Perils to Self-Efficacy Perceptions and Teacher-Preparation Quality among Special Education Intern Teachers.

Abstract

Researchers estimate that 30 percent of teachers are likely to leave the profession within three years (Plash & Piotrowski, 2006). First year special education teachers are two and half times more likely to leave their job than their peers in general education (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004). In California, the attrition rate is 36 percent for special education teachers with two or fewer years of experience, compared to 20 percent for general educators (Levine, Doorlag, & Godlewski, 1995). These dire statistics have a direct bearing on the preparation and retention of special education intern teachers, which are imperiled due to fiscal realities, limited resources, inadequate preparation programs, and increased workloads. How we prepare future teachers of special education is a key if we are to improve the status quo. Colleges and universities are expected to produce a diverse and flexible workforce, instill pedagogically sound and relevant practices, and provide high quality fieldwork experiences for their candidates. Teacher preparation programs are further expected to recruit and aid in teacher retention, particularly in high needs areas such as mathematics, science, and special education. To meet these challenges, some states and institutions of higher education offer alternative credentialing programs that allow those already possessing baccalaureate degrees to be employed by school districts while completing credential requirements (Hawk & Schmidt, 2005). Meeting these challenges often rests on the preparation quality candidate teachers receive and their ability to put it into practice. Whether pathways to credentialing are traditional or alternative, teacher preparation programs must examine a variety of outcome variables associated with effective teacher performance. These can include objective indicators on teaching programs, practices, and policies, and more subjective indicators such as teacher's self-efficacy or perceptions of control (Bandura, 1977, 1997). Because a lack of teacher self-efficacy can undermine even the best of teacher education, it is imperative that we assess the types of perils that can arise in its absence. This is particularly important given the continued limited-resource environments and other threats to an already over-taxed education infrastructure (Nieto, 2005). Teacher self-efficacy has been widely researched since it was first introduced in 1977. The concept is based on Bandura's (1977, 1982, 1984, 1997) cognitive theory of social learning and refers to the conviction that a teacher can produce desired outcomes in his/her students. In an attempt to measure teacher self-efficacy, Gibson and Dembo (1984) developed a 30-item scale, which was based on the two scales from a Rand study (Armor et al., 1976). The original two items in the Rand study were expanded to improve the validity and reliability in Gibson and Dembo's scale (Hoy & Spero, 2005). Both scales yielded two factors in self-efficacy; personal teaching efficacy (PTE, [alpha]=.78, %var. 18%) and general teaching efficacy (GTE, [alpha]=.75, %var. 10%). PTE is defined as the levels of teacher confidence in their ability to promote students' learning. GTE refers to the levels of teacher confidence about the power of teaching (Gibson & Dembo). Because PTE is most associated with the belief of influencing behaviors as a result of one's actions, rather than a more generalized belief implied by GTE, this study follows previous research and primarily focuses on the former dimension (Bandura, 1997; Gibson & Dembo, 1984). Ample research supports the PTE scale, which has been linked as a causal factor to: teacher resiliency (Yost, 2006); teacher effectiveness and students' achievement (Soto & Goetz, 1998); the use of recommended practices and student's academic outcomes (Rose, 1995; Soto & Goetz, 1998); and implementing new innovative teaching strategies (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997). …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 55 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.