Pre- and In-service EFL Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy and Teaching Concerns

Year 2015, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 44 - 64, 06.05.2015

Demet Yaylı , Fulden Ekizler

Abstract

This study examined pre- and in-service English as a foreign Language (EFL) teachers’ sense of efficacy and teaching concerns and also the relationships within and between their concern and efficacy subscale scores. Two instruments, the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) and the Teaching Concerns Checklist (TCC), were used. First, while in-service EFL teachers were found to be more self-efficacious, pre-service EFL teachers were observed to have higher concern levels. Second, both pre- and in-service EFL teachers’ sense of efficacy and teaching concern scores indicated a positively strong relationship within both concern and efficacy subscale scores. This relationship suggests that an increase or a decrease in one efficacy or concern subdimension affects the other efficacy or teaching concern subdimensions. Third, between TCC and TSES subscale scores, a negatively moderate correlation was observed for both groups of teachers, which suggests that high confidence in one’s ability to teach is negatively correlated with teaching concerns.

Keywords

teachers’ sense of efficacy; teaching concerns; pre-service teachers; in-service teachers; English as a foreign language (EFL)

Hizmet Öncesi ve İçi İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin Özyeterlik Algıları ve Öğretmeye Yönelik Endişeleri

Abstract

Bu çalışma hizmet öncesi ve hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmenlerinin özyeterlik algılarını, öğretmeye yönelik endişelerini ve endişe ve özyeterlik ölçeklerinin alt boyutlarından elde edilen bulguların kendi içlerinde ve birbirleriyle olan ilişkilerini incelemiştir. Bu amaçla, Öğretmen Özyeterlik Ölçeği ve Öğretmeye Yönelik Endişeler Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Öncelikle, hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmenlerinin özyeterlik algısı daha yüksek gözlenirken, hizmet öncesi İngilizce öğretmenlerinin ise endişe düzeyi daha yüksek olarak izlenmiştir. Ayrıca, hem hizmet öncesi hem de hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmenlerinden elde edilen özyeterlik ve endişe ölçeklerinin alt boyutlarında gözlenen bulgular kendi içinde karşılaştırıldığında olumlu yönde güçlü bir ilişki ortaya koymaktadır. Diğer bir deyişle, özyeterlik alt boyutlarından birinde gözlenecek bir artış başka bir alt boyutta da artışa neden olabilecektir. Son olarak, bu alt boyutlardan elde edilen bulgular endişe ve özyeterlik olarak birbirleriyle karşılaştırıldığında ise olumsuz yönde dengeli bir ilişki gözlenmiştir. Bu da öğretmenin özyeterlik algısının yüksek olmasının endişe düzeyinin düşük olmasını beraberinde getireceği şeklinde yorumlanabilir

Keywords

öğretmen özyeterlik algısı, öğretmeye yönelik endişeler, hizmet öncesi öğretmenler, hizmetiçi öğretmenler, İngilizcenin yabancı dil olarak öğretilmesi

References

• 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 Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 130 243).
• Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
• Atay, D. (2007). Beginning teacher efficacy and the practicum in an EFL context. Teacher Development, 11(2), 203-219.
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall, Inc.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
• Borich, G. D. (1992). Validation of the stages of concern questionaire. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group, 14(2), 43-48.
• Boz, Y. (2008). Turkish student teachers’ concerns about teaching. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(4), 367–77.
• Boz, Y., & Boz, N. (2010). The nature of the relationship between teaching concerns and sense of efficacy. European Journal of Teacher Education, 33(3), 279–291.
• Campbell, J. (1996). A comparison of teacher efficacy for pre- and in-service teachers in Scotland and America. Education, 117 (1), 220-238.
• Capa, Y., Cakiroglu, J., & Sarikaya, H. (2005). The development and validation of a Turkish version of teachers’ sense of efficacy scale. Eğitim ve Bilim (Education and Science), 30(137), 74-81.
• Chan, K. W. (2004). Teacher professional development: In-service teachers’ motives, perceptions and concerns about teaching. Hong Kong Teachers’ Centre Journal, 3, 57 - 71.
• Courtad, C. A. (2009). Changes in knowledge about assisstive technology of pre-service teachers. Poster presented at the annual Council for exceptional conference, Seattle, WA.
• Fortman, C. K., & Pontius, R.W. (2000). Self-efficacy during student teaching. Paper presented 2000. at Midwest Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL. October 25-28,
• Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Education Research Journal, 6, 207-226.
• Gerges, G. (2001). Factors influencing preservice teachers’ variation in use of instructional methods: Why is teacher efficacy not a significant contributor. Teacher Education Quarterly, 4, 71-87.
• Ghaith, G., & Shaaban, K. (1999). The relationship between perceptions of teaching concerns, teacher efficacy, and selected teacher characteristics. Teaching and Teacher 15, 487-496. Education,
• Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, M. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy anattitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 451-458.
• Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (1996). Statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: West Publishing Company.
• Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2004). District policy and beginning teachers: A lens on teacher learning. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(4), 281–301.
• Hall, H. C., & Symanoskie, J. E. (2003). Stages of concerns of preservice student, and inservice career and technical education teachers. Paper presentation at the annual the Association for Career and Technical Education, Orlando, FL. meeting of
• Harris, M. B. (1995). Basic statistics for behavioral science research. Needhamd Height, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Henson, R. K. (2001). The effects of participation in teacher research on teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 819-836.
• Hollon, R. E., Anderson, C. W., & Roth, K. L. (1991). Science teachers' conceptions of teaching and learning. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (pp. 145-185). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Incecay, G., & Kesli-Dollar, Y. (2012). Classroom management, self-efficacy and readiness of Turkish pre-service English teachers. International Association of Research in Foreign Language Education and Applied Linguistics, 1(3), 189-198.
• Johnson, K. E. (1992). The relationship between teachers' beliefs and practices during literacy instruction for non-native speakers of English. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(1), 83-108.
• Kafkas, M., Acak, M., Coban, B., & Karademir, T. (2010). Investigation of the relationship between preservice physical education teachers’ sense of self-efficacy and professional 93-111.
• Kazelskis, R., & Reeves, C. K. (1987). Concern dimensions of pre-service teachers. Educational Research Quarterly, 11(4), 45-52.
• Lee, V. E., Dedrick, R. F., & Smith, J. B. (1991). The effect of the social organization of schools on teachers’ efficacy and satisfaction. Sociology of Education, 64, 190- 208.
• Liaw, E. (2009). Teacher efficacy of pre-service teachers in Taiwan: The influence of classroom 180. teaching and group discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 176
• Liu, J. (2008). A comparison of teacher candidates and first-year teachers by gender an licensure level, in terms of their perceptions of preparation program quality, efficacy and concerns about teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Ohio University, Ohio. beliefs, State
• McVey, M. K. (2004). The role of teacher education experiences in addressing the concerns of apprentice teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh.
• Moore-Hayes, C. (2008). Exploring pre-service and beginning teachers’ perceptions of preparedness to teach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Capella University.
• Moore, W., & Esselman, M. (1994). Exploring the context of teacher efficacy: The role of achievement and climate. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
• Murshidi, R., Konting, M. M., Elas, H., & Fooi, F. S. (2006). Sense of efficacy among beginning teachers in Sarawak. Teacher Education, 17, 265-275.
• Newman, C., Lenhart, L., Moss, B., & Newman, D. (2000). A four-year cross-sectional study of changes in self-efficacy and stages of concern among pre-service teachers. Journal Database, http://www.eric.ed.gov. Education
• O'Connor, J., & Taylor, H. P. (1992). Understanding preservice and novice teachers' concerns to improve teacher recruitment and retention. Teacher Education Quarterly, 19, 19-28.
• Ortactepe, D. (2006). The relationship between teacher efficacy and professional development within the scope of an in-service teacher education. Unpublished MA Thesis in Adult Education, Boğaziçi University.
• Pigge, F. L., & Marso, R. N. (1997). A seven year longitudinal multi-factor assessment of teaching concerns development through preparation and early years of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(2), 225–35.
• Poulou, M. (2007). Personal teaching efficacy and its sources: Student teachers’ perceptions. Educational Psychology, 27, 191-218.
• Rotter, J. B. (1982). The development and applications of social learning theory. New York: Praeger.
• Sarikaya, H. (2004). Preservice elementary teachers’ science knowledge, attitude toward science teaching and their efficacy beliefs regarding science teaching. Published master’s thesis. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
• Shaukat, S., & Iqbal, H. M. (2012). Teacher self-efficacy as a function of student engagement, instructional strategies and classroom management. Pakistan Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(3), 82-85.
• Smith, D. J., & Sanche, R. P. (1992). Saskatchewan interns' concerns at three stages of a four month practicum. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 38(2), 121-13.
• Smith, D. J., & Sanche, R. P. (1993). Interns’ personally expressed concerns: A need to extend the Fuller model?. Action in Teacher Education, 15(1), 36–41.
• Soodak, L. C., & Podell, D. M. (1997). Efficacy and experience: perceptions of efficacy among preservice and practicing teachers. Journal of Research and Development in 30, 214-221. Education,
• Swennen, A., Jörg, T., & Korthagen F. (2004). Studying student teachers' concerns, combining image-based and more traditional research techniques. European Journal of Teacher Education, 27(3), 265-283.
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 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.
• Yavuz, S. (2005). Socio-demographic and institutional predictors of variations in English as foreign language teachers’ efficacy perceptions. Published master’s thesis. Marmara University, İstanbul.
• Yayli, D., & Hasirci, S. (2009). Concerns of prospective teachers of Turkish on teaching, The Journal of International Social Research, 2(9), 520-525.
• Yost, R. (2002). I think I can: Mentoring as a means of enhancing teaching efficacy. The Clearing House, 75, 195-198.
• Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2000). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
• Woolfolk-Hoy, A., & Burke-Spero, R. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 343–356.
• Woolfolk-Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Pre-service teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 81–91.