachers. Ob-
serving and modelling successful teachers may generate expectations that teachers can
learn from successes of colleagues, which in turn, can result in their own positive self-ef-
ficacy. In brief, teachers can learn to be effective by watching the behaviours of others be-
ing effective.
Social persuasion by colleagues and superiors that a teacher can teach successfully will
enhance the teacher’s self-efficacy. For example, coaching and giving encouraging feed-
back are commonly used actions that likely influence teacher self-efficacy positively. Es-
sentially, emotional support builds a teacher’s belief in teaching self-efficacy.
Physiological and emotional states of the teacher influence self-efficacy judgments. For
example, a teacher’s excitement and enthusiasm can provide cues about anticipated teach-
ing success. On the other hand, stress, anxiety and other negative states can lead to negat-
ive judgments of teacher abilities and skills. This is in part what differentiates teacher
self-efficacy, as a broader concept, from teacher confidence. A teacher who is profession-
ally well-qualified may not be a successful teacher if personal negative or inhibiting emo-
tional factors come into play. In general, the more narrowly defined concept of (teacher)
confidence is less influenced by emotional factors outside the realm of teaching than is
teacher self-efficacy.
Teacher Self-Efficacy and Classroom Behaviour
The growing body of research on teacher self-efficacy suggests that it may account for indi-
vidual differences in teacher effectiveness. For example, teacher self-efficacy has been found
to be consistently related to positive teaching behaviour and strong pupil achievement, pupils
learn more from teachers who have high self-efficacy, and highly self-efficacious teachers are
more likely to use open-ended questions, inquiry methods, or small group learning activities
for students. They are also are more persistent at a task, take more “risks” (e.g., are more will-
ing to try not-yet-tested teaching activities), and are more likely to use innovative elements in
their teaching. Teachers with high self-efficacy also are more open to new ideas, more willing
to adopt innovations, are less likely to experience burn-out, support pupils’ autonomy to a
greater extent, and are more attentive to low ability students (Brouwers & Tomic, 2003; Hen-
son, 2001; Ross & Bruce, 2007). Finally, teachers with high self-efficacy exhibit greater en-
thusiasm for teaching, have greater commitment for teaching, and are more likely to remain in
the teaching profession (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001).
Measuring Teacher Self-Efficacy
Teacher self-efficacy has at least a 25 year history of research. Presumably, the first attempt to
measure teacher efficacy was by the RAND Foundation. RAND researchers inserted two
“sense of self-efficacy” items in their questionnaire first in a study in which success in reading
programmes was examined and then in a second study in which effects of funding of educa-
tional programmes was investigated. Teachers’ sense of self-efficacy proved to be an unex-
pected, but important, factor that had strong, positive relationships to students’ performance,
achievement of programme goals, and other positive (educational) outcomes (Armor et al.,
Independent of the RAND research, Guskey (1981) investigated how teacher locus of control
was related to teacher self-perceived responsibility for student achievement (RSA). Teacher
self-efficacy is conceptually similar to but not exactly the same as RSA. To conduct the re-
search, Guskey developed a measure to indicate how much teachers assume personal respons-
ibility for student success or failure. Based on his findings, he concluded that there were two
distinct qualities underlying RSA, meaning that RSA was not a unitary dynamic. Guskey’s
work on RSA inspired Gibson and Dembo to develop a measure of teacher self-efficacy.
Gibson and Dembo (1984) were first to develop an instrument specifically to measure teacher
self efficacy. Their instrument, the Teacher Efficacy Scale (TES), has been used in many
studies and is considered to be a “standard” tool for measuring the teacher self-efficacy con-
struct. The original TES had 30 items. Later, they developed a short form having only 16
items but better psychometric qualities. Still later, other researchers developed a 10-item ver-
sion found to have psychometric qualities roughly equivalent to those of the 16-item version.
In igts various forms, the TES has been used in a variety of school environments and at di-
verse types of schools, administered to in-service teachers who taught across a variety of
school subjects, and used with pre-service teachers. It also inspired researchers to develop and
use similar instruments, especially subject-specific measures such as ones for teaching math-
ematics (Charalambos, Philippou, & Kyriakides, 2007), science (Cakiroglu, Cakiroglu, &
Boone, 2005), chemistry (Enochs, Smith, & Huinker, 2000), or character formation (Milson,
The structure of the TES includes two dimensions labelled (a) personal teaching efficacy and
(b) general teaching efficacy. The latter was originally named simply teaching efficacy but
because it was frequently confused with the first component, it was later renamed general
teaching efficacy. TES respondents use a six-point, Likert-type response scale ranging from
“strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” Higher (i.e., more positive) scores represent higher
Personal Teaching Efficacy (PTE) represents a teacher’s belief that he/she possesses
the skills and abilities to facilitate student learning, that is, it is the teacher’s overall sense
of his/her own teaching effectiveness. Items 1 and 6 in Table 2 are examples of PTE
General Teaching Efficacy (GTE) represents the belief that teaching (as an organisa-
tional form of education) can affect pupils positively, even in light of external factors or
conditions such as low motivation or poor home environment. Items 5 and 7 are ex-
amples of GTE measurement.
According to Gibson and Dembo, GTE is a teacher’s personal beliefs about the relationship
between his/her teaching and pupils’ learning; essentially, it corresponds to what Bandura
called outcome expectancy.
Gibson and Dembo (1984) found that teachers who scored high on both dimensions were less
likely to criticize a student following an incorrect answer and more likely to persist if a stu-
dent failed a learning task initially. High-efficacy teachers also were more likely to divide a
class for small group instruction as opposed to whole-class instruction. Other researchers have
found similar results.
The primary goal of this research was to validate the Slovak version of the TES. The follow-
ing criteria were set to achieve this goal:
1. Two factors determined to represent the PTE and GTE dimensions.
2. Two factors relatively independent of each other.
3. Factors extracted account for at least 28.8 % of the total (explained) variance [which is
the percentage achieved by Gibson and Dembo (1984) in their original research].
4. Reliabilities of at least .79 for each factor scale (which is what was found by Gibson
and Dembo (1984) in their original research).
A second major goal was to collect data on Slovak pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy.
The original, 30-item TES was translated into Slovak by an experienced translator who
rendered a substantive but not entirely literal version of the items; the items were adapted to
reflect the Slovak educational environment. The translated version (TES-SK) was then re-
viewed by several university-based educational professionals. Subsequently, some item word-
ings were modified to improve comprehensibility.
The translated and refined TES-SK was administered to 135 students enrolled in five year
teacher education programmes at the Faculty of Education, Comenius University in Bratis-
lava. Prior to completing the TES-SK, all university student respondents had completed at
least 20 hours of school-based classroom observation, and the majority had at least 40 hours
of classroom observation. None of the participants had actual teaching experience. The ori-
ginal sample included 16% year one students (n = 21), 40.5% year two students (n = 55), 16%
year three students (n = 21), 14.5% year four students (n = 20), and 13% year five students (n
= 18).
Upon post-administration review, it was found that there was considerable, likely spurious,
variations in the responses of the year one students, most probably because these students
were in the initial semester of their programmes and were inexperienced about effective
teaching practices. Therefore, their data were excluded from further analysis, and the final
sample consisted of 114 respondents. There were eight males in the final sample. Although
relatively small, the sample size is sufficient because it exceeds the typically and often recom-
mended minimum of 100 respondents for factor analysis (e.g., see Garson, 2008).
Data Analyses
A principal component factor analysis with varimax normalized rotation was performed. De-
termination of the number of factors to retain included applications of the Kaiser criterion
(i.e., eigenvalues greater than one) and the scree test. Items that loaded .30 or higher on a
factor were retained.
Two component factors emerged and they accounted for 34% of the total (explained) factor
variance. The first factor was deemed to represent PTE and the second was deemed to repres-
ent GTE. Ten items had factor loadings greater than .30 on the first factor, seven items had
factor loadings greater than .30 on the second factor, and one item loaded greater than .30 on
the two factors. Because of the dual loading, this latter item was dropped from the further ana-
lysis and interpretation. In general, the results were similar to those found for the 16 item ver-
sion of the instrument. The respective coefficient alphas for the items retained on these factors
were .76 and .45.
The initial analysis yielded data that were encouraging because of their similarity to results
from other similar studies. Also, the explained total variance was not optimal, but it was
higher than that found in the original Gibson and Dembo (1984) research. However, the low
reliability for the second (GTE) factor was problematic. Therefore, a second phase of analysis
was undertaken to attempt to improve the psychometric qualities of the TES-SK.
In the second analysis, items that loaded .50 (a relatively rigorous criterion) or more on any of
the factors in the original factor analysis were identified and retained as the data set. The data
from these items were then factor analyzed using the same procedures and criteria as applied
in the first analysis.
Again, two factors emerged. Applying the greater-than-.30 factor loading criterion, ten items
were retained. Importantly, each item retained loaded highly on only one factor. These two
factors account for 43.4% of the total (explained) factor variance, which is greater than in the
previous analysis and 15% more than that in the Gibson and Dembo (1984) research. The first
factor, again identified as PTE, explained 27.2% and the second factor, again identified as
GTE, explained 16.2%. As expected, it also was determined that the inter-factor correlation
was low at .15. The TES-SK factor structure resulting from this analysis is shown in Figure 1.
The respective coefficient alphas for the items retained on these factors were .73 and .54. In
this version, the reliability of the first factor items is satisfactory, but the reliability of the
second factor items was relatively low.
The final form of the TES-SK contains ten items, similar to the briefest version of the original
TES that has been used. The first factor contains six items and the second contains four items.
Results and Discussion
The final version of the TES-SK containing 10 items met three of the four a priori criteria set
for this validation study: (a) a two-factor solution was found and the factors appeared to rep-
resent PTE and GTE, (b) independence between the factors was shown, and (c) and the total
factor (explained) variance was greater than 29%. The fourth criterion was not achieved in
that the reliabilities found did not reach the criterion. However, the reliability of the first
factor items was relatively high. Overall, the Slovak version of the Teacher Efficacy Scale
(i.e., TES-SK) has good and substantive, though not ideal, psychometric properties, and there-
fore may be used cautiously in future research.
The PTE and GTE factors were shown to be relatively independent, which suggests that a
teacher may have high personal teaching efficacy but may believe that influences external to
his/her efficacy affect pupils’ learning, or vice versa. Thus, a teacher may be convinced of
his/her own ability to teach (PTE) but doubtful about his/her pupils’ ability to learn success-
ively (GTE), or may believe that his/her pupils’ ability to learn is irrespective of his/her own
inability to teach.
Several reasons may underlie why the data for the second factor (GTE) of the TES-SK are not
as clear or as strong as those for the first factor. Woolfolk and Hoy (1990) and Deemer and
Minke (1999) offered an interpretation that the two dimensions of TES represent two very dif-
ferent constructs. The first (PTE) refers to individual (i.e., personal) teacher efficacy; note the
use of “I” or “my” pronouns in PTE items. The second (GTE) includes items that refer to a
rather generalized concept of a teacher or situations external to the teacher’s classroom; in
other words, a much less personalized context. It may be that generalized conceptualizations
of teaching have more varied components than do personal conceptualizations of teaching.
Although the TES-SK psychometric properties could have been better, they are sufficient for
initial investigation of the resultant item data. As for other forms of the TES, higher scores
reflect higher the teacher self-efficacy. Each TES-SK item theoretically had a midpoint score
of 3.5. As shown in Table 1, found in this study was that individual item overall means ex-
ceeded the midpoint for both dimensions. This suggests that the student participants believed
that they can teach efficiently and effectively, and that teaching is not much affected by
factors outside their control as teachers.
The PTE item means were higher than those for GTE and review of the standard deviations
shows greater spread for the GTE items. This finding is in accord with similar studies of in-
service or pre-service teacher self-efficacy. It suggests that the respondents were more varied
in regard to their perceptions of teaching efficacy in general than they were in regard to their
own teaching efficacy.
Individual item means are shown in Table 2. Among the four highest PTE item means, three
are related to belief in efficacy in managing pupils’ learning and the other is related to belief
in efficacy in managing pupil discipline. Managing pupil discipline is one of the more diffi-
cult tasks with which a teacher is confronted. Perhaps these student respondents’ high per-
ceived self-efficacy to manage pupil discipline has not yet been tested in the reality of actual
The lowest PTE item means (6 and 8) are related to concerns about pupil progress expressed
as grades. It is laudable that the student respondents believe in their own self-efficacy in re-
gard to helping pupils achieve better grades. Hopefully, such belief would prompt them as
teachers to teach better and not to simply raise pupils’ grades because they believe they are
teaching better.
A broader context of understanding the results here can be achieved by comparing them to
those found in other countries. Thus, studies which had comparable samples and used similar
self-efficacy instruments with six-point item scales were examined. Woolfolk (2000) admin-
istered a 10-item teacher efficacy scale to students at a teachers’ college in the USA. Simil-
arly, Charalambos, Philippou, and Kyriakides (2007) investigated student teacher self-effic-
acy in the USA and in Turkey. Wertheim and Leyser (2002) measured self-efficacy in pre-
service teachers in Israel. Table 3 shows and allows comparison of the resultant respective
data sets. In all the studies, PTE item mean scores exceed four points, and are surprisingly
similar. The greatest difference is between the highest score for USA 2 and the lowest score
for USA 1 at .53. This suggests that even across varied educational and cultural environments,
pre-service teachers have similar levels of self-efficacy beliefs. In addition, the PTE scores are
all rather high and are a good precondition to enable these students to be efficacious teachers
after entering the profession.
A similar trend is evident in the GTE item mean scores. Differences among GTE item mean
scores across the studies also are small. The greatest difference is between the highest scoring
Turkish students and the lowest scoring Slovak students, but is only .68. It also may be ob-
served that the GTE item mean scores in all the countries except Turkey are lower than PTE
item mean scores. However, the difference between PTE and GTE scores in pre-service stu-
dents in Turkey is only .12. This finding is similar to those of other studies that found that
pre-service as well as in-service teachers have higher PTE than GTE (e.g., Milson, 2003;
Wertheim & Leyser, 2002).
Although the TES-SK psychometric properties determined from this study were not as strong
as might be desired, they are substantive enough to allow initial research use of the instru-
ment. A first step in such research might be further refinement of the TES-SK to address some
of its limitations. For example, it should be used to investigate teacher self-efficacy among
more tightly controlled and selected samples of pre-service teachers and among practicing
teachers. In particular, problems with measurement of GTE remain, a not unusual result in
the professional literature. Further, more specific refinement or revision of existing measures
of GTE are necessary, as is GTE research with more varied samples and of factors related to
Data from Slovak pre-service students were similar to comparable samples in other countries.
Relatively high level self-efficacy in pre-service teachers is a good in that it should underlie
successful teaching after they actually enter the teaching profession. However, further re-
search is needed to determine the educational, personal, social, and/or other factors that con-
tribute to level of teacher self-efficacy. As noted, Bandura postulated four sources of efficacy
expectations: mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological
and emotional states (Bandura, 1997). These sources in particular should be examined to in-
vestigate how they function in and impact pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy. And of special
concern is how to design teacher education so that it can successfully impact pre-service
teachers’ self-efficacy.
Note: An earlier version of this paper was published in Gavora (2010).
David J. Armor, P. Conry-Oseguera, Millicent Cox, Nicelma J. King, Lorraine M.
McDonnell, Anthony H. Pascal, Edward Pauly, & Gail L. Zellman (1976). Analysis of the
school preferred reading program in selected Los Angeles minority schools. Report No.
R-2007 LAUSD. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation. (cited after Tschannen-Moran, M.,
Woolfolk Hoy, A., 2001).
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy. The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman and
Comp. ISBN 0-7167-2850-8.
Brouwers, A., &Tomic, W. (2003). A test of the factorial validity of the Teacher Efficacy
Scale. Research in Education, Vol. 69, May, pp. 67-79.
Cakiroglu, J., Cakiroglu, E., Boone, W. (2005). Pre-service teacher efficacy beliefs regarding
science teaching: A comparison of pre-service teachers in Turkey and the USA. Science
Educator, 14, No. 1, pp.31-40.
Deemer, S., & Minke, K. (1999). An investigation of the factor structure of the Teacher Effic-
acy Scale. The Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 93, No. 1. pp. 3-10.
Enochs, L., Smith, P., & Huinker, D. (2000). Establishing factorial validity of the mathemat-
ics teaching efficacy beliefs instrument. School Science and Mathematics, Vol. 100, No. 4,
pp. 194-202.
Garson, D. G. (2008). Factor Analysis: Statnotes. Retrieved March 2, 2009, from North
Carolina State University Public Administration Program,
Gavora, P. (2010). Profesijná zdatnosť vnímaná učiteľom. Adaptácia výskumného nástroja.
Pedagogická revue (Bratislava), Vol. 61, No. 1-2, pp. 19-37.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, Vol. 76, No. 4, pp. 569-582.
Guskey, T. R. (1981). Measurement of responsibility teachers assume for academic successes
or failures in the classroom. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 34, pp. 44-51.
Guskey, T. R., & Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher Efficacy: A study of construct dimension.
American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 31, pp. 645 -674.
Henson, R. (2001). Teacher self-efficacy: Substantive implications and measurement
dilemmas. Paper at the annual meeting of the Educational Research Exchange. January 26,
2001. Texas A&M University, Texas. (retrieved
Nov. 9., 2007).
Charalambos, Y., Philippou, G., & Kyriakides, L. (2007). Tracing the development of preser-
vice teachers’ efficacy beliefs in teaching mathematics during fieldwork. Educational
Studies in Mathematics (on-line), 3058m382444 (re-
trieved Nov. 8., 2007).
Kolektív autorov. (2006). Profesijný rozvoj učiteľa. Prešov: Metodicko-pedagogické centrum
v Prešove. ISBN 80-80545-431-0.
Lukášová-Kantorková, H. (2003). Učitelská profese v primárním vzdělávání a pedagogická
příprava učitelů (teorie, výzkum, praxe). Ostrava: Pedagogická fakulta OU. ISBN 80-
Milson, A. J. (2003). Teachers’sense of efficacy for the formation of students’ character.
Journal of Research in Character Education, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 89-106.
Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational Psychology: Developing Learners (5th ed.), glossary. N.J.,
Merrill: Upper Saddle River.
Ross, J., & Bruce, C. (2007). Professional development effects on teacher efficacy: Results of
randomised field trial. The Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 101, No. 1, pp. 50-60.
Rotter, J. (1966). Generalised expectances of internal versus external control of
reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, Vol. 80, pp. 1-28.
Spilková, Vl. (1997). Proměny primární školy a vzdělávaní učitelů v historicko-srovnávací
perspektivě. Praha: Pedagogická fakulta UK.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 17, pp. 783-805.
Wertheim, C., & Leyser, Y. (2002). Efficacy beliefs, background variables, and differentiated
instruction of Israeli prospective teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 96,
pp. 54-63.
Woolfolk, A., & Hoy, W, (2000). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of
teaching. Paper presented at annual meeting of American Educational Research Associ-
ation, New Orleans. (retrieved
Nov. 8., 2007).
Woolfolk, A., & Hoy, W. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about
control. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 82, pp. 81-91.
Zelina, M. (1995) Výchova tvorivej osobnosti. Bratislava: Univerzita Komenského.
Figure 1. The factor structure of TES-SK: item loadings and inter-factor correlation
Table 1. TES-SK overall item descriptive statistics
mean minimum maximum SD
PTE 4.22 2.33 5.83 0.73
GTE 3.69 1.50 5.75 0.87
Personal Teaching
General Teaching
Table 2. TES-SK item means in descending order.
dimension item mean
1 When a pupil is having difficulty with an assignment,
I am usually able to adjust it to his/her level. PTE 4.86
2 If a pupil is not disciplined, I am sure I can find ways to
manage him/her. PTE 4.26
3 If a pupil cannot do a homework assignment, I would
be able to assess whether it was at a correct level of dif-
PTE 4.15
4 If a pupil masters a new concept quickly, it might be
because I knew the necessary steps in teaching that
PTE 4.10
5 Hours in class have little influence on pupils compared
to the influence of their home environment. GTE 4.08
6 If pupils get better grades than they usually get, it is be-
cause I found more efficient ways of teaching. PTE 4.05
7 A teacher is very limited in what he/she can achieve be-
cause it is the home environment that shapes a pupil’s
GTE 4.04
8 When the grades of a pupil improve, it is because
I found a way how to adjust teaching him/her. PTE 4.02
9 Even if the teacher has excellent knowledge and skills,
it has little influence on pupils’ learning. GTE 3.35
10 The amount a pupil can learn is primarily related to
family background. GTE 3.33
For this table, the Slovak version of the items was translated back into English.
Negatively worded items (3, 5, 7 and 9) were reverse scored.
PTE - Personal Teaching Efficacy
GTE - General Teaching Efficacy
Table 3. Mean scores on PTE and GTE in five studies of pre-service teachers
Slovakia USA 1 USA 2 Turkey Israel
PTE 4.22 4.12 4.65 4.25 4.31
GTE 3.69 3.85 4.19 4.37 3.89
PTE - Personal Teaching Efficacy
GTE - General Teaching Efficacy
USA 1 – Woolfolk (2000)
USA 2 – Cakiroglu, Cakiroglu, Boone (2005)
Turkey – Cakiroglu, Cakiroglu, Boone (2005)
Israel – Wertheim, Leyser (2002)
... Teacher self-efficacy, which is a motivational concept, directly affects their teaching behaviors and student outcomes (Ashton, 1984;Azar, 2010;Boriack, 2013;Gavora, 2010;Gibson & Dembo, 1984;Muijs & Reynolds, 2002;Riggs & Enochs, 1990;Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk-Hoy, 2001;. In addition, teaching self-efficacy, affected by teachers' tenure, enthusiasm levels, and motivation, emerges as an important variable that contributes to teacher and student success (Settlage et al., 2009;Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). ...
... In addition, teaching self-efficacy, affected by teachers' tenure, enthusiasm levels, and motivation, emerges as an important variable that contributes to teacher and student success (Settlage et al., 2009;Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Teachers with high self-efficacy beliefs tend to use inquiry-based teaching practices, spend more time on teaching, and apply student-centered innovative teaching strategies (Crawford et al., 2021;Gavora, 2010;Gibson & Dembo, 1984;Schunk, 2014). Teachers with low self-efficacy beliefs tend to spend less time on teaching practices and use more teacher-centered teaching strategies (Bayraktar, 2009). ...
Full-text available
By means of a good understanding of teachers’ motivational components in teaching, we are able to gain insight into their teaching performance. One of these personal components is self- efficacy. The aim of the study was to adapt the Teaching Engineering Self-Efficacy Scale (TESS) developed by Yoon (2014) into Turkish to measure the engineering teaching self- efficacy of K-12 teachers. The analysis of the data consisting of 439 science and technology design teachers from across Türkiye was performed using the Mplus program. According to the results obtained from this research, it was determined that the X2/sd ratio was 2.97, RMSEA was .07, CFI was .95, TLI was .94 and SRMR was .04. in the findings obtained from Model C, with the best fit index values. In addition, it was found that the Cronbach α reliability coefficients (.94 for engineering- pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy, .95 for engineering engagement self-efficacy, .93 for engineering discipline self- efficacy, and.87 for engineering outcome expectancy, .96 for the entire scale) were found to be at a high level. In sum, the Turkish version of TESS is a valid and reliable scale with 23 items and a four-dimensional structure as in the original.
... Guskey (1984) discovered that those teachers who love to teach and are certain of their potentials are exceedingly effective in the classroom. They are also the most responsive teachers to introduce innovative pedagogical practices; hence, students learn more from these type of teachers (Gavora, 2010). Contrariwise, those presumed to be ineffective seemed to be less innovative. ...
... Teacher self-efficacy also has to do with how much teachers believe in their abilities and skills as teachers. Teacher self-efficacy is an essential characteristic associated with teaching effectiveness (Gavora, 2010). Yoon Yoon et al. (2014) discovered that teacher selfefficacy is a situation-specific construct since instructors' efficacy beliefs differ based on the subject matter and teaching environment. ...
Full-text available
Teacher efficacy has been positively connected with student outcomes, including achievement, motivation, self-efficacy beliefs, and instructors' tenacity, passion, commitment, and instructional conduct. The researcher conducted the study to determine the maritime education faculty's self-efficacy in teaching digital technology. The researcher used descriptive research to determine the self-efficacy of maritime education faculty in teaching digital technology. The purposive sampling method was utilized considering that the respondents were the maritime education faculty from three (3) Maritime Higher Education Institutions that participated in the study. The statistical tools used in the study were frequency, percentage, standard deviation, mean, and ANOVA. The Maritime education faculty perceived themselves as having self-efficacy that can be experts in teaching digital technology, such as student engagement, instructional techniques, and classroom management. Even though they teach different courses, self-efficacy has no significant difference when classified according to the courses taught. It is highly recommended that the respective schools of the Maritime education faculty that participated in this study should be given more training on classroom management so that their self-efficacy in teaching the subject will remain high. There is also the need for the teachers to have some dialogues and consultations with the parents of their students to encourage them to collaborate with the teachers to see that their children learn their lessons well.
... Selfefficacy in certain scientific disciplines shows the strongest correlation with related career paths, for example, there is a strong relationship between self-efficacy and student interest in science (Panergayo et al., 2021). There is a correlation between students' academic self-efficacy and their learning success (Gavora, 2010). Motivation refers to the reasons underlying student learning behavior, characterized by the development of interest and willingness of students to learn. ...
Full-text available
The Effect of the RQANI Learning Model on Self-Efficacy of Pre-Service Biology Teachers in Ternate City, Indonesia. Objective: The purpose of this study was to identify the effect of the RQANI model on the self-efficacy of biology students in Ternate City, North Maluku, Indonesia. Methods: The present study was a quasi-experimental study with a non-equivalent control group design. The study population contained all students from the Department of Biology Education in the city of Ternate, North Maluku, Indonesia. The sample consisted of 120 biology education students from IAIN Ternate and STIKIP Kie Raha, the city of Ternate, North Maluku. The data were collected through survey and observation. Data analysis involved descriptive and inferential statistics. Findings: The study results showed that the RQANI learning model had an effect on biology students' self-efficacy. Conclusion: RQANI learning model had an effect on biology students' self-efficacy Abstrak: Dampak Model Pembelajaran RQANI terhadap Efikasi Diri Calon Guru Biologi di Kota Ternate, Indonesia. Tujuan: Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi pengaruh model RQANI terhadap Self-Efficacy Mahasiswa Calon Guru Biologi di Kota Ternate, Maluku Utara, Indonesia. Metode: Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian quasy eksperiment dengan desain Nonequivalent Control Group Design. Populasi penelitian merupakan seluruh mahasiswa pendidikan biologi di Kota Ternate, Maluku Utara, Indonesia. Sampel penelitian terdiri dari 120 mahasiswa pendidikan biologi di IAIN Ternate dan STIKIP Kie Raha, Kota Ternate, Maluku Utara. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah instrumen untuk mengukur self-efficacy mahasiswa melalui angket dan lembar observasi. Selanjutnya, data penelitian dianalisis dengan menggunakan analisis deskriptif dan inferensial. Temuan: Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dan analisis data, maka dapat disimpulkan bahwa terdapat pengaruh model pembelajaran RQANI terhadap self-efficacy mahasiswa biologi. Kesimpulan: terdapat pengaruh model pembelajaran RQANI terhadap self-efficacy mahasiswa biologi. Kata kunci: efikasi diri, penelitian kuasi eksperimen, calon guru Biologi.
... incompetence in time (inability to diagnose the stages of development of a child with developmental disabilities, which often leads to ineffective interventions); non-systemic selfsupport (cognitive, emotional); inability to understand the value of self-actualization (expecting assessment from outside); insufficient flexibility of behavior (willingness to rebuild and adapt to the needs of a child); unreactive sensitivity (level of sensitivity to the feelings and needs of children and their parents); unwillingness to act spontaneously (to be guided by personal ideas about the problem); low level of self-respect and trust in personal competencies); incomplete self-acceptance and acceptance of the nature of a person capable of making mistakes; failure to accept personal aggression; uncooperativeness and reluctanceto be friendly with each child); unmet cognitive needs (lack of desire for personal growth and development); unrealized creativity (ability to respond to stimuli outside the box (Charyyarova, 2019;Gavora, 2010); ...
Full-text available
Efikasi mengajar guru merupakan aspek penting dalam meningkatkan hasil belajar siswa. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi tingkat efikasi mengajar guru anak usia dini. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan survei terhadap mahasiswa program studi pendidikan anak usia dini di STAI Darul Falah yang sudah mengajar sebanyak 27 orang. Hasil penelitian diperoleh gambaran bahwa tingkat efikasi mengajar PAUD pada aspek personal teaching efficacy termasuk pada level sedang, dan pada general teaching efficacy termasuk pada level baik. Untuk meningkatkan efikasi mengajar, dapat dilakukan dengan pengembangan kompetensi (seminar, workshop, pelatihan, dll) atau dengan melaksanakan lesson study di sekolah.
Bu çalışmanın amacı, sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının matematik öz yeterlik inancı ve matematik dersine karşı tutumlarını cinsiyet, öğrenim gördükleri sınıf düzeyleri ve lisede iken seçtikleri alan gibi çeşitli değişkenler üzerinden incelemektir. Bu araştırmanın çalışma grubu, 2021-2022 eğitim-öğretim yılında Fırat Üniversitesi ve Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sınıf Öğretmenliği Bölümünde öğrenimine devam eden 300 öğrenci ile oluşturulmuştur. Araştırmanın amacına ulaşılabilmesi için veriler “Matematiğe Karşı Öz Yeterlik Algısı Ölçeği”, “Matematik Tutum Ölçeği” ve “Kişisel Bilgi Formu” olmak üzere üç ölçek kullanılmıştır. “Matematiğe Karşı Öz Yeterlik Algısı Ölçeği” üç faktörden oluşmuştur ve bunlar da OYF1 (Matematik Benlik Algısı), OYF2 (Matematik Konularında Davranışlarındaki Farklılık) ve OYF3 (Matematiği Yaşam Becerilerine Dönüştürme) olarak adlandırılmıştır. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulguların analizi SPSS 22.0 paket programı kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Elde edilen verilerin analizinde “aritmetik ortalama”, “yüzde”, “frekans” kullanılmıştır. Sınıf Öğretmenliği Bölümünde öğrenimine devam eden öğrencilerin görüşlerinin, demografik verilere göre analizinde de Bağımsız Gruplar T-Testi, Tek Yönlü Varyans Analizi (ANOVA) ve Çoklu Regresyon Analizi kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular sonucunda öğrencilerin matematik öz yeterlik inancının öğrenim gördükleri sınıf düzeyi değişkenine göre anlamlı bir farklılık yoktur. Cinsiyet ve lisede seçtikleri alan değişkenine göre anlamlı bir farklılık gösterdiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca öğrencilerin lisede seçtikleri alan değişkenine göre anlamlı bir farklılığın olmadığı; cinsiyet ve öğrenim gördükleri sınıf düzeyi değişkenleri açısından ise anlamlı bir farklılık gösterdiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu sonuçlara ek olarak sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının matematik öz yeterlik inancı ve matematiğe karşı tutumu arasında da anlamlı bir fark bulunmuştur. Buna ek olarak yapılan çoklu regresyon analizinden elde edilen bulgular ile matematik öz yeterlik inancının matematik tutumunu %58 oranında açıkladığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.
Full-text available
Bandura’s influential theory has been used to argue that teachers with high self-efficacy will be more effective at increasing pupil achievement—and a voluminous empirical literature has repeatedly documented associations consistent with this claim. However, few studies have considered whether these correlations reflect an underlying causal relationship. In this paper we utilise across-subject, within-pupil variation in teacher self-efficacy in the Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2015 data to provide new evidence on this question. By focusing upon relative differences in teacher self-efficacy and pupil achievement within pupil-teacher pairs, our estimates control for more potential confounders than much of the existing literature. Contrary to that literature, we find no evidence of a relationship. Instead, this paper presents clear and consistent findings of null effects.
Full-text available
We designed a professional development (PD) program to increase the teacher efficacy of mathematics teachers. We randomly assigned 106 Grade 6 teachers in 1 school district to treatment and control conditions in a delayedtreatment design. The PD explicitly addressed 4 sources of teacher-efficacy information identified in social-cognition theory (Bandura, 1997). Treatment teachers outperformed control-group teachers on 3 measures of teacher efficacy, but results were statistically significant only for efficacy for classroom management. We attributed the teacher-efficacy effects of the PD (6% of the variance) to the priority given in the PD to management of classroom discussions and overt attempts by PD leaders to redefine teacher conceptions of classroom success.
Full-text available
The 2-factor structure of S. Gibson and M. H. Dembo's (1984) Teacher Efficacy Scale (TES) was investigated. Although the researchers asserted that the factors corresponded to A. Bandura's (1977) outcome and efficacy expectations, A. E. Woolfolk and W. R. Hoy (1990) observed that the factor structure is potentially confounded by item orientation; items on the 1st factor have a mostly positive orientation, whereas items on the 2nd factor are mostly negative. That possibility was tested by revising TES items so that both orientations were available for each item. Teachers (N = 196) completed 1 of 2 scales, each with revised and original items. Three potential factor structures were examined using principal axis factoring. Although the teacher efficacy construct may be multidimensional, when wording confounds are eliminated, the TES appears unidimensional.
Full-text available
Teacher efficacy has proved to be powerfully related to many meaningful educational outcomes such as teachers’ persistence, enthusiasm, commitment and instructional behavior, as well as student outcomes such as achievement, motivation, and self-efficacy beliefs. However, persistent measurement problems have plagued those who have sought to study teacher efficacy. We review many of the major measures that have been used to capture the construct, noting problems that have arisen with each. We then propose a promising new measure of teacher efficacy along with validity and reliability data from three separate studies. Finally, new directions for research made possible by this instrument are explored.
We examined the structure and meaning of efficacy for a sample of 182 prospective teachers and related efficacy to beliefs about control and motivation. The two independent dimensions of teaching efficacy (TE) and personal efficacy (PE) usually identified in studies of experienced teachers were also found for these prospective teachers. Both TE and PE were significantly correlated with bureaucratic orientation, but in opposite directions. Neither TE nor PE was related to motivational style; only TE was related to pupil control ideology. Canonical correlations, however, revealed more complex relationships. Personal efficacy was positively related to a control orientation that rejects teacher control of students but accepts the schools' control of teachers. The interaction of TE and PE made unique contributions to the prediction of pupil control ideology and bureaucratic orientation.
A scale assessing teacher beliefs concerning the responsibility for student academic success was developed and validated. The results show a striking difference in male/female teacher responses. Female teachers consistently assumed greater responsibility for the learning outcomes of their students. (JN)
Developed an instrument to measure teacher efficacy and examined the relationship between teacher efficacy and observable teacher behaviors. Factor analysis of responses from 208 elementary school teachers to a 30-item Teacher Efficacy Scale yielded 2 substantial factors that corresponded to A. Bandura's (see record 1977-25733-001) 2-factor theoretical model of self-efficacy. A multitrait–multimethod analysis that supported both convergent and discriminant validity analyzed data from 55 teachers on 3 traits (teacher efficacy, verbal ability, and flexibility) across 2 methods of measurement. Finally, classroom observations related to academic focus and teacher feedback behaviors indicated differences between 8 high- and low-efficacy teachers in time spent in whole class and small group instruction, teacher use of criticism, and teacher persistence in failure situations. (35 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (MTEBI) for preservice teachers resulted from the modification of the Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument STEBI-B. The MTEBI consists of 21 items, 13 items on the Personal Mathematics Teaching Efficacy (PMTE) subscale and eight items on the Mathematics Teaching Outcome Expectancy (MTOE) subscale. Possible scores on the PMTE scale range from 13 to 65; MTOE scores may range from 8 to 40. The first version of the MTEBI had 23 items like the STEBI-B; however, subsequent analysis in this validation required two items be dropped. Reliability analysis produced an alpha coefficient of 0.88 for the PMTE scale and an alpha coefficient of 0. 75 for the MTOE scale (n = 324). Confirmatory factor analysis indicates that the two scales (PMTE and MTOE) are independent, adding to the construct validity of the MTEBI.