Educational Research and Reviews

  • Abbreviation: Educ. Res. Rev.
  • Language: English
  • ISSN: 1990-3839
  • DOI: 10.5897/ERR
  • Start Year: 2006
  • Published Articles: 2008

Full Length Research Paper

The relationship between teacher self-efficacy beliefs and educational beliefs of pre-service teachers

Kemal OÄŸuz Er
  • Kemal OÄŸuz Er
  • Department of Educational Science, Necatibey Faculty of Education, University Of Balıkesir, Turkey.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar


  •  Received: 09 September 2019
  •  Accepted: 05 December 2019
  •  Published: 31 January 2020

 ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to determine the relationship between ‘educational beliefs’ and ‘teacher self-efficacy perceptions’ of pre-service teachers in the faculty of education. A total of 1002 pre-service teachers, 463 final year undergraduate and 539 certificate program students, participated in the study voluntarily at the Necatibey Faculty of Education in Balıkesir University. 'Educational Beliefs Scale' developed by Yılmaz and 'Turkish Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale' developed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy which was adapted to Turkish by Çapa were applied on the participants. As a result of the research, a significant difference was found in pre-service teachers' self-efficacy opinions regarding gender variable in favor of men. Besides that, a significant difference was found in favor of women in terms of progressivism and existentialism in education beliefs and in favor of men in terms of essentialism. Other results of the research are as follows: when the beliefs of education and self-efficacy beliefs of teacher trainees were examined in terms of academic discipline variable, there was no significant difference in self-efficacy beliefs of teacher candidates. In terms of educational belief variable, only a significant difference was observed in existentialism dimension. According to sources of teacher education variable, a significant difference was found in favor of formation students in self-efficacy dimension related to classroom management. Lastly, according to the source of teacher training, it was seen that the students of the faculty of education adopted the philosophy of existentialism more, whereas the formation students adopted the essentialism more.

 

Key words: Teacher education, pre-service teachers, self-efficacy beliefs, educational beliefs.


 INTRODUCTION

Philosophy is a field of study that teaches how to think, inquire and look at events from different perspectives but unfortunately loses its prestige in today’s world, especially in Turkey. Philosophy is the general understanding of the world; it explains the universe and analyzes universal questions  (Politzer,   2018).   Philosophy   is  an  area  of knowledge originating from human’s systematic, in depth, and speculative thinking over the universe and its relationship with people (Gutek, 2014). Philosophy of Education, on the other hand, is a discipline of philosophy, which discusses what education is, the problem, and  solves activities that  determine  it  and  the
 
concepts that engender it (Cevizci, 2014). Philosophy of Education is a philosophical analysis of education and problems of education. The main subject of Philosophy of Education is education, and the method it uses is that of philosophy. Philosophers of education approach problems of education through the lens of philosophy. They focus on analyzing and explaining the concepts and problems at the center of education. What should be the target and goals of education? Who should be educated and how? Should education vary according to natural interests and talents? What kind of role should the state play in education? (Noddings, 2016). Nevertheless, the answers to these questions play a crucial role at defining the educational systems and curricula of countries; therefore constructing the desired student profile.
 
Philosophy of Education is the philosophy which takes education as its subject matter. It first asks whether education is possible from a philosophical perspective. Then it undertakes a thorough philosophical questioning of what will be taught to whom by whom (Çüçen, 2007). Philosophy of education takes interest in many elements within the framework of education. First and foremost, it investigates student or person who are educated, teacher or the person who educates or the curriculum, educational activities and their goals, values, and perspectives gained through education. In its approach to the phenomenon and subject of education, Philosophy of Education tackles what education is and discusses the criteria for education. It brings up questions about the course of education, the kind of individual to be raised, and about which knowledge, skills, and values should be transferred to the student (Cevizci, 2014). When developing the curriculum, the discipline consults with philosophy on explaining the main premises, contributing to prospective goals, sustaining consistency within and outraises the goals, and sequencing the goals according to their priority (Demirel, 2017). When determining the curriculum, factors such as considering the goals of education, their practice, and determining their exact clarity are involved. When instruction is being planned, philosophy of education asks questions as such: what knowledge is more important/valuable? What knowledge should be taught to the students? What knowledge is more beneficial for the learner as a member of a society and an individual? Answering these questions is not only limited to determining what knowledge should be excluded from and included in the curriculum, but it also provides the curriculum with the most current information about the nature of a good living, society and people (Gutek, 2014). When determining the curricular design models to develop the curriculum, education makes decisions according to the dominant philosophy within the target society and state. In the states with fundamentalist and perennial philosophy of education, policy makers choose models that centralize the subject focus; whereas in educational systems where progressive philosophy is dominant, preference is for student-centered models.
 
Within the scope of educational beliefs, this study is based on the educational philosophies of Perennialism, Essentialism, Progressivism, Reconstructivism and Existentialism. The mentioned philosophical schools are explained below:
 
In Perennialism, which is based on Classical Realism and Idealism, human is overall an intelligent creature (Sönmez, 2002). According to perennialists, school is a societal institution founded to improve human’s intellectual potential. First problem of the educational thinker is to explain the human nature and build a curriculum based on the universal characteristics of the human nature (Gutek, 2014). In Perennialism wherein lies the permanence of human nature and moral principles, foundational curricular models do not change either. That is why people need be raised according to these permanent realities. Education should be the same for all; a common curriculum should be used for all students. Proponents of this philosophy defend universal and intellectual education. Educators should prioritize universal and recurring subjects in human life; students’ psychological and mental potential should be developed with a subject focused curriculum centralizing disciplines such as history, language, math, literature, humanities and science (Gutek, 2014; Demirel, 2012; Arslan, 2017; Ornstein and Hunkins, 2004).
 
Essentialism is based on Realism and Idealism. According to this philosophy, although human is a social and cultural entity, she is not equipped with any information at birth (Sönmez, 2002). For this reason, the main target of education-school is to provide the individual’s socialization, to have them gain dominant values in the society as well as main components of the culture of human, to protect the origin of these values and its permanence (Ergün, 1996; Gutek, 2014; Sönmez, 2002). Essentialism represents an educational understanding governed by a predetermined curriculum, a specialist teacher who represents the authority, and by discipline.
 
Progressivism stands on pragmatics. In this philosophy, the student is at the center. The main goal of education is to teach students research and learning methods, in addition develop their intellectual growth so that students construct their own knowledge and comprehension (Sönmez 2002; Gutek, 2014; Cevizci, 2014). Education should be tailored to students’ interests; school should be life itself and not only a preparation for it. Education should include such approaches as problem-solving, project, stages of scientific method and cooperative learning. According to this view which claims that there is no permanent and absolute information, a democratic classroom environment is prepared for students where they will experience real life and adapt to society in a cooperative atmosphere (Cevizci, 2014; Çüçen, 2007; Demirel, 2012). Gutek (2014) summarized the characteristics  of  Progressivist  education  as follows: 1.
 
Learner is more important than the subject. 2. It sides with direct experience and practice than oral and writing skills. 3. It emphasizes group learning and encouragement more than individualized learning. 4. It criticizes inherited perspectives and values as it adopts cultural and moral relativity.
 
As a continuation of Progressivism, Reconstructivism claims that education is a tool for balance as well as change because life continually changes (Sönmez, 2002, 94). Education is not only life but future. Education’s responsibility is to give shape to and organize the society. Education will realize a social reform. The main responsibility falls on the school to change the society. Power lies in the teacher. Reconstructionists state that the main function of schools is to diagnose crises of the modern society. According to them, teachers should not be afraid to indoctrinate into the students the idea of a reconstructed society; they should tell students the goal of education. Students are to rebuild the society and the world peace. Students should be educated in a way to help them reconstruct the society and oversee it. Classroom environment should be democratic and education should concentrate on practice, and new methods and technics should be executed (Çüçen, 2007; Ergün, 1996; Gutek, 2014; Sönmez, 2002).
 
In Existentialism, existence comes before essence. According to existentialists, human creates her own essence, and she is the only object who does so (HançerlioÄŸlu, 1999). Therefore, it rejects an understanding of human nature that is preconstructed; and related practices of directing education, sequencing its duties, foreseeing the fate, and identifying human’s role in the universe (Bilhan, 1991; Noddings, 2016). Although existentialism oftentimes falls apart with traditional religious philosophy, there have been religious existentialists, and both clusters have emphasized human freedom (Noddings, 2016). Existentialism tries to improve the human’s power to choose; student is more important than the teacher and curriculum. Curricula should encourage individuals’ absolute freedom, enrich their worldview, teach them how to make choices and take responsibility, and how to use these freedoms provided forthemselves (Ergün, 1996; Sönmez, 2002).
 
This study also analyzes teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy in relation to educational beliefs. Bandura (1997) defines self-efficacy as teacher’s own judgment related to her capacity to successfully plan and execute necessary activities to display a specific performance (As cited in SenemoÄŸlu, 2018). SenemoÄŸlu (2018) explains it as teachers’ own judgments and beliefs about themselves regarding the degree of success in difficult conditions students will face in the future such as taking a test, entering a competition, teaching in a classroom, speaking in public. Erdamar (2007) proposes that perception of self-efficacy has an effect on choosing activities, the time to spend on an activity, period of patience when faced with hardship, and on emotions  of anxiety and trust. Self-efficacy trust influences people’s goals for themselves, how much effort they will spend to reach those goals, how long they will endure hardships to reach their goals, and their reactions towards failure (Bıkmaz, 2004).
 
According to Klausmeıer and Allen (1978), one of the factors of success in educational setting is self-efficacy trust. A teacher’s trust in self-efficacy influences the quality of education, her methods, techniques, student participation and student comprehension, and this determines students’ success accordingly. Well prepared candidate teachers thus are expected to have high trust in self-efficacy (As cited in Üredi and Üredi, 2005). Plourde (2001) argues that teachers with high self-efficacy trust use student-centered teaching techniques in their classrooms. Henson (2001) explains that such teachers are also inclined to do research to improve the educational methods they use (As cited in Arslan and Sağır, 2008).
 
While Ashton (1984) describes teachers’ beliefs in self-efficacy as “beliefs about the capacity to influence student performance,” they claim that no other teacher quality has this much consistent correlation with students’ success (As cited in Bıkmaz, 2004). Self-efficacy beliefs mostly emerge in areas of private space. One of the most important among these private spaces is teacher self-efficacy. It is an important element in teacher education and is fundamental in order to determine how self-efficacy improves, which components it involves, which factors contribute to strong and positive teacher sufficiency, and how to develop which curricula targeted to improve teacher sufficiency (Pajares, 1997; As cited in Çapri and Çelikkaleli, 2008). Hoy and Woolfolk (1993), Pajares and Miller (1994), point out that teachers’ belief in self-efficacy is an important variable in constructing a productive school or reconstructing schools (As cited in Çapri and Çelikkaleli, 2008). Bıkmaz (2004) purports that for the last two decades; self-efficacy beliefs become one of the significant research topics of specialists who have expertise particularly in teacher education.
 
While educational beliefs significantly affect self-efficacy beliefs, teacher self-efficacy beliefs affect their in-class performances. Therefore, it is believed that portraying the relationship between educational beliefs and self-efficacy will highly contribute to the literature and teacher education curricula.
 
The aim of this study is to identify the relationship between “educational beliefs” and “perceptions of teacher self-efficacy” of candidate teachers who study at colleges of education. In order to achieve this goal, the study seeks to answer these following questions:
 
1) Is there a meaningful difference between candidate teachers’ levels of educational beliefs and self-efficacy beliefs in terms of variables (sex, field, source of teacher education)?
2) Are candidate teachers’ educational beliefs related to their self-efficacy beliefs?


 METHODOLOGY

Research design
 
In this research, as it was aimed to investigate the relationship between teacher beliefs and self-efficacy perceptions of the teacher candidates, correlational research design is used. Research models that aim to determine the existence of mutual change and/or the degree of such change between two or more variables are called "correlational research models (Gay and Airasian, 2000). In addition, ex post facto research design is preferred as the research aims to define whether there is a difference in terms of various variables (teacher training source, department and gender).
 
Participants
 
The study group consisted of 4th grade pre-service teachers who have attended School of Education in Turkey during 2017-2018 academic year and students who have attended the teacher certificate program during the same academic year. The study included students who participated in the classes and participated in the research voluntarily during the 2017-2018 academic year. Of the 1002 students who volunteered to participate in the study, 463 (46.2%) were students enrolled in the Necatibey School of Education and 539 (53.8%) were students of the pedagogical formation program. Of these, 739 (73.8%) were female and 263 (26.2%) were male. Of the students in the study group, 199 (19.9%) were hard science (Mathematics, Science, Physics, Chemistry, etc.) and 803 (80.1%) were students in soft science (Pre-School, Social Studies, Turkish, Geography, etc.).
 
Data collection instrument tools
 
The research data is collected via “Educational Beliefs Scale (EBS)” developed by Yılmaz et al. (2011), and “Turkish Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale (TTSES)” developed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) and adopted to Turkish by Çapa et al. (2005). EBS contains 40 items of Likert type in order to determine the educational beliefs adopted by teachers in the study. EBS consists of 5 factors: “Perennialism”, “Essentialism”, “Progressivism”, “Reconstructivism”, and “Existentialism”. The distribution of the 40 items in the scale to the subscales is as follows: 8 items in Perennialism, 5 items Essentialism, 13 items Progressivism, 7 items Reconstructivism, and 7 items Existentialism. The items in the scale are scored from 1-Strongly Disagree to 5-Strongly Agree. The scale does not contain any items that are rated as reverse. A total score is not obtained from the scale, and it tried to determine how much the participants adopt each education philosophy. According to the analyses carried out by Yılmaz, et al. (2011) determine the reliability of EBS, the internal consistency coefficients calculated for each dimension are as follows: Progressivism “0.91”, Existentialism “.89”, Reconstructivism “0.81”, Perennialism “0.70”, Essentialism “0.70”. According to the the internal consistency coefficients obtained from the analyses our research are as follows: Progressivism “0.88”, Existentialism “0.87”, Reconstructivism “0.79”, Perennialism “0.74”, Essentialism “0.79”.
 
On the other hand, TTSES contains 24 items to determine teachers’ self-efficacy. TTSES consists of 3 factors: “Self-Efficacy for Student Participation”, “Self-efficacy for Class Management”, and “Self-Efficacy for Teaching Strategies”. The first dimension called “ensuring student participation” consists of items related to what extent teachers can assure students that they can do well in school activities. The second dimension called “class management” consists of items related to what extent teachers can control unwanted behavior in the classroom. The third dimension called “Instructional Strategies” consists  of  items  related  to  what  extent teachers can make use of different teaching and evaluation strategies. Each factor in the scale consists of 8 items. According to the analyses to determine the reliability of TTSES, the internal consistency coefficients calculated for each dimension are as follows: “Self-efficacy for Class Management” is calculated as “0.84”, “Self-Efficacy for Student Participation” “0.82”, “Self-Efficacy for Teaching Strategies” “0.86”. According to the internal consistency coefficients obtained from the analysis, the research are as follows: “Self-efficacy for Class Management” “.85”, “Self-Efficacy for Student Participation” “0.84”, “Self-Efficacy for Teaching Strategies” “0.85”.  
 
Data collection and analysis
 
Before starting the study, permission was obtained from Necatibey Faculty of Education, where the research was conducted in accordance with ethical rules. In the study, before the questionnaires were given to the students, they were informed about the aims of the research and asked whether they would participate voluntarily. A total of 1040 students who volunteered for the study were informed about how to fill in the questionnaires and data collection process was completed. In addition, it was stated to the volunteer students that the results obtained from the research will be used only for scientific purposes and it is not necessary to write their names. The data collection process was carried out in the first thirty minutes of the course as it was thought that the students were not exhausted yet; thus, reliability and validity were not negatively affected. It took approximately 20-25 minutes for the students to fill in the questionnaires. Later on, 38 of the questionnaires were excluded due to incomplete and inappropriate answers.
 
In this study, descriptive statistics calculations are carried out to evaluate the gathered data. As a result of the analysis, it is concluded that the distribution of the answers given by the participants is normal. Normal distribution test is applied in this research. Since the sample population is high (1002), Skewnes and Kurtosis values are investigated rather than applying Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (Denis, 2018; Morgan et al., 2004; Stevens, 2012). After determining that the variances are homogeneous, t-test is conducted for independent groups in order to determine whether pre-service teachers differ in “Educational Beliefs” and “Teacher Self-Efficacy” according to gender, field of science, and teacher training source variables, and Pearson correlation analysis is conducted in order to determine the level of the relationship between educational beliefs and self-efficacy of the pre-service teachers.
 
It is interpreted that the correlation coefficient, when examining relationships between factors, indicates very weak relationship if r<0.2, weak relationship if between 0.2-0.4, medium level of relationship if between 0.4-0.6, high level of relationship if it is between 0.6-0.8, very high level of relationship if >0.8 (Cohen, 1988).


 FINDINGS

In this study, firstly data are investigated in terms of following a normal distribution or not. Hence, mode, median, skewness, and kurtosis are calculated. Based on means and standard deviations, explanations about self-efficacy and educational beliefs of teacher candidates were given a place (Table 1). At the end of the analysis, if the range of the skewness and kurtosis values is (+ -1.5), this refers to the data to be normally distributed (Morgan et al.,  2004; Tabachnick  and  Fidell,  2013).  As  seen  in Table 1, teacher candidates have a mean of 3.86 in the entire scale as follows: SEFCM (mean=3.88, sd= 0.56), SEFSP (mean= 3.88, sd=0.54) and SEFTS(mean=3,83, sd=0,55). Based on these findings, it can be stated that teacher candidates have high self-efficacy. Furthermore, when the philosophical beliefs of teacher candidates are taken into consideration, Table 1 also demonstrates that the highest belief level is progressivism (mean= 4.57, sd=0.42) and the lowest belief level is essentialism (mean=2.38, sd=0.86).
 
 
Findings are related to the first sub-problem (Results obtained from the first part of the questionnaire): The findings related to the beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding education and self-efficacy are listed below in the order of independent co-variances.
 
The assessment of the beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding education and self-efficacy in terms of the gender covariance:
 
The t-test results to determine whether the beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding education and self-efficacy differ by gender covariance are listed in Table 2.
 
As shown in Table 2, self-efficacy related to class management demonstrates a significant difference in favor of male gender. When the effect of gender on philosophical beliefs is considered, progressivism and existentialism dimensions show a substantial difference in favor of females while essentialism shows a difference in favor of males.
 
The assessment of the beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding education and self-efficacy in terms of the academic field covariance
 
The t-test results to determine whether the beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding education and self-efficacy differ by academic field covariance are listed in Table 3.
 
As shown in Table 3, only educational beliefs demonstrate  a   significant   difference   in  existentialism dimension. It was observed that the graduates of Soft Sciences adopt the existentialist education philosophy more than the students continuing to study in Hard Sciences.
 
The assessment of the beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding education and self-efficacy in terms of the teacher education background covariance:
 
The t-test results to determine whether the beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding education and self-efficacy differ by teacher education background covariance are listed in Table 4.
 
As shown in Table 4, a statistically significant difference was observed in self-efficacy dimension related to class management and in existentialism and essentialism dimensions of adopted educational beliefs. Students of the teacher certificate program found themselves more adequate about class management related self-efficacy dimension compared to students of the School of Education. Looking at the findings regarding existentialism, students of the School of Education adopted this philosophical belief more than students of the teacher certificate program while it was observed to be reversed for essentialism dimension.
 
Findings related to second sub-problem (Results obtained from the first part of the questionnaire): The findings related to the relationship between educational beliefs and self-efficacy perceptions of pre-service teachers are described below (Table 5).
 
The relationship between educational beliefs and self-efficacy perceptions of pre-service teachers
 
The secondary sub-aim in this study is the determination of the extent of the relationship between educational beliefs and self-efficacy of pre-service teachers. With this aim, the Pearson correlation analysis was performed as shown in Table 5.When the relationship between the whole  and  the dimensions  of the self-efficacy scale and the educational beliefs is investigated, the whole and the dimensions related to progressivism, existentialism, reconstructionism  and  perennialism  show  a  weak  and direct correlation at 0.01 level. A weak inverse correlation was found between essentialism and self-efficacy related to student attendance at 0.05 level.
 
 
 
 
 


 DISCUSSION

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between the “educational beliefs” and “self-efficacy perceptions of pre-service teachers” of the students at an education faculty. Findings indicated that there is a significant difference in the self-efficacy in class management dimension according to gender, where the male students scored higher. Some other studies on self-efficacy conducted in Turkey showed significant difference according to gender, in some males (Dolapçı, 2013; Elkatmış et al., 2013; YeÅŸilyurt, 2013) and other females (Aydın et al., 2014; Özdemir, 2008; Ünlü et al., 2017; Yalçın, 2011) scored significantly higher. However, in contrast to these results, studies that show no difference according to gender are more (Altunçekiç et al., 2005; Azar, 2010; Bakaç and Özen, 2017; Berkant, 2017; Çocuk et al., 2015; EriÅŸen and Çeliköz, 2003; EroÄŸlu and Ünlü, 2015; Gerçek et al., 2006; Ilgaz et al., 2013; KahyaoÄŸlu and Yangın, 2007; Özcan and Sert, 2017; Özkurt and Keçici, 2017; Uygur, 2010; Uzun et al., 2010; Ülper and BaÄŸcı, 2012; Üstün and Tekin, 2009; Varol, 2007; Yıldırım, 2011).

 

When the results are investigated according to relation of gender to educational beliefs, female participants scored significantly higher in progressivism and existentialism dimensions, while male participants scored higher on essentialism. Alkın-Åžahin et al. (2014) reported similar results. Çakmak et al. (2016) identified that female participants scored higher in existentialism and progressivism, while no difference was detected in perrenialism, essentialism, and reconstructionism according to gender. In KozikoÄŸlu and Erden’s (2018) study, however, it was shown that female participants scored higher on progressivism and existentialism, while male participants scored higher on perennialism and essentialism. No difference was detected in reconstructionism. Çelik and Orçan (2016) did not report any gender differences on reconstructivism and essentialism, while there were significant differences in existentialism dimension which female participants scored higher. Aslan (2017), on the other hand, found out that male participants scored higher on more traditional educational philosophies, essentialism and perennialism, but no gender difference was detected in the dimensions of progressivism, and reconstructivism. In a similar study, Kumral (2015) also reported that male participants scored higher on more traditional educational philosophies, essentialism and perennialism, but female participants scored higher on more popular educational philosophies of progressivism, and reconstructivism. However, some other studies did not report any significant difference in educational philosophies according to gender (Biçer et al., 2013; Çetin et al., 2012; Ilgaz et al., 2013; YokuÅŸ, 2016). In an educational system that is based on constructivism, it is expected that teachers identify themselves with progressivism and existentialism which are known to underlie constructivism.

 

Study also investigated the relationship between self-efficacy and educational beliefs according to academic discipline of the pre-service teachers. Results showed no significant differences in self-efficacy according to their academic disciplines. However, Aydın et al. (2014) study which used the same scale showed that pre-service teachers at the Turkish Language Teaching programme significantly differed from the pre-service teachers in elementary school teaching and English language teaching. Moreover, Fine arts students performed significantly different from students in Mathematics, Special Education and Turkish Language Teaching departments in student participation dimension.

 

For the educational beliefs scale, there was a significant difference only on existentialism according to academic disciplines. It was observed that students from soft sciences identified themselves more with the existentialism compared to students from hard sciences. In a similar vein, Çetin et al. (2012) study found significant differences in educational philosophy dimension according academic disciplines. Pre-service teachers from Social Sciences Education Department scored higher on contemporary educational philosophies (Existentialism, reconstructivism, progressivism) compared to pre-service teachers from Science Education Department, while these students scored higher on more traditional educational philosophies (perennialism and essentialism). Kumral (2015) further investigated the educational beliefs within the soft science departments. Results indicated that pre-school education department students adopted a more traditional philosophy (essentialism and perennialism) compared to students from English language teaching and Turkish language teaching department  who  adopted  more  popular  (progressivism and reconstructivisim) educational philosophies. Çelik and Orcan (2016), on the other hand, did not find any difference on educational philosophies of the pre-service teachers concerning their academic discipline. These different and somewhat contradictory results indicate that teacher education institutions do not provide training and education for pre-service teachers in line with the current and modern educational philosophies. Moreover, pre-service teachers did not internalize these educational philosophies regardless of their gender and their academic discipline.

 

The relationship between educational beliefs and self-efficacy of the pre-service teachers was also investigated according to the sources of teacher education. Results indicated that there was a significant difference on the class management dimension of the self-efficacy scale where students from certificate program scored higher. This indicates that students who were trained in other faculties rate themselves higher in class management compared to education faculty students. However, it is surprising that students who were coming from disciplines other than education perceive themselves more sufficient in class management compared to students who studied four years in educational faculties.

 

According to the sources of teacher education, a significant difference was found on existentialism and essentialism dimensions. When existentialism dimension was examined, results indicated that pre-service teachers who studied at education faculties adopted existentialism as their educational philosophy compared to pre-service teachers from certification program, and in the dimension “essentialism” students from certification program scored higher. In their study, Ilgaz et al., (2013) reported a significant difference in favor of pre-service teachers from other faculties in terms of perennialism and essentialism.

 

When the relationship between the whole and dimensions of self-efficacy scale and educational beliefs was investigated, the study discovered a linear weak relationship at 0.01 level between progressivism, existentialism, reconstructivism, and perennialism. A very weak negative relationship at 0.05 level was found out between the self-efficacy dimension towards student participation and essentialism. In their study, Ilgaz et al. (2013) found a significant relationship between educational beliefs and self-efficacy perceptions. The emergence of a weak relation between the self-efficacy perceptions and educational beliefs of pre-service teachers is one of the remarkable findings of this study.

 

This study examined the educational beliefs and self-efficacy perceptions of the pre-service teachers according to various variables and investigated the existence of a relationship among them. Self-efficacy belief serves as a key factor in the system of a productive person (Bandura, 1997). According to Pajares (1996), self-efficacy belief is a concept that acts as the determiner of human behavior and strengthens through choices made, effort given, and persistence towards difficulties by people as well as  their patterns of thought and emotional reactions. Pendergast et al. (2011) state that teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs is an important factor in the construction of their teaching profession, and teachers with high self-efficacy levels are more flexible during teaching and tend to be more eager to make effort in order to help all students, while teachers with low self-efficacy levels make less effort to meet the learning needs of all students. Various research findings manifested that teacher self-efficacy has a direct effect on students’ success, and teachers with high self-efficacy levels planned teaching on a superior level and allocated more time towards students’ problems (Allinder, 1994; Caprara et al., 2003; Gibson and Dembo, 1984 as cited in Pendergast, et al., 2011; Moore and Esselman, 1992).

 

Educational belief determines the answer to the question of how students will learn based on the teaching method that the teacher will choose (Hermans et al., 2008). The belief system of the teacher determines whether his/her teaching approach will be teacher-centered or student-centered (Jackson, 1986. The beliefs and attitudes of pre-service teachers is a significant concept for understanding their in-class practices, teaching processes, and tendencies towards change (Richardson, 1996). Educational beliefs are constructed by previous learning experiences and influenced by professional context. When pre-service teachers proceed to the teacher training institutions, their educational beliefs have already been shaped by their previous learning experiences, and their beliefs are relatively steady and resistant to change as a result (Pajares, 1992). Therefore, teacher training institutions should lay stress on the development of pre-service teachers’ educational beliefs and self-efficacy perceptions starting from the first years of their training, because teachers’ educational beliefs and self-efficacy perceptions affect their teaching ways and teacher identities (Pajares, 1992; Kagan, 1992). Pre-service teachers with high level self-efficacy perceptions and educational beliefs will in the future educate students with high level self-efficacy perceptions and educational beliefs through using contemporary and student-centered approaches in the schools that they will serve as teachers.

 

With the establishment of The Council of Higher Education, there have been two sources of teacher training: Faculties of Education and Faculties of Science and Literature with their pedagogical training certificate programs. In the studies carried out in Turkey on pre- service teachers' educational and self-efficacy beliefs, there have been very few articles that include students both from faculty of education and Faculty of Science and Literature. This study was aimed to find out how effective the certificate program, which only lasts for one year, is on the educational and self-efficacy beliefs of the pre-service teachers, and to compare these results with the educational and self-efficacy beliefs of the students studying in the Faculties of Education. It is believed that this  study   will  give   an   opinion   on   the   practices  of

certificate program in the future and the effectiveness of Faculties of Education. 


 RECOMMENDATION

In line with the findings obtained from this research, the following recommendations can be made for researchers and practice. It is suggested that qualitative studies (interviews) should be conducted with both groups of students (those studying in Faculty of Education and having a pedagogic formation) in order to reveal the differences in the educational beliefs through using contemporary and student-centered approaches in the schools that they will serve as teachers.
 
With the establishment of The Council of Higher Education, there have been two sources of teacher training: Faculties of Education and Faculties of Science and Literature with their pedagogical training certificate programs. In the studies carried out in Turkey on pre-service teachers' educational and self-efficacy beliefs, there have been very few articles that include students both from faculty of education and Faculty of Science and Literature. In this study, it was aimed to find out how effective the certificate program, which only lasts for one year, is on the educational and self-efficacy beliefs of the pre-service teachers, and to compare these results with the educational and self-efficacy beliefs of the students studying in the Faculties of Education. It is believed that this study will give an opinion on the practices of certificate program in the future and the effectiveness of Faculties of Education.
 
Pre-service teachers’ educational and self-efficacy belief levels are denoted in the existing studies in terms of some variables such as age, teacher training source, gender and department. It is believed that such studies can contribute to the development of teaching practices and learning environments used in teachers’ training. 


 CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors have not declared any conflict of interests.

 



 REFERENCES

Alkın-Åžahin SA, Tunca N, &Ulubey Ö (2014). The relationship between pre-Service teachers' educational beliefs and their critical thinking tendencies. Elementary Education Online 13(4):1473-1492.
Crossref
 

Allinder RM (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the instructional practices of special education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education and Special Education 17:86-95.
Crossref

  
 

Altunçekiç A, Yaman S, Koray Ö (2005). The research on prospective teachers' self-efficacy belief level and problem solving skills. Kastamonu Educational Journal 13(1):93-102.

  
 

Arslan A (2017). Introduction to philosophy. Ankara,Turkey: BB101 Yayınları.

  
 

Arslan O, Sağır ŞU (2008). Determination of science and technology pre-service teachers' scientific attitudes, self-efficacy belief levels and the factors affecting. Paper presented at the 8th. International Educational Technology Conference.Eskişehir, Turkey.

  
 

Aslan S, Aybek B (2017). An Investigation of educational philosophies that pre-service teachers adopt through critical thinking tendencies in terms of several variables. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Science 16(2):373-385. 
Crossref

  
 

Ashton P (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of teacher education 35(5):28-32.
Crossref

  
 

Aydın R, Ömür YE, Argon T (2014). Pre-service teachers' perception of self-efficacy and academic delay of gratification. Journal of Educational Sciences 40:1-12. 

  
 

Azar A (2010). In-service and pre-service secondary science teachers' self-efficacy beliefs about science teaching. Educational Research and Reviews 5(4):175-188.

  
 

Bandura A (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, USA: W.H. Freeman.

  
 

Bakaç E, Özen R (2017). Relationship between pedagogical certificate program students' attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs towards teacher profession. Kastamonu Educational Journal 25(4):1389-1404.

  
 

Berkant GH (2017). Investigation of prospective teachers' perceived teacher self-efficacies. Journal of Educational Reflections 1(2):1-17.

  
 

Bıkmaz F (2004). The validity and reliability study of the self-efficacy belief of the elementary school teachers in science teaching. Journal of Ministry of Education 31(161):172-180.

  
 

Biçer B, Er H, Özel A (2013). The relationship between the epistemological beliefs and educational philosophies of the pre-service teachers adopted. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education 9(3):229-242.

  
 

Bilhan S (1991). Educational philosophy. Ankara, Turkey: Ankara University.

  
 

Cevizci A (2014). Introduction to philosophy. Ä°stanbul, Turkey: Say.

  
 

Cohen J (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.

  
 

Çakmak Z, Bulut B, TaÅŸkıran C (2016). A study on the opinions of social studies field pre-service teachers on educational beliefs. AbantÄ°zzet Baysal University Education Faculty Journal 16 (11):1190-1205.

  
 

Capa Y, Cakiroglu J, Sarikaya H (2005). The development and validation of a Turkish version of teachers' sense of efficacy scale. Education and Science 30(137):74-81.

  
 

Caprara GV, Barbaranelli C, Borgogni L, Steca P (2003). Efficacy Beliefs as Determinants of Teachers' Job Satisfaction. Journal of Educational Psychology 95:821-832.
Crossref

  
 

Çapri B, Çelikkaleli Ö (2008). Investigation of preservice teachers' attitudes towards teaching and professional self-efficacy beliefs according to their gender, programs, and faculties. Ä°nönü University Education Faculty Journal 9(15):33-53.

  
 

Çelik R, Orçan F (2016). A study on prospective teachers' educational beliefs. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education 12(1):63-77.

  
 

Çetin B, Ä°lhan M, Arslan S (2012). An investigation of educational philosophies adopted by preservice teachers in terms of various variables. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, philosophy 5(5):149-170.
Crossref

  
 

Çocuk HE, YokuÅŸ G, Tanrısever I (2015). Pedagogical formation students' self-efficacy and metaforic perceptions related to teaching profession. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Graduate School of Social Sciences 12(1):373-387.

  
 

Çüçen AK (2007). Introduction to philosophy. Bursa, Turkey: Asa.

  
 

Demirel O (2012). Curriculum development in education. Ankara: PegemA Publication.

  
 

Demirel Ö (2017). Curriculum development in education (25. thed). Theory to practice. Ankara, Turkey: Pegem.

  
 

Denis DJ (2018). SPSS data analysis for univariate, bivariate, and multivariate statistics. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
Crossref

  
 

Dolapçı S (2013). Prospective teachers' self-efficacy perceptions and perspectives on inclusive education (Unpublished master's thesis). Dokuz Eylül Üniversity, Ä°zmir, Turkey.

  
 

Elkatmış M, Demirbaş M, Ertuğrul N (2013). Self-efficacy beliefs of students who take the pedagogic training program in the faculty of arts and sciences and students in the education faculty towards teaching profession. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction 3(3):41-50.
Crossref

  
 

Erdamar G (2007). Social learning theory. In Ulusoy, A. (Eds), Education psychology. Ankara, Turkey: Anı pp.315-352.

  
 

Ergün M (1996). Philosophy of education. Ankara, Turkey: Ocak.

  
 

Erisen Y, Çeliköz N (2003). ÖÄŸretmen Adaylarinin Genel ÖÄŸretmenlik DavraniÅŸlari Açisindan Kendilerine Yönelik Yeterlilik Algilari. Türk EÄŸitim Bilimleri Dergisi 1(4):25-36.

  
 

EroÄŸlu C, Ünlü H (2015). Self-efficacy: Its effects on physical education pre-service teachers' attitudes toward the teaching profession. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 15(1):201-212.
Crossref

  
 

Gay LR, Airasian P (2000). Educational Research. New Jersey (6.th ed). USA: Prentice Hall.

  
 

Gerçek C, Yılmaz M, KöseoÄŸlu P, Soran H (2006). Biology teaching self-efficacy beliefs of the pre-service teachers. Ankara University Journal of Educational Sciences 39(1):57-73.

  
 

Gibson S, Dembo M (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology 76(4):569-582.
Crossref

  
 

Gutek GL (2014). Philosophical and ideological approaches to education. (Trans. N. Kale). Ankara, Turkey: ÜtopyaYayıncılık.

  
 

HançerlioÄŸlu O (1999). Philosophy dictionary. Ä°stanbul, Turkey: RemziKitabevi.

  
 

Henson RK (2001). Teacher self-efficacy: Substantive implications and measurement dilemmas.

  
 

Hermans R, Tondeur J, VanBraak J, Valcke M (2008). The impact of primary school teachers' educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers and Education 51:1499-1509.
Crossref

  
 

Hoy WK, Woolfolk A E (1993). Teachers' sense of efficacy and the organizational health of schools. The Elementary School Journal 93:356-372.
Crossref

  
 

Jackson PW (1986). The practice of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.

  
 

Ilgaz G, Bülbül T, Çuhadar C (2013). Investigation of the relationship between preservice teachers' educational beliefs and their perceptions of self-efficacy. AbantÄ°zzetBaysal University Education Faculty Journal 13(1):50-65.

  
 

Kagan DM (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist 27(1):65-90.
Crossref

  
 

Kahyaoğlu M, Yangın S (2007). Views of prospective teachers in elementary school teaching departments about professional self-efficacy. Kastamonu Educational Journal 15(1):73-84.

  
 

KozikoÄŸlu Ä°, Erden RZ (2018). The Investigation of the relationship between pre-service teachers' opinions concerning critical pedagogy and beliefs of educational philosophies. Elementary Education Online 17(3):1566-1582.

  
 

Kumral O (2015). Student teachers' philosophy of education: case of pamukkale university faculty of education. Hasan Ali Yücel Education Faculty Journal 12(24):59-68.

  
 

Morgan A, Leech NL, Gloeckner GW, Barrett KC (2004). SPSS for introductory statistics. New York, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Crossref

  
 

Moore W, Esselman M (1992). Teacher efficacy, power, school climate and achievement: A desegregating district's experience. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

  
 

Noddings N (2016). EÄŸitimfelsefesi [Educational PhilosoÄŸhy].(Trans.R. Çelik). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.

  
 

Ornstein AC, Hunkins FP (2004). Curriculum: Foundations, principles and issues. New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

  
 

Özcan C, Sert H (2017). Comparison of primary education section with and preservice science teachers' confidence in self efficiency and their attitudes toward teaching profession. The Journal of International Education Science 4(12):75-93.

  
 

Özdemir SM (2008). An investigation of prospective primary teachers' self-efficacy beliefs regarding teaching process in terms of certain variables. Educational Administration and Practice 54:277-306.

  
 

Özkurt MF, Keçici-Erben S (2017). The relation between the class teachers senses of self efficacy with teaching technologies and talents of materiel designing. The Journal of International Education Science 4(13):286-302.

  
 

Pajares MF (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research. Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research 62(3):307-332.
Crossref

  
 

Pajares F (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs and mathematical problem- solving of gifted students. Contemporary Educational Psychology 21:325-344.
Crossref

  
 

Pajares F, Miller MD (1994). The role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem-solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 86:193-203.
Crossref

  
 

Pajares F (1997). Current Directions in Selfefficacy Research. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Greenwich, CT: JAI Pres.

  
 

Pendergast D, Garvis S, Keogh J (2011). Pre-service student-teacher self-efficacy beliefs: An insight into the making of teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 36(12):46-58. 
Crossref

  
 

Plourde LA (2001). The genesis of science teaching in the elementary school: the influence of student teaching. Web: 

View

  
 

Politzer G (2018). Basic principles of philosophy. Ä°stanbul, Turkey: Dorlion.

  
 

Richardson V (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In: J. Sikula (Eds.). Handbook of research on teacher education (2 th ed). New York: Macmillan pp. 102-119.

  
 

Senemoğlu N (2018). Developmental learning and teaching (25.th ed). Ankara, Turkey: Anı.

  
 

Sönmez V (2002). Philosophy of Education (6th ed). Ankara, Turkey: Anı.

  
 

Stevens JP (2012). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New York, USA: Routledge.

  
 

Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, USA: Pearson.

  
 

Ülper H, Bagci H (2012). Selfefficacy perceptions of Turkish teacher candidate. Turkish Studies 7/2:1115-1131.
Crossref

  
 

Ünlü Ä°,, KaÅŸkaya A, Kızılkaya MF (2017). Examining the self-efficacy beliefs of social studies pre-service teachers in terms of some variables. AhiEvran University KırÅŸehir Education Faculty Journal 18(2):651-668.

  
 

Üredi I, Üredi L (2005). Comparison of self-efficacy beliefs of science pre-service teachers according to their gender, grades and achievement levels. Yeditepe University Education Faculty Journal 1(2):1-17.

  
 

Üstün A, Tekin S (2009). A comparison of the self- efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers in terms of different variables at Amasya University Faculty of Education. AbantÄ°zzetBaysal University Education Faculty Journal 9(1):1-7.

  
 

Uygur M (2010). Ä°nvestigation of self-efficacy perceptions of undergraduate students of English language education according to different variables(Unpublished Master's Thesis). Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey.

  
 

Uzun A, Özkılıç R, Åžentürk A (2010). A case study: Analysis of teacher self-efficacy of teacher candidates. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 2(2):5018-5021.
Crossref

  
 

Varol B (2007). Self-efficacy of physical education and sports teaching students' teaching profession (Unpublished Master Thesis). NiÄŸde University, NiÄŸde, Turkey.

  
 

Yalçın FA (2011). Investigation of science pre-service teachers' self-efficacy beliefs of science teaching with respect to some variables. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences 3(3):1046-1063.

  
 

YeÅŸilyurt E (2013). Academic Self-Efficacy Perceptions of Teacher Candidates. Online Submission 3(1):93-103.
Crossref

  
 

Yıldırım S (2011). Self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, anxiety and mathematics achievement: Findings from Turkey, Japan and Finland. NecatibeyFaculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 5(1):277-291.

  
 

Yılmaz K, Altınkurt Y, Çokluk Ö (2011). Developing the educational belief scale: The validity and reliability study. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 11(1):335-350.

  
 

YokuÅŸ T (2016). An examination of philosophy of education music pre-service teachers adopt in terms of different variables. MSKU Journal of Education 3(1):26-36.

  

 




Copyright © 2024 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.

This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

Back to Vol. 15 No. 1
Back to articles
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
SUBMIT MANUSCRIPT
CONFERENCES
          */?>