Learning Environments Research

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 39–58

Teaching teachers: An investigation of beliefs in teacher education students

Article

Abstract

Influenced by work on learner-centred education, teacher efficacy and teachers’ concerns, we conducted an investigation of the influence of 185 preservice teachers’ teacher efficacy and concerns on their learner-centred beliefs. Learner-centred beliefs were selected for the purposes of this study as the best indicator of future teaching actions because these preservice teachers had not yet entered the classroom or engaged in teaching practices. Preservice teacher efficacy and concerns, individually and collectively, significantly influenced learner-centred beliefs. These findings indicate that teacher education can facilitate the development of learner-centred beliefs by addressing these trainable characteristics and demonstrate the need to further explore both teacher efficacy and concerns as they relate to learner-centred education within teacher education programs.

Keywords

Learner-centred Teacher concerns Teacher education Teacher efficacy 

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1996). The directive influence of attitudes on behavior. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking motivation and cognition to behavior (pp. 385–403). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association (APA). (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school reform and redesign (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  4. Amit, M., & Fried, M. N. (2002). Research, reform and times of change. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 355–381). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, L. M., Raphael, T. E., Englert, C. S., & Stevens, D. (1991, April). Teaching writing with a new instructional model: Variations in teachers’ practices and students’ performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
  8. Barone, T., Berliner, D. C., Blanchard, J., Casanova, U., & McGowan, T. (1996). A future for teacher education: Developing a strong sense of professionalism. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education: A project of the Association of Teacher Educators (pp. 1108–1149). New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  9. Barr, R. B. (1998). Obstacles to implementing the learning paradigm: What it takes to overcome them. About Campus, 3(4), 18–25.Google Scholar
  10. Benton-Borghi, B. H. (2006). Teaching every student in the 21st century: Teacher efficacy and technology (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 2006). Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(07A), 2540.Google Scholar
  11. Bouffard-Bouchard, T. (1990). Influence of self-efficacy on performance in a cognitive task. Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 353–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bruce, C. D., & Ross, J. A. (2008). A model for increasing reform implementation and teacher efficacy: Teacher peer coaching in grades 3 and 6 mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education, 31, 346–371.Google Scholar
  13. Burton, J. P., Bamberry, N. J., & Harris-Boundy, J. (2005). Developing personal teaching efficacy in new teachers in university settings. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4, 160–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Conway, P. F., & Clark, C. M. (2003). The journey inward and outward: A re-examination of Fuller’s concerns-based model of teacher development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(5), 465–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cousins, J. B., & Walker, C. A. (2000). Predictors of educators’ valuing of systematic inquiry in schools [Special edition]. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 15, 25–52.Google Scholar
  16. Cuban, L. (2007). Hugging the middle: Teaching in an era of testing and accountability, 1980–2005. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 15(1), 33–57.Google Scholar
  17. Cummins, C. L. (1998). An investigation of the relationship between teachers’ orientations in reading—Process and instruction: Four case studies (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(06A), 1965.Google Scholar
  18. Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 4–10.Google Scholar
  19. Darling-Hammond, L. (2001). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  20. Dunn, K. E. (2007). Teacher beliefs: An exploration of the relationship of teacher efficacy and years teaching to teachers’ learner-centered beliefs. National Forum of Applied Educational Research, 20(3), 1–18.Google Scholar
  21. Fives, H. (2003). Exploring the relationships of teachers’ efficacy, knowledge, and pedagogical beliefs: A multimethod study (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Maryland, 2003). Dissertation Abstracts International, 64, 3188.Google Scholar
  22. Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207–226.Google Scholar
  23. Fuller, F. F., & Brown, O. H. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K. Ryan (Ed.), Teacher education: Part II. Seventy-fourth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 25–52). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  24. Fuller, F. F., Parsons, J. S., & Watkins, J. E. (1973, April). Concerns of teachers: Research and reconceptualization. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  25. George, A. A., Hall, G. E., & Stiegelbauer, S. M. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: The Stages of Concern Questionnaire. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
  26. Ghaith, G., & Shaaban, K. (1999). The relationship between perceptions of teaching concerns, teacher efficacy, and selected teacher characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 487–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gist, M. E. (1989). The influence of training method on self-efficacy and idea generation among managers. Personnel Psychology, 43, 789–805.Google Scholar
  28. Hall, G. E., George, A. A., & Rutherford, W. L. (1979). Measuring stages of concerns about the innovation: A manual for use of the SoC Questionnaire. Austin, TX: University of Texas.Google Scholar
  29. Hall, G. E., George, A. A., & Rutherford, W. L. (1986). Measuring the Stages of Concern about the innovation: A manual for use of the SoC Questionnaire. Austin, TX: University of Texas.Google Scholar
  30. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2001). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  32. Hall, G. E., Hord, S. M., George, A. A., Stiegelbauer, S., & Dirksen, D. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: The concerns based adoption model. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
  33. Hall, G. E., Wallace, R. C., & Dossett, W. A. (1973). A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Austin, TX: Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, The University of Texas.Google Scholar
  34. Hord, S. M., & Huling-Austin, L. (1986). Effective curriculum implementation: Some promising new insights. The Elementary School Journal, 87, 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hord, S. M., Rutherford, W. L., Huling-Austin, L., & Hall, G. E. (2005). Taking charge of change. Austin, TX: Southeast Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
  36. INTASC. (1992). Model standards for beginning teacher licensing and development: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.Google Scholar
  37. James, R. K., Lamb, C. E., Householder, D. L., & Bailey, M. A. (2000). Integrating science, mathematics, and technology in middle school technology-rich environments: A study of implementation and change. School Science and Mathematics, 100, 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Knoblauch, D. E. (2004). Contextual factors and the development of student teachers’ sense of efficacy (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 2004). Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(09A), 3343.Google Scholar
  39. Latham, G. P., Millman, Z., & Miedema, H. (1998). Theoretical, practical and organizational issues affecting training. In C. J. De Wolff, P. J. D. Drenth, & H. Thierry (Eds.), A handbook of work and organizational psychology: Personnel psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 185–207). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press, Ltd.Google Scholar
  40. Lehman, B., Allen, V., & Freeman, E. (1990). Teacher perceptions and practices for using children’s literature in elementary reading instruction. ERIC document reproduction no. ED 329 937.Google Scholar
  41. Lotter, C. (2004). Pre-service science teachers’ concerns through classroom observations and student teaching: Special focus on inquiry teaching. Science Educator, 13(1), 29–38.Google Scholar
  42. Maxson, S. (1995). At-risk learners: The influence of teacher beliefs on classroom practices. Reading: Exploration and Discovery, 16(2), 31–37.Google Scholar
  43. McCombs, B. L. (1997). Self-assessment and reflection: Tools for promoting teacher changes toward learner-centered practices. NASSP Bulletin, 81(587), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McCombs, B. L. (1999). The Assessment of Learner-Centered Practices (ALCP): Tools for teacher reflection, learning, and change. Denver, CO: University of Denver Research Institute.Google Scholar
  45. McCombs, B. L. (2002a, February). The learner-centered framework: A research-validated rational for defining healthy educational environments. University of Denver Research Institute: Talking paper for education committee hearing, Sacramento, CA. Retrieved November 5, 2007, from http://www.amersports.org/library/reports/9.html.
  46. McCombs, B. L. (2002b, April). How can we define teacher quality? The learner-centered framework. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  47. McCombs, B. L. (2003, April). Defining tools for teacher reflection: The Assessment of Learner-Centered Practices (ALCP). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  48. McCombs, B. L., & Lauer, P. A. (1997). Development and validation of the learner-centered battery: Self-assessment tools for teacher reflection and professional development. The Professional Educator, 20(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  49. McCombs, B. L., & Quiat, M. A. (1999). A study of the learner-centeredness of the Community for Learning (CFL) Program. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Center for Research in Human Development in Education. Retrieved October 30, 2007, from http://www.temple.edu/Lss/pdf/spotlights/500/spot500.pdf.
  50. McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  51. McKinney, M., Sexton, T., & Meyerson, M. J. (1999). Validating the efficacy-based change model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 477–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. NCATE Unit Standards. (2006). National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. Retrieved April 16, 2007, from http://www.ncate.org/Standards/NCATEUnitStandards/UnitStandardsinEffect2008/tabid/476/Default.aspx.
  53. Negrete, E. G. (2004). Faculty concerns and perceptions of mandated educational change: An exploratory study (Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 2004). Dissertation Abstracts International, 11A, 4127.Google Scholar
  54. Newman, C., Moss, B., Lenarz, M., & Newman, I. (1998, October). The impact of a PDS internship/student teaching program on the self-efficacy, stages of concern and role perceptions of preservice teaching: The evaluation of a goals 2000 project. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  55. O’Sullivan, K. A., & Zielinski, E. J. (1988, April). Development of a stages of concern questionnaire for pre-service teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Ozark, MO.Google Scholar
  56. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543–578.Google Scholar
  57. Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Self and self-belief in psychology and education: A historical perspective. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 3–20). Amsterdam: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teacher’s beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.Google Scholar
  59. Piggie, 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, 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167–199.Google Scholar
  61. Rakes, G. C., & Casey, H. B. (2002). An analysis of teacher concerns toward instructional technology. International Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1). Retrieved February 23, 2007, from http://www.ao.uiuc.edu/ijet/v3n1/Author2/.
  62. Rakes, G. C., & Dunn, K. (2008, March). Exploring relationships between teacher technology concerns and classroom practices. Paper presented at the nineteenth annual international conference for the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
  63. Rakes, G. C., Fields, V. F., & Cox, K. E. (2006). The influence of teachers’ technology use on instructional practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38, 411–426.Google Scholar
  64. Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D., & Lloyd, C. (1991). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practices in reading comprehension instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 559–586.Google Scholar
  65. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  66. Ross, J. A., Cousins, J. B., & Gadalla, T. (1996). Within-teacher predictors of teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 385–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schraw, G., Flowerday, T., & Lehman, S. (2001). Increasing situational interest in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 211–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sinatra, G. M. (2005). The “warming trend” in conceptual change research: The legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40, 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stanton, J. M., Sinar, E. F., Balzer, W. K., & Smith, P. C. (2002). Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales. Personnel Psychology, 55, 167–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sweeney, B. (2003). The CBAM: A model of the people development process. International Mentoring Association. Retrieved January 3, 2007, from http://www.mentoring-association.org/membersonly/CBAM.html.
  71. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2002, April). What is the value of understanding beliefs? An exploration of beliefs related to academic achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  73. van den Berg, R. (1993). The concerns-based model in the Netherlands, Flanders, and the United Kingdom: State of the art and perspective. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 19(1), 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Vogler, K. E. (2006). Impact of high school graduation examination on Tennessee science teachers’ instructional practices. American Secondary Education, 35(1), 33–57.Google Scholar
  75. Weimer, M. (2002). Learner centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  76. Woolfolk, A. E., Rossoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and their beliefs about managing students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zielinski, E. J., & Preston, D. (1992, March). The evolution of pre-service science teachers’ concerns about teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  78. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Educational Statistics and Research Methods, 248 Graduate Education BuildingThe University of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA
  2. 2.Educational Studies, 205F Gooch HallThe University of Tennessee at MartinMartinUSA

Personalised recommendations