research report Teacher Efficacy: What Is It and Does It Matter?

Nancy Protheroe

eacher efficacy— A teacher’s sense of efficacy can “teachers’ confidence lead to gains in the classroom. Tin their ability to promote ’ learn- ing” (Hoy, 2000)—was first discussed as a concept more than 30 years ago when these two items were includ- ed in studies conducted by researchers at the Rand Corp.:

n “When it comes right down to it, a teacher really can’t do much because most of a ’s motivation and performance depends on his or her home environment.” n “If I try really hard, I can get through to even the most difficult or unmoti- vated students” (Armor et al., 1976, in Henson, 2001).

Teachers were asked to express their degree of agreement or dis- agreement with each of the two state- ments and their responses initiated the concept of teacher efficacy. From the beginning, this “early work

IN BRIEF Teachers’ level of confidence about ability to promote learning can depend on past experiences or on the culture. Principals can help develop a sense of efficacy for individual teachers and for the entire school.

42 Principal n May/June 2008 Yellow Dog Productions/Getty Images suggested powerful effects from the Building on the work of Bandura, simple idea that a teacher’s belief in his “ … a teacher may have Hoy (2000) discusses other factors or her ability to positively impact stu- that can impact a teacher’s sense of dent learning is critical to actual success faith generally in the efficacy: or failure in a teacher’s behavior” ability of teachers to (Henson, 2001). n Vicarious experiences. For example, Some researchers suggest that the reach difficult children, a teacher might observe another more precise term “teacher sense of effi- teacher using a particularly effective cacy” be used, as what is being discussed while lacking confidence practice and thus feel more confident is a teacher’s sense of competence—not in his or her personal that, through its use, she could be some objective measure of actual com- more successful in reaching her petence. From a practical standpoint, teaching ability.” students. there are two important questions relat- n Social persuasion. In a school setting, ed to this theoretical construct: this could take the form of either pep talks or feedback that highlights n How does a teacher’s sense of efficacy have worked to develop longer and effective teaching behaviors while affect his or her teaching? more focused instruments to get at the providing constructive and specific n Can it, through its impact on teaching, beliefs the first two Rand items were suggestions for ways to improve. How- affect student achievement? intended to measure. Their work has ever, such “persuasion” is likely to also increased our understanding of lose its positive impact if subsequent Over the years, since the concept was the concept. It is now generally thought teacher experiences are not positive. first developed, researchers have helped that two types of beliefs comprise the to provide answers to both these ques- construct of efficacy. The first,personal Hoy (2000) views the school setting tions. In his review of research, Jerald teaching efficacy, relates to a teacher’s itself—especially the ways in which (2007) highlights some teacher behav- own feeling of confidence in regard to teachers new to the are iors found to be related to a teacher’s teaching abilities. The second, often socialized—as having a potentially pow- sense of efficacy. Teachers with a stron- called general teaching efficacy, “appears erful impact on a teacher’s sense of ger sense of efficacy: to reflect a general belief about the efficacy. For example, is a new teacher power of teaching to reach difficult chil- encouraged to view asking for help as n Tend to exhibit greater levels of plan- dren” (Hoy, 2000). Researchers have not only normal, but desirable? This ning and organization; also found that these two constructs are can be an important way to ensure that n Are more open to new ideas and are independent. Thus, a teacher may have such a new teacher does not experi- more willing to experiment with new faith generally in the ability of teachers ence a series of failures that in turn methods to better meet the needs of to reach difficult children, while lacking affect mastery experiences, the prime their students; confidence in his or her personal teach- determinant of a sense of efficacy. n Are more persistent and resilient when ing ability. things do not go smoothly; Collective Efficacy n Are less critical of students when they How Do Teachers Develop Some researchers have taken the con- make errors; and a Sense of Efficacy? cept of teacher efficacy to another level n Are less inclined to refer a difficult stu- An important factor in the determi- and developed a complementary con- dent to special . nation of a teacher’s sense of efficacy struct called collective teacher efficacy. is, not surprisingly, experience, or Goddard, Hoy, and Hoy (2000) define Anita Woolfolk, a longtime researcher what Bandura (1977), a leader in the this as “the perceptions of teachers in a on the subject of teacher efficacy, sum- development of self-efficacy theory, school that the efforts of the faculty as a marizes practical implications of these calls performance accomplishments. whole will have a positive effect on stu- findings: Has he or she been able to make a dents,” with the faculty in general agree- difference in student learning? Hoy ing that “teachers in this school can get Teachers who set high goals, who persist, (2000) suggests that “some of the most through to the most difficult students.” who try another strategy when one approach powerful influences on the develop- In the view of these researchers, “teach- is found wanting—in other words, teachers ment of teacher efficacy are mastery ers’ shared beliefs shape the normative who have a high sense of efficacy and act on experiences during student teaching environment of … [and] are an it—are more likely to have students who learn and the induction year.” Thus, “the important aspect of the culture of the (Shaughnessy, 2004). first years of teaching could be criti- school.” cal to the long-term development of Veteran educators have likely expe- Researchers interested in the topic teacher efficacy.” rienced some of the effects of a strong www.naesp.org Principal n May/June 2008 43 positive—or negative—sense of collec- dent in their own abilities and in their tive efficacy. Teachers in a school char- “Teachers who believe effectiveness … is more likely to wel- acterized by a can-do, “together we can come parental participation.” Finally, it make a difference” attitude are typi- they can teach all can help to build teacher commitment cally more likely to accept challenging children in ways that to the school with individual teachers goals and be less likely to give up easily. more likely to “share what they know In contrast, teachers in a school char- enable them to meet with others.” acterized by a low level of collective efficacy are less likely to accept respon- these high standards are What Can Principals Do to sibility for students’ low performance more likely to exhibit Build a Sense of Efficacy? and more likely to point to student risk Although much of teachers’ sense factors, such as poverty and limited teaching behaviors that of individual and collective efficacy knowledge of English, as causes. can be linked to their past levels of Finally, as with an individual teach- support this goal.” success or failure in teaching children, er’s sense of efficacy, there is a positive researchers point out that this factor is relationship between collective efficacy not the whole story. For example, God- and student achievement. For exam- dard and Skrla (2006) looked at school ple, a study conducted by Hoy, Sweet- influence the socioeconomic status of characteristics reported by 1,981 teach- land, and Smith (2002) found that the school.” ers and correlated them with teachers’ collective efficacy “was more important In their summary of research on col- reported levels of efficacy. Less than in explaining school achievement than lective efficacy, Brinson and Steiner half the difference in efficacy could be socioeconomic status” and highlighted (2007) suggest that a school’s strong accounted for by factors such as the the finding’s practical significance sense of collective efficacy also can have school’s socioeconomic status level, stu- “because it is easier to change the col- a positive impact on parent-teacher dents’ achievement level, and faculty lective efficacy of a school than it is to relationships since “a staff that is confi- experience. Based on this, they suggest that principals have the opportunity regardless of a student’s background— Hoy, W. K., Sweetland, S. R., & Smith, P. A. to build collective efficacy through the throughout the year. (2002). Toward an organizational experiences they provide for teachers. model of achievement in high schools: The significance of collective efficacy. Hipp’s (1996) study of the influence In this time of high standards for Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(1), of principal leadership behaviors iden- all children, the concept of teacher 77-93. tified some behaviors as significantly efficacy—from the standpoint of indi- Jerald, C. D. (2007). Believing and achieving related to efficacy. Principals of teach- vidual teachers and of the faculty as a (Issue Brief). Washington, DC: Center ers reporting high levels of efficacy whole—is critically important. Teachers for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement. modeled behaviors such as risk-taking who believe they can teach all children Pfaff, M. E. (2000). The effects on teacher efficacy and cooperation. In addition, their in ways that enable them to meet these of school based collaborative activities structured principals were seen as inspiring high standards are more likely to exhib- as professional study groups. Paper presented group purpose. They contributed to it teaching behaviors that support this at the Annual Meeting of the American the development of a “shared vision goal. Thus, principals must intentionally Educational Research Association, New Orleans. which centered on creating a student- help teachers develop a sense of efficacy Shaughnessy, M. F. (2004). An interview centered atmosphere.” because, as Goddard, Hoy, and Hoy with Anita Woolfolk: The educational Building on such findings, Goddard, (2000) remind us, “It is not enough to psychology of teacher efficacy.Educational Hoy, and Hoy (2000) suggest that hire and retain the brightest teachers— Psychology Review, 16(2), 153-175. one way for school administrators to they must also believe they can success- improve student achievement is by fully meet the challenges of the task at working to raise the collective efficacy hand.” P Web Resources beliefs of their faculties. Pointing to the “Believing and Achieving,” an impact of past teaching experiences on Nancy Protheroe is director of special Issue Brief posted by The Center for the development of a teacher’s sense research projects at Educational Comprehensive School Reform and of efficacy, Hoy, Sweetland, and Smith Research Service. Her e-mail address is Improvement, integrates an overview (2002) suggest that school leaders [email protected]. of research on teacher efficacy with a “need to lead in ways that promote discussion of educators’ responsibility mastery experiences for teachers.” References Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward for student learning. While Goddard, Hoy, and Hoy a unifying theory of behavioral change. www.centerforcsri.org/files/ (2000) agree, they also recognize that Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. CenterIssueBriefJan07.pdf “Although mastery experiences are Brinson, D., & Steiner, L. (2007). Building the most powerful efficacy changing collective efficacy: How leaders inspire teachers This Web site maintained by Anita forces, they may be the most difficult to achieve (Issue Brief). Washington, DC: Center for Comprehensive School Woolfolk Hoy, a researcher with interest to deliver to a faculty with a low col- Reform and Improvement. in teacher efficacy, includes links to lective efficacy.” They continue this Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. several surveys intended to measure a argument by writing that this situation (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: teacher’s sense of efficacy. can be remedied if school administra- Its meaning, measure, and impact www.coe.ohio-state.edu/ahoy/ tors “provide efficacy-building mastery on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), researchinstruments.htm experiences” through “thoughtfully 479-507. designed staff development activities Goddard, R. D., & Skrla, L. (2006). The In “Building Collective Efficacy: How and action research projects.” influence of school social composition Leaders Inspire Teachers to Achieve,” Pfaff (2000) studied a group of on teachers’ collective efficacy beliefs. authors Brinson and Steiner describe elementary school teachers who partici- Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(2), 216-235. ways to encourage a sense of collective pated in a study group that discussed Henson, R. K. (2001). Teacher self-efficacy: efficacy. issues related to instruction. Survey Substantive implications and measurement www.centerforcsri.org/files/ data found the participating teachers dilemmas. Paper presented at the Annual CenterIssueBriefOct07.pdf felt themselves to be more effective Meeting of the Educational Research after the experience and that they had Exchange, Station, TX. Hipp, K. A. (1996). Teacher efficacy: Influence implemented “subtle but powerful” of principal leadership behavior. Paper changes in their teaching styles and use presented at the Annual Meeting of of instructional strategies. The partici- the American Educational Research pating teachers were also significantly Association, New York. more likely than nonparticipants in the Hoy, A. W. (2000) Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching. Paper same school to maintain a high level of presented at the Annual Meeting of general teaching efficacy—the belief the American Educational Research that teachers can make a difference Association, New Orleans. www.naesp.org Principal n May/June 2008 45