The Effect of Professional Development Programs on Teachers' Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis Study

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect size of professional development programs on teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy using meta-analysis method. For this purpose, literature review was made on existing national and international studies. In this context, master’s thesis, doctoral dissertation and articles that were conducted between 1990 and 2019, were appropriate for the research problem and had statistical data to be included in the meta-analysis study were reviewed and investigated in Turkish and English from national and international databases. As a result of the literature review, 1072 national and international related studies were reached. Among these studies, it was determined that 14 studies (N=969) met the inclusion criteria. The effect sizes and the combined effect size of the studies were calculated using “Comprehensive Meta Analysis v2.0 (CMA) Statistical Package Program”. In the studies combined under the random effects model, the effect size of professional development programs on teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy beliefs was determined as 0.652 (95% CI, SE=0.146). This value was a “moderate” effect level according to the effect size classification of Cohen, Manion & Morrison (2007). As a result of the heterogeneity test, it was concluded that there was a high level of heterogeneity in the study (Q=90.679; ²=22.362; I²=85.664). Moderator analysis was performed in order to determine the sources of high levels of heterogeneity between studies. As a result of the ANOVA similarity analysis conducted for the publication type and branch categorical moderators, it was determined that the effect sizes of teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy beliefs differed significantly according to the branch variable. As a result of the meta-regression analysis performed for the publication year, sample size and application period which were assessed as continuous variables, it was determined that the publication year (Z=-5.46504, p<0.05) and sample size (Z=2.70837, p<0.05) moderators caused significant differences on the effect sizes of the teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy beliefs. Some recommendations were made in line with the study results.

Keywords

• Professional development programs
• Science teaching self-efficacy Beliefs
• Self-efficacy,
• Effect size,
• Meta-analysis,

References

1. (* shows the studies included in the meta-analysis.) Ada, S. ve Ünal, S. (2009). Eğitim bilimine giriş. Ankara: Nobel.
2. *Atia, K. M. (2012). Exploring the influence of a summer professional development program on teachers' self-effıcacy belief outcomes and the possible effect on science CST scores (Publication No. 923853630) (Unpublished master thesis, California State University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
3. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10-20.
4. Avidav, A. (2000). Professional career empowerment amongst teachers in primary school: The concept and its components (Unpublished PhD thesis), Hebrew University.
5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
7. Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51(2), 269-290.
8. Banilower, E. R., Boyd, S. E., Pasley, J. & Weiss, I. R. (2005). Lessons from a decade of mathematics and science reform. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon, Research,

9. Bhattacharyya, S.,Volk, T., & Lumpe, A. (2009). The Influence of an extensive inquiry-base field experience on pre-service elementary student teachers’ science teaching beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(3), 199-218.
10. Blanford, P. E. (2008). Teachers' participation in formal induction programs and their subsequent level of professional growth in wisconsin public schools (Publication No. 3326690) [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Southern Mississippi]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
11. Blandford, S. (2000).Managing professional development inschools. London: Routledge.
12. Bleicher, R. E. (2006). Nurturingconfidence in preservice elementary science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(6), 841-860.
13. Borenstein, M., Cooper, H., Hedges, L., & Valentine, J. (2009). Effect sizes for continuous data. The Handbook of Research synthesis and Meta-Analysis, 2, 221-235.
14. Borenstein, M. (2009). Effect sizes for continuous data. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.) (pp. 221–35). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
15. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2005). Comprehensive Meta-analysis Version 2. Englewood, N. J: Biostat. Available from: http://www.meta-analysis.com/downloads/Meta-Analysis-Manual.pdf
16. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed effect and random effects models for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 1(2), 97-111.
17. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
18. Cakiroglu, J., Capa-Aydin, Y., & Hoy, A. W. (2012). Science teaching efficacy beliefs. In Second international handbook of science education (pp. 449-461). Dordrecht: Springer.
19. Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. New York: The Guilford Press.
20. Chesnut, S. R., & Burley, H. (2015). Self-efficacy as a predictor of commitment to the teaching profession: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 15, 1-16. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.001.
21. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th Edition). New York: Routledge
22. Czerniak, C. M., & Schriver, M. (1994). An examination of preservice science teachers’ beliefs and behaviors as related to self-efficacy. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 5(3),77-86.
23. Deehan, J. (2017). The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instruments (STEBI A and B): A comprehensive review of methods and findings from 25 years of science education research. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
24. Dembo, M. H., & Gibson, S. (1985). Teachers’ sense of efficacy: An important factor in school improvement. The Elementary School Journal, 86, 173-184.
25. *Deniz, H., & Akerson, V. (2013). Examining the impact of a professional development program on elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and nature of scientific inquiry, and science teaching efficacy beliefs. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 17(3), 1-19.
26. Desimone, L.M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199. doi: 10.3102/0013189X08331140.
27. *Eshach, H. (2003). Inquiry-events as a tool for changing science teaching efficacy belief of kindergarten and elementary school teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(4), 495-501.
28. *Ewing-Taylor, J. M. (2012). A longitudinal evaluation study of a science Professional development program for K-12 teachers: Nerds (Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database. (3539187).
29. Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Best, S., & Tal, R. T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643-658.
30. *Gado, I.,Verma, G., & Simonis, D. (2008). Middle grade teachers’ perceptions of their chemistry teaching efficacy: Findings of a one year long professional development program. Georgia Educational Researcher, 6(1), 46-57. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S., (2001). What makes professional development effective: Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
31. Guskey, T. R. (2003). What makes professional development effective?. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(10), 748-750.
32. Haney, J., Lumpe, A., & Czerniak, C. (2002). From beliefs to actions: The beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 171-187. *Haney, J. J., Jing, W., Keil, C., & Zoffel, J. (2007). Enhancing teachers' beliefs and practices through problem-based learning focused on pertinent issues of environmental health science. Journal of Environmental Education, 38(4), 25-33.
33. Hartmann, D. P. (1977). Considerations in the choice of interobserver reliability estimates. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10(1), 103-116.
34. Hechter, R. P. (2008). Changes in preservice elementary teachers’ personal science teaching efficacy and science teaching outcome expectancies: The influence of context, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of North Dakota.
35. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J., (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one? Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3-15.
36. Higgins, J., & Parkons, R., (2009). A successful professional development model in mathematics: A system-wide new zealand case. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 231-24.
37. Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539-1558.
38. Higgins, J.,Thompson, S., Deeks, J., & Altman, D. (2002). Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: A critical appraisal of guideline sandpractice. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 7(1), 51-61.
39. Jarrett, O. S. (1999). Science interest and confidence among preservice elementary teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 11, 49-59.
40. Kalkan, F. (2020). Öğretmenlerin öz yeterlik inançları ve iş doyumu düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki: Bir meta analiz çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 45(204), 317-342.
41. Klassen, R. M.,& Tze, V. M. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59-76.
42. Landis, J. R. & Koch, G. G. (1977) Themeasurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174.
43. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Applied social research methods series; Vol. 49. Practical Meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
44. Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., Love, N., & Hewson, P. W. (2009). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Corwin press.
45. *Luera, G., & Murray, K. (2016). A mixed methods approach to determining the impact of a geoscience field research program upon science teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and instructional practices. Journal of Geoscience Education, 64(4), 303-313. https://doi.org/10.5408/14-064.1
46. Luft, J. A., & Hewson, P. W. (2014). Research on teacher professional development programs in science. Handbook of research on science education, 2, 889-909.
47. *Lumpe, A., Czerniak, C., Haney, J., & Beltyukova, S. (2012). Beliefs about teaching science: The relationship between elementary teachers’ participation in professional development and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 34(2), 153-166.
48. Madden, M. R. (2016). Systemic changes occurring in elementary schools that pursue a STEM focus (Order No. 10240305). Available from ProQuest Central. (1867043476). Retrieved https://ezproxy.wilkes.edu/login?url=https://searchproquestcom.ezproxy.wilkes.edu/docview/1867043476?accountid=62703
49. Martin, B. J. (2016). A case study investigation of practices and beliefs of teachers at a STEM-focused elementary school (Order No. 10183244). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1853109859). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/docview/1853109859?accountid=14872
50. Menezes, L. (2011). Collaborative research as a strategy of professional development of teachers. In Ubuz, B.(Ed), Proceedings of the 35th Int. Conference on the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (Vol. 3, pp: 225-232), Ankara, TURKEY: PME.
51. Mintzes, J. J., Marcum, B., Messerschmidt-Yates, C., & Mark, A. (2013). Enhancing selfefficacy in elementary science teaching with professional learning communities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1201-1218.
52. Özer, B. (2005). Ortaöğretim öğretmenlerinin mesleki gelişime ilgisi. Journal of Educational Sciences & Practices, 4(8), 1-11.
53. *Peters-Burton, E. E., Merz, S. A., Ramirez, E. M., & Saroughi, M. (2015). The effect of cognitive apprenticeship-based professional development on teacher self-efficacy of science teaching, motivation, knowledge calibration, and perceptions of inquiry-based teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(6), 525-548. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10972-015-9436-1
54. Petitti D. B. (2000). Meta-analysis, Decision Analysis and Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Methods for Quantitative Synthesis in Medicine, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
55. *Posnanski, T. J. (2002). Professional development programs for elementary science teachers: An analysis of teacher self-efficacy beliefs and a professional development model. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 189-220.
56. Bennett, J. M. P. (2016). An investigation of elementary teachers' self-efficacy for teaching integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education (Doctoral Dissertation). Available from ProQuest Central. (1819538425). Retrieved from https://ezproxy.wilkes.edu/login?url=https://search-roquestcom.ezproxy.wilkes.edu/docview/1819538425?accountid=62703
57. Ramakrishnan, R., & Salleh, N. M. (2018). Teacher’s self-efficacy: A systematic review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(12), 2379-2402.
58. Sağlam, M., ve Yüksel, İ. (2007). Program değerlendirmede meta-analiz ve meta değerlendirme yöntemleri. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18, 175-188.
59. *Sandholtz, J. H., & Ringstaff, C. (2014). Inspiring instructional change in elementary school science: The relationship between enhanced self-efficacy and teacher practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(6), 729-751. doi:10.1007/s10972-014-9393-0
60. Schriver, M., & Czerniak, C. M. (1999). A comparison of middle and junior high science teachers’ levels of efficacy and knowledge of developmentally appropriate curriculum and instruction. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(1), 21-42.
61. Shoji, K., Cieslak, R., Smoktunowicz, E., Rogala, A., Benight, C. C., & Luszczynska, A. (2016). Associations between job burnout and self-efficacy: A meta-analysis. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 29(4), 367-386.
62. *Stewart, A. E., Knox, J. A., & Schneider, P. (2015). Piloting and evaluating a workshop to teach Georgia teachers about weather science and safety. Journal of Geoscience Education, 63(4), 271-284.
63. Thalheimer, W., & Cook, S. (2002). How to calculate effect sizes from published research: A simplified methodology. Work-Learning Research, 1, 1-9.
64. *Tinnin, R. K. (2000). The effectiveness of a long-term professional development program on teachers’ selfefficacy, attitudes, skills, and knowledge using a thematic learning approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas.
65. Trimmell, M. D. (2015). The effects of stem-rich clinical professional development on elementary teachers’ sense of self-efficacy in teaching science (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (UMI 3704976).
66. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80-91.
67. Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: An international review of the literature. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO.
68. *Wingfield, M. E. (1998). The effect of site based preservice experiences on elementary science teaching self-efficacy beliefs. Doctoral dissertation, University of Houston. UMI Number: 9828336.
69. Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis. Sage, Newbury Park, CA.