The development of self-efficacy in the teaching of reading
Licensed primary teachers (N = 93) in nine schools completed surveys of their self-efficacy beliefs, level of implementation, and the value they placed on the strategies before and after participating in four levels of inservice training in the Tucker Signing Strategies for Reading. The independent...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Others |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
W&M ScholarWorks
2005
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd/1539618751 https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1961&context=etd |
| Summary: | Licensed primary teachers (N = 93) in nine schools completed surveys of their self-efficacy beliefs, level of implementation, and the value they placed on the strategies before and after participating in four levels of inservice training in the Tucker Signing Strategies for Reading. The independent variable was the structure of the training teachers received, and the dependent variables were teacher sense of efficacy in general, teacher sense of efficacy for reading, implementation of the reading strategies, and the value of the reading strategies taught. Components of the training for the use of Tucker Signing Strategies for Reading were structured into four treatment groups aligned with three of the four sources of self-efficacy development identified by Bandura (1997). Findings indicated that implementation of the Tucker Signing Strategies for Reading increased as inservice training increased in intensity. The most powerful training format was mastery experience, which was distinguished from the other training formats by the addition of follow-up coaching. Inservice training format made a significant contribution to the change in teacher sense of efficacy for reading. Initial teacher sense of efficacy in general and initial teacher sense of efficacy for reading were not factors in predicting the level of implementation of the reading strategies. Final teacher sense of efficacy for reading made a significant contribution to explaining variance in implementation. The strength of the effect of the follow-up coaching workshop model on implementation overpowered the other tested variables. Statistical significance of the change in sense of efficacy for reading was lost when compared with the impact of the follow-up coaching model. Value covaried almost perfectly with implementation for this sample. Unexpected decreases occurred in the change in efficacy scores across treatment groups; a surprising number of participants rated their sense of efficacy lower on the final survey than on the first. Dips in self-efficacy beliefs with exposure to a potentially powerful new teaching strategy underscore the importance of the final treatment component, follow-up coaching, to bolstering teachers' motivation to overcome the anxiety of trying something new. |
|---|