HETL Global Communities

Using a Learning Community Approach to Continued Education to Increase Preschool Teachers’ Self-Efficacy

June 30, 2014 in Volume 4

HETL Note: We are proud to present to our readers the work of Dr. Amy Allen and Dr. Ruslan Slutsky whose study explores the effect of a learning community approach to empowering preschool teachers by improving their self-efficacy levels. The empirical results indicate that using participants’ own classrooms as a learning environment may help bridge the existing gap between theory and practice and serve as a feasible practical approach towards developing continued education university degree programs for preschool teachers.

AmyAllenPhotoAuthor bios: Dr. Amy Allen is an assistant professor at The University of Toledo (USA) in the Department of Early Childhood, Physical and Special Education. Her research interests include the assessment of student learning, effective teacher education practices, and quality preschool education practices. Dr. Allen works with undergraduate and graduate students in the Pre-K to Third Grade licensure program. Contact details: [email protected]

 

RuslanSlutskyPhotoDr. Ruslan Slutsky is an Associate Professor in the Early Childhood Education Department at The University of Toledo (USA). His qualitative research interests include the effects of learning communities on teaching and learning, the Reggio Emilia approach to teaching young children, Head Start, and play, with a particular focus on superhero and war play. Dr. Slutsky teaches undergraduate and graduate level courses in early childhood, play, and language development. Contact details: [email protected]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Using a Learning Community Approach to Continued Education to Increase Preschool Teachers’ Self-Efficacy

Amy Allen and Ruslan Slutsky

The University of Toledo, U.S.A.

Abstract

This study examines the effects of continued education on preschool teachers’ efficacy scores. Practicing preschool teachers enrolled in an on-line bachelor’s degree program were followed over the period of four semesters. The program was designed using a learning community approach, and using participants’ classrooms as laboratories for bridging the theory to practice gap that often exists. The pre- and post- data collected indicated a significant change in teachers’ efficacy levels at the end of the program. These findings are important to the field, as one indicator of high quality preschool programs is the efficacy of the teachers in the program. The results demonstrate that programs such as this may offer a feasible way to increase the efficacy levels of preschool teachers.

Keywords: teacher efficacy, continued education, preschool teachers

Introduction

High quality in early childhood education has been an ongoing concern in the field of education and especially in light of the findings of Locasale-Crouch et al. (2007), that as many as 33 percent of programs may be low in quality. Federal and state governments spend considerable tax dollars to improve the quality of preschool programs nationwide (Barnett & Yarosz, 2004). Quality is very important as it relates positively to children’s developmental outcomes and future school success (Meisels, 2006). The quality and ability of the classroom teacher to meet the needs of the children is critical in achieving high quality preschool education (Mashburn, Pianta, Hamre, Downer, Barbarin, & Bryant, 2008). Retaining high quality teachers is always a struggle in early childhood classrooms due to low salaries and lack of benefits at many early childhood centers. Many contend that having credentials in early childhood education has not been proven to improve child outcomes or raise the overall quality of classroom experiences (Early, Maxwell, Burchinal, Alva, Bender, & Bryant, 2007; Justice, Mashburn, Hamre, & Pianta, 2008). While there is much uncertainty regarding what actually correlates with quality in early childhood education, one variable, teacher self-efficacy has been found to positively correlate with classroom quality (Guo, Pianta, Justice, & Kaderavek, 2010).

Literature Review

Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy as discussed by Shidler (2009) can be viewed as the teacher’s ability to provide instruction and classroom experiences that impact student achievement. Self-efficacy is the belief that one has the ability to accomplish what they set out to do (Bandura, 1997). Teachers who have a high degree of self-efficacy believe they can impact children in a positive way and explore ways to be agents of change in their classrooms (Ross, 1995). Teachers who have low self-efficacy often blame children for their failures and lack motivation to want to succeed, rather they tend not to accept some responsibility for children who underperform (Ashton & Webb, 1986). In addition, teachers with low self-efficacy do not perceive themselves as having much impact on outcomes and perceive their teaching as having little impact on what children learn (Guskey & Passaro, 1994). A key finding from Guo, et al. (2010), suggests that additional years of preschool teaching experience has a negative effect on self-efficacy. If increased experience does not improve preschool teachers’ sense of efficacy, perhaps the type of professional development teachers undergo can have a more positive effect. In a 2011 study, researchers found that teachers who reported high levels of self-efficacy were more like to report high levels of sense of community, staff collaboration, and children’s engagement in the classroom. Teacher’s experience, however, was unrelated to teacher’s self-efficacy (Guo, Justice, Sawyer, & Tompkins, 2011).

Continued Education

Education level has been a highly debated issue in teacher quality (Barnett, Epstein, Friedman, Sansanelli, & Hustedt, 2009). Some researchers have found that, when compared to teachers without bachelor’s degrees, teachers with a bachelor’s degree in early childhood education have classrooms that are richer in language use, more sensitive (and less punitive), and have children who are overall more engaged in learning (Bowman, 2011). Others have also found this correlation and suggest that holding a bachelor’s degree improves teacher quality (Clifford & Maxwell, 2002). However, according to Fuller (2011) teachers holding bachelor’s degrees do not have a greater impact on children’s development. In fact, he suggests that “public dollars are wasted by requiring this credential” (p. 60). Early et al., (2006) found little to no correlation between holding a bachelor’s degree and teacher quality and child development outcomes. With mixed results from educational research on the impact teacher education has on student learning outcomes, how much more important is self-efficacy in this debate?

We believe self-efficacy to be a critical variable linked to high quality teaching. The challenge is how to develop and train teachers to have high levels of self-efficacy; as Strickland and Riley-Ayers (2007) suggest, the most effective professional development training occurs in the teacher’s classroom, or as close to it as possible. Such training takes advantage of the local experiences teachers provide to their children and makes the professional development more authentic.

Learning Communities

In the present study, not only was the training close to where the preschool teacher participants worked (all course related content was implemented in their own classrooms), but it was also conducted within a learning community. Over a two-year period the preschool teachers who participated in the program took coursework together and discussed the content of that coursework together. This follows a standard learning community approach where participants work together through linked coursework to “find greater coherence in what they are learning as well as increased intellectual interaction with faculty and fellow students” (Gabelnick, MacGregor, Matthews, & Smith, 1990, p. 5).

Being a member of a learning community afforded the preschool teachers the opportunity to form strong bonds, friendships, group identities, and cohesion with others (Matthews, 1986) because they spent multiple quarters or semesters learning and constructing knowledge together. The extra time spent with a cohort provides individuals with a unique opportunity to work closely with others over an extended period of time. The relationships that form allow participants to become more comfortable in their own constructions of knowledge over the duration of the course. The confidence and comfort that many feel in such a learning context helps build self- confidence in their own abilities as teachers.

The friendships that develop in learning communities provide participants the opportunity to discover what other participants have to say about the course and the curriculum. The effects of such relationships often result in an appreciation of others’ differing points of view, particularly regarding the teaching and learning process (Gabelnick et al., 1990). The discussions that arise in learning communities also afford participants a safe place to try out and share their ideas. Such discourse is continuous throughout the cohort experience and further builds confidence and self-efficacy. This is the type of self-efficacy teachers need to be effective in working with children and creating high quality environments.

Methodology

Participants

The participants in this study were 32 preschool teachers enrolled in an online degree program for early childhood education at a large mid-western university (to avoid confusion, these preschool teachers are referred to as “participants”; preschool children in their classrooms are referred to as “children”). The participants were part of a four semester program which, when completed successfully, would result in earning a bachelor’s degree in early childhood education. Admission requirements for the program included the following: teachers must have earned a two-year associate degree (a degree traditionally awarded by community colleges or technical schools) in either child development or early childhood education; teachers must have had a minimum cumulative grade point average of 2.7. The participants did not have to complete requirements for a state teaching license. Thus upon graduation, participants obtained a degree in early childhood education but did not hold a teaching license to teach in the public elementary schools (grades kindergarten to 3rd).

Participants were required to be working in a preschool classroom for the duration of their coursework. These classrooms served as learning laboratories for the participants. Assignments were based on theories, and then translated into best practices. Participants then had an opportunity to implement such practices in their own classrooms and then reflect and revisit them with instructors and classmates.

Participants worked together as a cohort and all participants took the same classes at the same time during the four semester program. This created a sense of community that, we believe, helped in producing the positive outcomes presented below.

Data Collection

At the beginning of the program, participants were asked to complete the Teacher’s Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). This was placed on the course website during the first few weeks of the program, and participants were invited asked to complete it by the end of the first month. No course points were awarded for this assignment, and participants were not required to complete the scale. However, all students chose to participate. Each student who participated completed a consent form giving their approval to use their anonymous responses for research purposes.

The second set of data were collected during the last month of the two-year program. Again, the scale was placed on the course website and each student was invited required to complete the scale. No course points were awarded for completing it.
Both the pre and post data were downloaded from the course websites through a course report link. The data were then put into SPSS files in order to complete the statistical analyses.

Data Analysis

Using the SPSS program, data were analyzed by applying a paired sample t-test to determine if there was a significant difference between pre- and post survey responses. First results were also analyzed at question level to identify specific questions that might provide insight into the research. Next results were analyzed at construct level to determine the significance of change over each specific construct identified in the TSES scale (Efficacy in Student Engagement, Efficacy in Instructional Strategies, Efficacy in Classroom Management). The results were examined for significance at the p < .05 level. A summary of the data analysis can be found as an appendix.

Results at Question Level

Of the 24 pairs of questions (pre- and post- for each question), eight pairs surfaced showing significant differences (Table 1). Although these data represent changes only at the question level, they do provide some insight into areas where participants appeared to have the biggest change in attitudes and perceptions.

Table 1. Paired samples t-test – question level

t

df

Sig. (2-  tailed)
Q 2 How much can you do to help your students to think critically?

-2.119

31

.042*

Q 7 How well can you respond to difficult questions from your students?

-2.119

31

.042*

Q 11 To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?

-2.790

31

.009**

Q 16 How well can you respond to defiant students?

-2.362

31

.025*

Q 18 How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies?

-2.188

31

.036*

Q 20 To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused?

-2.610

31

.014*

Q 21 How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of students?

-2.331

31

.026*

Q 23 How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?

-2.964

31

.006**

*p < .05, **p < .01

Efficacy in instructional strategies

Further investigation of the eight significant scores revealed that the majority of the significant differences occurred within the subscale Efficacy in Instructional Strategies (Table 2). These results, when considered together present a convincing argument that participants in the program changed their views about how well they were able to choose and implement instructional strategies. There are a total of eight questions that fall into this subscale, and significant results were reported for five of the questions. The other three questions, while not significant, did present reasonable differences (.113, .317, and .133). This data suggest that participants significantly changed their view of their own efficacy in deploying instructional strategies.

Table 2. Paired sample t-test (subscale Efficacy in Instructional Strategies)

     t

Sig. (2-tailed)

Q 7 How well can you respond to difficult questions from your students?

-2.119

.042*

Q 11 To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?

-2.790

.009**

Q 18 How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies?

-2.188

.036*

Q 20 To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused?

-2.610

.014*

Q 23 How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?

-2.964

.006**

*p <. .05, **p <. .01

Efficacy in student engagement

The subscale of Efficacy in Student Engagement scores revealed only one significant result (Table 3). However, we believe that the question, “How much can you do to help your students think critically?” could possibly be construed as an instructional strategies question. This lends additional support to the Efficacy in Instructional Strategies subscale. Regardless, the results for this question are indicative of change in participants’ perceptions.

Table 3. Paired sample t-test (subscale Efficacy in Student Engagement)

t

Sig. (2-tailed)

Q 2 How much can you do to help your students to think critically?

-2.119

.042*

*p <. .05, **p <. .01

Efficacy in classroom management

The Efficacy in Classroom Management subscale scores revealed significant results in two questions (Table 4). Participants reported a significant change in their abilities to respond to defiant children and to establish classroom management systems.

Table 4. Paired sample t-test (subscale Efficacy in Classroom Management)

t

Sig. (2-tailed)

Q 16 How well can you respond to defiant students?

-2.362

.025*

Q 21 How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of students?

-2.331

.026*

*p <. .05 ; **p <.01

Results at Construct Level

Although results at question level proved to be compelling, an analysis of the responses at construct level was needed in order to justify an argument that the participants had experienced significant changes in their efficacy levels. These analyses provided additional insight into the significance of the findings and can be found in Table 5. The data did not reveal a significant level of change in the Efficacy in Student Engagement construct. However this finding was expected, as only one question in this subscale showed significance at question level.

Table 5. Paired sample t-test – construct level

t

 df

Sig. (2-tailed)

Efficacy in Student Engagement

-1.796

31

.082

Efficacy in Instructional Strategies

-3.851

30

.001**

Efficacy in Classroom Management

-2.429

31

.021*

*p <. .05 ; **p <.01

 

Discussion

Using Instructional Strategies

Teachers in this study improved their views of themselves when it came to instructional strategies. The answers to the question “How well can you implement alternative strategies in your room” were significantly different (p < .01), which indicated that teachers in the experienced significant changes in their perceptions of themselves. This is an important finding, as choosing the appropriate instructional strategy is crucial when trying to ensure that all children learn.

The findings provide an opportunity to reflect on the importance of teachers’ feelings of empowerment when it comes to choosing effective instructional strategies. The needs of learners vary greatly in preschool classrooms; therefore, being able to choose an effective instructional strategy is a key skill for preschool teachers to have. In order to address the learning needs of individual children, teachers must be able to identify appropriate content and choose appropriate strategies for exposing individual children to the content. Because of the variety of needs of learners at this young age, preschool teachers must have a large repertoire of teaching strategies from which to choose. One strategy does not fit all at any grade level, but especially at the preschool level. Teachers must know, and feel comfortable choosing from, a variety of appropriate teaching strategies if they are to meet the needs of every child in their classrooms.

We know that teacher training is one vehicle for improving classroom practices and, in turn, student learning outcomes. However, because research about how and when this training occurs presents differing results, it is important to note studies that appear to validate the idea of teacher training being tied closely to teachers’ classrooms (Strickland and Riley-Ayers 2007). The results of the present study suggest that teachers who were able to learn new strategies in college classrooms and at the same time implement them with children in their own classrooms, increased their levels of efficacy. Therefore, it seems that simply teaching general strategies, with no opportunities for immediate implementation and reflection may not produce the same results as teaching specific strategies, requiring immediate implementation, and reflection upon the experience in a timely and meaningful way.

We know that teachers with high levels of efficacy hold the belief that they are able to impact children positively and that they are able to make internal decisions that will affect the teaching and learning cycle (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Ross, 1995). This makes it paramount that researchers begin to unpack the complexities of teaching preschool teachers new strategies in ways that increase efficacy. This study, while not able to prove a causal effect, does provide insight into one of those complexities: the context in which teachers are taught to use new instructional strategies. The findings strongly suggest that when teachers are taught new strategies and charged with using those new strategies immediately in their own classrooms, and when they are able to reflect effectively upon the strategy with “just in time” feedback, teachers build confidence in using the strategy. In our sample, teacher efficacy levels increased as a result of taking this approach.

When this type of scaffolding occurs, it appears that strategies can be learned and practiced by classroom teachers in a more structured way that includes active reflection. Participants in this program were taught strategies, were given opportunities to practice these strategies in their own classrooms, and were guided through active reflection that helped them to analyze their own practices. We believe that this type of learning cycle accounts for much of the change in the Efficacy of Instructional Strategies subscale.

Classroom Management

Classroom management is a skill that many teachers struggle to learn. However, despite the difficulty that may occur in developing it, teachers must find ways to effectively and efficiently manage the day-to-day routines, and the behaviors that are evident in preschool classrooms. We believe that structure and routine are two elements of healthy learning environments for young children. Without predictable routines and an expectation of consistent behavioral standards, young children often fail to reach their potential in academic and social settings.
Given this, it is important for preschool teachers to recognize what types of things need to occur in order for children to embrace routines and behavioral standards. Teachers need to feel empowered to try new strategies that will help to accomplish these two things. No one strategy will likely be effective for all children. Therefore, teachers need to feel comfortable in trying new strategies if they are going to effectively help young children adapt to classroom routines and procedures.

Although only two questions in the Efficacy of Classroom Management subscale showed significant results, those two questions appear to be notable (“How well can you respond to defiant students?” and “How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of students?”). Both questions address the idea of maintaining order in the classroom. Increased efficacy in each of these two areas is very important – high levels of efficacy in these areas indicate that teachers feel empowered to make decisions and implement changes in the classroom. We believe that as efficacy levels in the area of classroom management increases, so do confidence levels (Ross, 1995). We also believe that when both efficacy and confidence are increased, teachers are more likely to meet the needs of children to ensure that learning occurs. As the ultimate goal of teaching is for children to learn, an increase in efficacy in classroom management may be the catalyst for a series of events that result in better student learning outcomes.

Community of Learners

Preschool teachers often find themselves in a position of isolation. Although they may want to collaborate with others, the amount of work, and the intensity of the work they do leaves little time for interacting with other early childhood professionals. Without the benefit of having other preschool teachers to collaborate with, these teachers often continue to use practices that are comfortable and familiar, rather than those that are believed to be effective in the field of education. One way to address this issue is to intentionally create communities of learners that provide a structure for meaningful collaboration.

A contributing factor to the increase in efficacy scores may have been the community of learners that was created within the program. Participants were together over a period of time, and because they had multiple opportunities to share and learn as a group, their learning outcomes were different from participants who did not have an opportunity to be part of a learning community (Gabelnick, et al., 1990). The changes in efficacy levels may also be attributed to this phenomenon. If participants were comfortable in sharing ideas with each other, then they may have been more comfortable taking chances in the classroom. Taking chances and trying new things are characteristics of teachers with high levels of efficacy (Ross, 1995).

In this study, communities of learners were intentionally created so that teachers were required to share and reflect upon instructional strategies. These communities developed over time and allowed the preschool teachers weekly, if not daily, opportunities to collaborate and share ideas. This type of professional growth is important, as it helps preschool teachers venture out of their day-to-day routines, and into new arenas that will result in different approaches to teaching and learning. Given the data collected here, it appears that one key factor in increasing teachers’ efficacy levels is the creation of such communities of learners.

Conclusion

While we are unable to present a causal relationship between the program and the increase in teacher efficacy scores, we are able to show that completing a program like this does, in part, correlate with increase in teachers’ perceptions of their own efficacy, especially in the area of using instructional strategies. This may be the result of peer interactions in the classroom, active reflection, or the theory to practice nature of the program. The results of this study are notable in that the participating preschool teachers significantly improved their efficacy in a variety of crucial areas. This increase in efficacy is desirable, as there is a body of research to show that high levels of teacher efficacy has a positive correlation with student learning outcomes (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Guo, et al., 2010; Shidler, 2009).

Finally, this study does suggest some important considerations for both preservice and inservice teacher education programs. If a desired outcome is to improve teachers’ efficacy as it pertains to the use of instructional strategies and in classroom management, then preservice/inservice teachers should:

  • have an opportunity to discuss the instructional strategies they are using in their classrooms with colleagues by being members of a professional community of learners;
  • be taught specific strategies for specific concept and skill development that may be different from the strategies they typically use;
  • have an opportunity to try new strategies in a non-threatening environment that allows them to succeed and fail;
  • have an opportunity to reflect upon new strategies and discuss their strengths and weaknesses in order to learn how to effectively choose strategies;
  • be encouraged to choose strategies based on the needs of the children they teach.

Finally it must be noted that the participants in the study were from a convenience sample (students enrolled in the program) and were only a small number (n = 32). This limits the study as such a small sample size may not be a true sampling of the larger population of teachers.

 

References

Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference: Teacher sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Barnett, W. S., & Yarosz, D. (2004). Who goes to preschool and why does it matter? Preschool Policy Matters, Issue 8. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER).

Barnett, W. S., Epstein, D. J., Friedman, A. H., Sansanelli, R. A., & Hustedt, J. T. (2009). The state of preschool 2009. Washington, D.C.: National Institute for Early Education Research.

Bowman, B. T. (2011). Bachelor’s degrees are necessary but not sufficient. In Zigler, Gilliam and Barnett (eds.), The Pre-K Debates: Current Controversies and Issues (pp. 54-57). Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.

Clifford, R. M., & Maxwell, K. (2002, April). The need for highly qualified prekindergarten teachers. Preparing Highly Qualified Prekindergarten Teachers Symposium. Chapel Hill: Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina.

Early, D., Maxwell, K., Burchinal, M., Alva, S., Bender, R., Bryant, D. (2007). Teacher education, classroom quality, and young children’s academic skills: Results from seven studies of preschool programs. Child Development, 78(2), 558-580.

Early, D. M., Bryant, D. M., Pianta, R. C., Clifford, R. M., Burchinal, M. R., Ritchie, S., & Barbarin, O. (2006). Are teachers’ education, major, and credential related to classroom quality and children’s academic gains in pre-kindergarten? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 174-195.

Fuller, B. (2011). College credentials and caring: How teacher training could lift young children. In Zigler, Gilliam and Barnett (eds.), The Pre-K Debates: Current Controversies and Issues (pp. 57-63). Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.

Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., & Smith, B. L. (1990). Learning communities: Creating connections among students, faculty, and disciplines. In R. E. Young (Ed.), New directions for teaching and learning (41). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Guo, Y., Piasta, S. B., Justice, L. M., & Kaderavek, J. N. (2010). Relations among preschool teachers’ self-efficacy, classroom quality, and children’s language and literacy gains. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1094-1103.

Guo., Y., Justice, L. M., Sawyer, B., Tompkins, V. (2011). Exploring factors related to
pre-school teachers’ self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 961-968.

Guskey, T., & Passaro, P. (1994). Teacher efficacy: A study of constructed dimensions. American Educational research Journal, 31, 627-643.

Justice, L. M., Mashburn, A. J., Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2008). Quality of language and literacy instruction in preschool classrooms serving at-risk pupils. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 51–68.

Locasale-Crouch, J., Konold, T., Pianta, R., Howes, C., Burchinal, M., Bryant, D., …. (2007). Observed classroom quality profiles in state-funded pre-kindergarten programs and associations with teacher, program, and classroom characteristics. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22(1), 3-17.

Mashburn, A. J., Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., Downer, J. T., Barbarin, O., Bryant, D. (2008). Measures of classroom quality in prekindergarten and children’s development of academic, language, and social skills. Child Development, 79(3), 732–749.

Matthews, R. (1986). Learning communities in the community college. Community, Technical, and Junior College Journal, 57(2), 44-47.

Meisels, S. (2006). Accountability in early childhood: No easy answers. Herr Research Center for Children and Social Policy. Erikson Institute, 6.

Ross, J. A. (1995). Strategies for enhancing teachers’ beliefs in their effectiveness: Research on a school improvement hypotheses. Teachers College Record, 97, 227-251.

Shidler, L. (2009). The impact of time spent coaching for teacher efficacy on student achievement. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 453-460.

Strickland, D., & Riley-Ayers, S. (2007). Literacy leadership in early childhood: The essential guide. NY: Teachers College Press.

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Wookfolk Hoy, A. (2001) Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.

Appendix

     TSES Questions

t

Sig. (2-tailed)

1. How much can you do to get through to the most difficult students?

-1.912

.065

2. How much can you do to help your students think critically?

-2.119

.042

3. How much can you do to control disruptive behavior in the classroom?

-.893

.379

4. How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in school work?

-.941

.354

5. To what extent can you make your expectations clear about student behavior?

-.361

.720

6. How much can you do to get students to believe they can do well in school work?

.373

.712

7. How well can you respond to difficult questions from your students ?

-2.119

.042

8. How well can you establish routines to keep activities running smoothly?

-1.567

.127

9. How much can you do to help your students value learning?

.000

1.000

10. How much can you gauge student comprehension of what you have taught?

-1.629

.113

11. To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?

-2.790

.009

12. How much can you do to foster student creativity?

-1.694

.100

13. How much can you do to get children to follow classroom rules?

-1.656

.108

14. How much can you do to improve the understanding of a student who is failing?

-1.021

.315

15. How much can you do to calm a student who is disruptive or noisy?

-1.459

.155

16. How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of students?

-2.362

.025

17. How much can you do to adjust your lessons to the proper level for individual students?

-1.017

.317

18. How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies?

-2.188

.036

19. How well can you keep a few problem students form ruining an entire lesson?

-1.910

.065

20. To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused?

-2.610

.014

21. How well can you respond to defiant students?

-2.331

.026

22. How much can you assist families in helping their children do well in school?

-1.339

.190

23. How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?

-2.964

.006

24. How well can you provide appropriate challenges for very capable students?

-1.543

.133

 

This academic article was accepted for publication in the International HETL Review (IHR) after a double-blind peer review involving four independent members of the IHR Review Board and two revision cycles. Accepting editor: Tina Bass (Coventry University, U. K.), Associate Senior Editor, International HETL Review.

Suggested citation:

Allen, A., & Slutsky, R. (2014). Using a learning community approach to continued education to increase preschool teachers’ self-efficacy. International HETL Review, Volume 4, Article 6. https://www.hetl.org/academic-articles/using-a-learning-community-approach-to-continued-education-to-increase-preschool-teachers-self-efficacy

Copyright 2014. Amy Allen & Ruslan Slutsky

The author(s) assert their right to be named as the sole author(s) of this article and to be granted copyright privileges related to the article without infringing on any third party’s rights including copyright. The author(s) assign to HETL Portal and to educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this article for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The author(s) also grant a non-exclusive licence to HETL Portal to publish this article in full on the World Wide Web (prime sites and mirrors) and in electronic and/or printed form within the HETL Review. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the author(s).

Disclaimer

Opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s), and as such do not necessarily represent the position(s) of other professionals or any institution.

Search HETL Portal

Signup to HETL Newsletter

Become a Member

Become a Member