Advertisement

A CASE STUDY OF ELEMENTARY BEGINNING MATHEMATICS TEACHERS’ EFFICACY DEVELOPMENT

  • Yu-Liang (Aldy) ChangEmail author
Article

Abstract

The main purpose of this research was to explore the developmental process of and possible changes in beginning elementary mathematics teachers’ efficacy. Beginning teachers with and without mathematics and science backgrounds were also compared to explore differences in their efficacy development. A multiple-case study method with a process and recursive design was employed in this study. The participants were six beginning elementary mathematics teachers purposefully selected from Taichung, Taiwan. Data were collected through interviews, recordings, observations, and reflection notes and then analyzed by immersion and editing analytic techniques. Based on the data analysis, a five-gradation developmental model and its characteristics of elementary beginning mathematics teacher efficacy was developed and proposed. The findings demonstrated the developmental process of this five-gradation model and its continuity and cyclical nature. Moreover, beginning mathematics teachers, who were at the same efficacy levels, tended to exhibit substantial similarities but slight differences in their developmental processes. This study also verified that the construct of internal and external factors played a significant role in cyclically contributing to continuous efficacy development. The implications of beginning mathematics teachers’ efficacy and their professional development that derived from the findings and discussions were proposed, as well as a recommendation for further exploration on their efficacy development.

Key words

efficacy development elementary beginning mathematics teacher professional development teacher efficacy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allinder, R. M. (1995). An examination of the relationship between teacher efficacy and curriculum-based measurement and student achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 16(4), 247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armor, D., Conroy-Osequera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnel, L., Pascal, A., et al. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading programs in selected Los Angeles minority school (R-2007-LAUSD). Santa Monica: Rand.Google Scholar
  3. Ashton, P. (1985). Motivation and the teacher’s sense of efficacy. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (vol. 2): The classroom mileau (pp. 141–174). Orlando: Academic.Google Scholar
  4. Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (Eds.) (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33, 344–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandura, A. (1981). Self-referent thought: A developmental analysis of self-efficacy. In J. H. Flavell & L. Ross (Eds.), Social cognitive development frontiers and possible futures. Melbourne: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  8. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 322–347.Google Scholar
  9. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  10. Benz, C. R., Bradley, L., Alderman, M. K., & Flowers, M. A. (1992). Personal teaching efficacy: Developmental relationships in education. Journal of Educational Research, 85(5), 274–285.Google Scholar
  11. Cantrell, P., Young, S., & Moore, A. (2003). Factors affecting science teaching efficacy of preservice elementary teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14, 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chang, Y. L. (2003). Knowledge assessment and self-efficacy ratings in teacher preparation. Paper presented at the annual conference of Northwest Association of Teacher Educators (NWATE), Spokane, WA, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Chang, Y. L., & Wu, S. C. (2006). Teacher efficacy and elementary teacher education. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10(3), 75–79.Google Scholar
  14. Chang, Y. L., & Wu, S. C. (2007). An exploratory study of elementary beginning mathematics teacher efficacy. In J. Woo, H. Lew, K. Park & D. Seo (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, vol. 2 (pp. 2-89–2-96). Seoul: PME 31.Google Scholar
  15. Chu-Chen, H. S. (2002). The relationship between elementary teacher’s self efficacy and professional knowledge. Unpublished thesis of National Taichung Teachers College, Taichung, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  16. Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Second handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (eds). (1999). Doing qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hermanowicz, H. J. (1966). The pluralistic world of beginning teachers. In The real world of the beginning teacher. Report of the nineteenth national TEPS conference. Washington, DC: National Education Association.Google Scholar
  20. Hong, C. C. (2002). The long-term effect of teaching with the guidance of lessons: Instructional concept, professional need, and teacher efficacy of the intern. Final report of the National Science Council Project, Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  21. Knoblauch, D., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2008). “Maybe I can teach those kids.” The influence of contextual factors on student teachers’ efficacy beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 166–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Madison, S. K. (1997). Preparing efficacious elementary teachers in science and mathematics: The influence of methods courses. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8(2), 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ministry of Education of Taiwan. (1999). New regulations of teacher education. Taipei: Author.Google Scholar
  24. Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Teachers’ belief and behaviors: What really matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 247–258.Google Scholar
  25. Mulholland, J., & Wallace, J. (2001). Teacher induction and elementary science teaching: Enhancing self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 243–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.Google Scholar
  27. Pan, S. M. (2003). Qualitative research: Theory and practice. Taipei: Psychology.Google Scholar
  28. Polettini, A. F. (2000). Mathematics teaching life histories in the study of teachers’ perceptions of change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 765–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ross, J. A. (1998). The antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. Advances in Research on Teaching, 7, 49–73.Google Scholar
  30. Thomas, D. R. (2000). Qualitative data analysis: Using a general inductive approach. New Zealand: Health Research Methods Advisory Service, Department of Community Health University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  31. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolkfolk Hoy, A. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 944–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248.Google Scholar
  34. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Teaching ArtMingDao UniversityChanghuaTaiwan
  2. 2.ChiayiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations