Changes in Preservice Elementary Teachers' Sense of Efficacy in Teaching Science

Changes in Preservice Elementary Teachers9 Senseof Efficacy in Teaching Science

lan S. GinnsQueensland University ofTechnology

David F. TulipQueensland University ofTechnology

James J. WattersQueensland University ofTechnology

Keith B. LucasQueensland University of Technology

Thispaperreportsprogress to dateona longitudinalstudy ofchanges inpreservice teac}iers1 sense ofefficacyin teaching science. The study involvedprocedures designedtovalidate, inan Australian context, tlie ScienceTeaching Efficacy Beliefs Instrument(STEBI-B)comprisedof’twoscales: PersonalScienceTeaching EfficacyBelief Scale (STE) and Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy Scale (STO). Concomitantly, the instrumentyyas usedto monitor changes in teachers’ sense ofscience teaching efficacy employing apretest andrepeatedpastiest, onegroup researchdesign. Thesubjectswere students enrolledinathree-year Bachelor ofTeaching(Primary)program. Correlations betweenpretest scores onSTEBI-B andothermeasures ofpersonal beliefsand behaviors, namely academic selfconcept andacademic locus ofcontrol, supported thevalidity ofSTEBl-5. The results indicate that, over three semesters oftheprogram, therewas significant difference between thepretest andpastiest scores on the STE scale. Possible explanations ofthe results obtained are discussedandevaluatedandajustificationforfurther long termresearchinto teachers9 sense of efficacy inteaching scienceis provided. Implications of the results for the teaching of elementary school science are discussed.

Although science education is an important compo-nent ofa comprehensive elementary school curriculum,extensive research has established that teachers, in gen-eral, fail to provide effective programs that involve morethan a token commitment of time and effort (Tilgner,1990; Ginns, MuUer-Stamp& Walters, 1992). To coun-teract this problem Tilgner recommends that prcseiviceteacher educationprograms should provide a wide rangeof science content and practical experiences for theirstudents, because greater involvement with science dur-ing training willpermeate into improved classroomprac-tice. In the context ofthe substantial amount ofliteraturedealing with factors which contribute to good scienceplanning and teaching, this solution appears to ignoremany of the issues which have emerged from past re-search. Forexample,notingonly afewofthese issues, theabove approach does not, (a) accommodate prcservicestudents’ attitudes towards science and science teaching(Lucas & Dooley, 1982; Ginns & Foster, 1983; KobaUa& Crawley, 1985; Morrisey. 1981; Schibeci. 1984;Shrigley, Koballa & Simpson, 1988), (b) acknowledgethe importance of beliefs and values with respect toteaching and planning (Fraser, Tobin & Lacy, 1984). or(c) allow for the development of teacher efficacy inrelation to the teaching ofscience in elementary schools(Riggs & Enochs, 1990).

Based on the assumption that teaching characteris-tics developed during preservice programs will effect apermanentchangeinteachers’attitudes (Morrisey, 1981),this paper seeks to examine one ofthe above issues, that

is, the development of science teacher efficacy within apreservice elementary teacher education program.

Background

Teachers’ sense of efficacy is a construct derivedfrom Bandura’s (1977) theory of self-efficacy in whichthe generalized behaviorofan individual is based ontwofactors, (a) a belief about action and outcome and (b) apersonal belief about his/her own ability to cope with atask. Bandura hypothesized that an analysis ofoutcomeexpectancy and the ability to cope with a task (self-efficacy) would facilitate the prediction ofbehavior, forexample, anindividual rating high onboth factors wouldbehave in a confident manner.

Ashton. Webb & Doda (1983) interpreted teachers’sense of efficacy by proposing a model which consistedof teaching efficacy, personal efficacy, and personalteachingefficacy. Teachingefficacyneferrcdtoateacher’sbeliefs about the general relationship between teachingand learning and it appears to be similar to Bandura’soutcome expectancy. Personal efficacy referred to ateacher’s general sense of his/her own effectiveness notspecific to a particular situation. Personal teachingefficacy was considered to be a combination ofteachingefficacy and personal efficacy. Ashton et al. suggest it isimportant to keep the two dimensions, teaching efficacyand personal teaching efficacy, separate conceptuallybecause the intervention strategies devised to producechange may depend on the origin of a teacher’s sense

School Science and Mathematics

Teachers9 Sense of Efficacy

of efficacy. For example, a teacher convinced of his/her own ability to teach (personal teaching efficacy),but doubtful about his/her students’ ability to learn(teaching efficacy), would require an interventiondifferent from that appropriate for a teacher who issure of his/her students’ ability to learn but doubtfulof his/her competence as a teacher. Personal TeachingEfficacy is viewed by Ashton, et al. as an accuratepredictor of teacher behavior.

In a study using factor analysis,Gibson and Dembo(1984) confirmed Bandura’s two component model ofefficacy, and two factors were identified. One wasrelated to a teacher’s sense of teaching efficacy orbelief that a teacher’s ability to bring about changeis limited by factors external to the teacher, (which isequivalent to Bandura’s factor ofoutcome expectancy).The other was a teacher’s sense of personal teachingefficacy, or belief that she or he has the skills to bringabout student learning, (which is equivalent to self-efficacy). The two models developed by Ashton, etal.(1983) and Gibson & Dembo (1984) are similar,although Dembo & Gibson (1985) question whetherthe general component labeled personal efficacy fromAshton etal.’s work was essential to an overall modelof teacher efficacy. Subsequent studies. (Woolfolk,Rosoff & Hoy. 1990; Greenwood. Olejnik & Parkay,1990) have utilized the two factors of self-efficacy andoutcome expectancy, in general, rather than specificteaching areas.

Riggs and Enochs (1990) observed that teachers’efficacy beliefs appeared to be dependent on thespecific teaching situation. Consequently, teachers’overall level of self-efficacy may not properly reflectindividual beliefs about their ability to affect sciencecourses taught in elementary schools. Riggs andEnochs (1990) contend that a specific measure ofscience teaching efficacy beliefs, which enabledinvestigators to accurately predict science teaching be-havior, would directly benefit any change processesnecessary to improve the students’ progress andachievement in science. The consistency with Bandura’sdefinition of self-efficacy as a situation-specificconstruct is evident With this in mind Riggs andEnochs (1990) devised the Science Teaching EfficacyBeliefs Instrument (STEBI-A) containing two scalestitled the Personal Science Teaching Efficacy Belief

Scale. (STE) and the Science Teaching OutcomeExpectancy Scale, (STO)to measure practicing elemen-tary school teachers’ sense of science teaching efficacy.A similar instrument, theSTEBI-B, was devised forpreservice teacher education students (Enochs &Riggs. 1990).

Research Question

The development of these situation-specificinstruments, in particular STEBI-B, represents animportant step in the ability of researchers to monitorthe development of preservice teachers’ sense ofscience teaching efficacy at different stages of theirpreservice program. Preservice teachers will enter theprogram with their personal sense of teacher efficacyand Ashton and Webb (1986) claim that in view ofthe situation specific nature of teachers’ sense ofefficacy, it is probable that the development of theirsense of efficacy may fluctuate throughout theprogram. In order to investigate this claim thefollowing research question was posed: What changeshave occurred to preservice elementary teachers’ senseof science teaching efficacy in the first half of theirpreservice program?

Methodology

One way such fluctuations can be monitored isthrough a longitudinal study in which the students’sense of science teaching efficacy is reassessed atintervals throughout the program. This paper reportsprogress to date on such a longitudinal study, whichemploys a pretest and repeated posttests one groupresearch design. Using pretest results, the initial valida-tion of the STEBI-B instrument and the monitoringof changes in preservice teachers’ sense of scienceteaching efficacy over three semesters are reported.The STEBI-B was administered as a pretest topreservice elementary teachers at the end of theirprogram and as a posttest at the mid-point of theirprogram. All students were consenting participants inthe study, which they understood was designed to leadto greater understanding of undergraduate learning andpossible improvements of instructional design andstudent counseling. (To complete the longitudinalstudy, it is planned to administer STEBI-B at the finishof the students’ undergraduate program).

This study can be used as three semesters ofundergraduate woric, comprised ofcourses in educationstudies, child development and learning, mathematicsfoundations, curriculum studies, and two courses inscience, one with an emphasis on science content andthe other on science method and curriculum.

SubjectsInthe longitudinal study 72 students completedboth

the pretest STEBI-B at the beginning of their program,and the posttest afterthree semesters. The subjects were

Volume 95(8), December 1995

Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy

undeigraduate students enrolled in a 3-year preserviceBachelor of Teaching (Primary) degree program at alarge Australian metropolitan university. The majorityenrolled directly from high school. At the commence-ment of their degree program, the median age of thegroup was 17.9 years, and 84% were female.

STEBI-B has two scales in Likert format, thePersonal Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Scale (STE)and the Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy Scale(STO). High scores on the first scale, relative to otherrespondents, indicate a strong personal belief in one’sown efficacy as a science teacher, and high scores onthe second scale indicate high expectations of theoutcomes of science teaching. Possible scores on theSTE scale range from 13 to 65. and on the STO from10 to 50. Responses to STEBI-B were recorded onanswer sheets designed for computer scoring.

Validation of STEBI-B in an Australian Context.The validity of STEBI-B can be supported by

identifying relationships between the two scales of theSTEBI-B instrument and other measures of personalbeliefs and behaviors. Furthermore, many of thesefactors have been shown to be significantly interre-lated. For example, Greenwood, Olejnik and Parkay(1990) have reported a significant relationship betweenteacher efficacy and teacher locus of control whileCaracosta and Michael (1986) have related locus ofcontrol with self concept Consequently, it seemsplausible to hypothesize that relationships will existbetween the constructs of locus of control, self conceptand teacher efficacy.

The Academic Locus of Control Scale (ALOC)(Trice. 1985) and the Dimensions of Self Concept,Form H (DOSC-H) (Michael, Denny, Knapp-Lee &Michael, 1984) have previously been validated andused (Tulip & Lucas, 1991; Lucas & Tulip, 1992), inthe context of this Australian university. Concomitantwith the undertaking of the STEBI-B by studentsbeginning their preservice program, both the ALOCscale and the DOSC-H were administered to the samepopulation of students. The data from all threeinstruments were compared with published data anda set of hypotheses concerning the interrelationshipsbetween component scales was tested.

It was hypothesized that ALOC would benegatively related to scores on both scales of STEBI-B. The predicted direction of the relationships resultedfrom the fact that a low score on ALOC correspondswith a high internal locus of control. These hypothesesare consistent with accounts of the development of theinstruments and previous related studies.

Further, it was hypothesized that personal scienceteaching efficacy belief (STE) scores on STEBI-Bwould be positively related to scores on all scales ofDOSC-H except anxiety, for which a negativerelationship was hypothesized. The STO scale, whichmeasures science teaching outcome expectancy doesnot seem to incorporate the personal dimensioninherent in STE and the five dimensions of selfconcept Therefore, the null hypothesis was proposedfor the relationship between STO scores and the scoreson all scales of DOSC-H.

STEBI-B. For both scales on STEBI-B. theCronbach alphas (.73 and .68) were lowerthan thosereported by Enochs and Riggs (1990) for a similargroup of American preservice teachers. The mean andstandard deviation of scores on the STE scale werein accord with the results for the American group.However, comparison of the mean and standarddeviation of scores on the STO scale was not possiblebecause Enochs and Riggs (1990) did not publish themfor the final version of this scale. Lack of significantcorrelation between the two scales in this study lendssupport to the discrete nature of the constructsunderlying the two STEBI-B scales. Factor analysisconfirmed the definition of the two discrete scales.

ALOC. The internal consistency of the ALOCscale was determined (Cronbach alpha-.66). By wayof comparison. Trice (1985) reported a KR20 of .70for this scale when used with American commencingcollege students. The mean (7.57) and standarddeviation (3.67) for the students in the study are lowerthan reported by Trice (12.79, 4.84).

DOSC-H. Cronbach alphas for the five scales onDOSC-H are between .82 and .89 and are similar tothose reported by Caracosta and Michael (1986) forAmerican college students. Means and standarddeviations for Level of Aspiration (LOA), Anxiety(ANX), and Academic Interest and Satisfaction (AIS)are quite similar to the American results. However, forLeadership and Initiative (LAI) and Identificationversus Alienation (IVA) the means are lower. Thereasons for this are not clear but may reflect differencesin the students, such as age or career aspirations, orin the nature of the universities. Correlations betweenthe scales on DOSC-H show a similar pattern to thatreported by Caracosta and Michael (1986) in that ANXshows only one significant correlation (with LOA),while the other scales are all intercorrelated to amoderate extent (see Table 1).

The research hypotheses concerning relationshipsbetween ALOC scores and scores on the STEBI-Bscales were accepted for STE, and rejected for STO.



Table 1. Means, standarddeviations, reliability estimates, andintercorrelations among two STEBI-B scales,fiveDOSC-H scales, and the ALOC scale.

STE73-1321*-26*33***28**24--26**

STO

6825***1332*"0421*-14

LOA

8430**66***33***52***-41***

ANX

8903010317*

AIS

8648***60***-59***

LAI

8240***

-36***

IVA

82-52***

ALOCSTESTOLOAANXAISLAIIVAALOCDecimal points omitted.Diagonal entries are coefficient alpha estimates of reliability.�p<.05; *><.01; �"/x.OOl(n=98 Preservice Teacher Education Students)

66

MEAN45.7133.4062.1844.4452.6443.7155.257.57

SD5.184.448.10

10.577.957.466.023.67

The research hypotheses concerning relationshipsbetween STE and the five DOSC-H scales were allaccepted. The null hypotheses for relationshipsbetween STO and the DOSC-H scales were rejectedin the cases of LOA, AIS, and IVA.

Comparisons of means and standard deviations onthe two STEBI-B scales and substantial confirmationof predicted intercorrelations between scales on thethree instruments provides evidence for the validity ofSTEBI-B in the Australian context for this study.However, the rejection of the null hypothesis ofrelationships between STO and each of LOA, AIS andIVA suggests that further clarification of the natureof science teaching outcome expectancy and selfconcept is desirable. Despite this need for furtherclarification, the evidence is sufficiently compelling tosupport the use of STEBI-B as a reliable measure ofpreseivice teachers’ sense of science teaching efficacy,in an Australian context

Results and DiscussionThe objective of this study was to record those

changes in preseivice elementary teachers’ sense ofself-efficacy in teaching science which occurred during

the first halfoftheir university program. The reliabilityand the validity of self-efficacy measures, the natureof the program that was the source of intervention, andimplications of the results of the study will bediscussed.

Correlational relationships, means and standarddeviations for pretest and posttest scores on STEBI-B, for the longitudinal study group, are presented inTable 2. PretestYposttest correlations on both scaleswere moderate and significant at the 5% level, but nosignificant correlations were found between the STEscores and STO scores. There was a significantdifference between the pretest and posttest scores (t(71)= -2.1,;? = .04. 2 tailed) on the STO scale, but nosignificant difference (p< .05) between pretest andposttest scores on the STE scale.

The criterion related validity of the STE scale issupported by the finding that traits such as an internallocus of control, and five dimensions of self concept,are related to a teacher’s belief in his/her ability tobecome an effective teacher of science in theelementary school. Furthermore, contrary to expecta-tions. beliefs about the ability of children to learnscience as measured by theSTO were related to levels

Table 2. Correlations, means and standard deviations: Pretest and posttest scores for the longitudinal study.

STEpretestSTEposttestSTOpretestSTOposttest

STEpretest45.1 (5.0)

.28*-.06-.10

STEposttest

46.1 (6.4)-.07.06

STOpretest

33.5 (5.2).27’

STOposttest

34.9 (4.2)

n=72; Mean scores and (standard deviations) displayed on the diagonal><05



of aspiration, academic interest and satisfaction, andidentification versus alienation, although not to locusof control of individuals.

In the longitudinal study, the salient interventioninvolved two science courses presented in sequence.The first course was designed specifically to addressdeficiencies in students’ knowledge in the physicalsciences and was presented in a mode which attemptedto address the particular concerns, experiences andanxieties ofpreservice elementary teachers. The rolesof science and technology in society were considered,along with basic topics dealing with the properties ofmatter, and energy concepts, all implemented in aninteractive, experiential format. The second course.which focused on science teaching methods, waspresented in the following semester and providedopportunities for students to apply their science contentand pedagogical knowledge with children, and todevelop implementable teaching packages. Theapproaches taken in both these courses attempted toprovide students with successful experiences in scienceand to improve students’ attitudes to science and,hence, positive changes in the STEBI-B scores wouldhave been expected.

However, by necessity, this intervention occurredin a broader context in which the students experienceda range of courses that addressed components ofteachers’ knowledge including knowledge of childrenas learners, of educational contexts and ofthe purposes,history and philosophy of education. Shulman (1987)argued that competent teaching practice requires anintegration of such knowledge. It could be predicted,therefore, that the sum of the students’ experiences inthe program would impact more on outcome beliefsthan on personal self-efficacy.

The results were consistent with this analysis. Acomparison of pretest with posttest means indicatesthat only outcome beliefs (STO) were significantlyaffected. It might be assumed that the increased STOresulted from successful experiences with children intheir second science course. Observing enthusiasticchildren successfully undertaking science activitiesshould impact on the preservice teachers’ beliefs aboutchildren’s abilities to learn science which is in accordwith the results. The STE score may have been lessaffected because the intervention had a negligibleinfluence on the more global personality traits suchas locus of control and self concept In other words.changing beliefs about personal science teachingefficacy may be more difficult than changing beliefsabout the potential for teachers to improve children’slearning of science.

Comparison of the changes in mean scores on STEand STO may, however, be overlooking more complexshifts. The moderate correlation of the pretest andposttest scores indicates that changes in individualscores are far from uniform in respect of magnitudeand direction. One implication is that an intensiveanalysis of individual cases may reveal insights intomore global personality traits and their interaction withself-efficacy. In such an analysis, it could bespeculated that the identification by individual studentteachers of those life experiences which havecontributed to a poor sense of self-efficacy may allowthem to reconcile their beliefs with their responsibilityto teach science. To explore this possibility further, thestudents in the study are currently being monitoredmore closely, through the use of interviews, as theycomplete their program.

This research has examined changes in preserviceteachers’ beliefs which may be considered to beindicative of their likelihood to teach science. Thestudents in this study were all successful in course workinvolvingthedevelopmentofbothsciencecontentknowl-edgeandknowledgeofpedagogicalprocessesinscience.Despite this therehas notbeena significantenhancementof their confidence to teach science as indicated by STE,a finding whichindicates that one ofthe majorobjectivesofbothscience courses inthepreserviceprogramwasnotachieved. The suggestions of Ashton and Webb (1986)thatperceived efficacymaybehighforcertaintaskswhenstudents enter the teacher education program, but de-crease as students encounter difficulties with the task,perhaps increase with successful experiences, and de-crease again ifadditional complexity is added to the taskmay, in part, account for the results.

Implications

The findings of this investigation have a number ofimplications forthe preservice and inservicepreparationofteachers, and the administration ofscience teaching inelementary schools. It is recognized that preserviceteacher education science courses have traditionally notproved to be successful at improving students’ sense ofscience teaching efficacy, yet, attitudes to science andconsequentteacherbehaviorsmayarisebecauseofteach-ers’ beliefs about their ability to teach science andchildren’s ability to learn science (Riggs & Enochs,1990). Aspredicted by self-efficacy theory, anynegativebeliefs that students hold about science and scienceteaching may have developed as a result of exposure tounsuccessful or unsatisfactory experiences in their ownlearningofscience, thereforeteachereducatorsneedtobe



cognizant of the importance of self-efficacy and theevidence that students’ beliefs can be changed. To thisend teacher educators might take into account students’personalbeliefs about science and scienceteachingwhenplanning and implementing science courses. Inclusionofrelevant, positive science experiences specifically de-signed to enhance students’ sense of science teachingefficacymayproveto be an effective strategy, especiallyifstudents are encouraged to engage in critical reflectionand self analysis concerning the development of bothaspects of science teaching self-efficacy.

The results confirm that STEBI-B is a valid instru-ment forteachereducators to use in assessing preserviceteachers’ senseofefficacy inteachingscience andthattheinstrument may be useful in monitoring changes in selfefficacy over the duration of a science course, or acomplete teacher education program. In order to makestudents more aware oftheirbeliefs and raise their levelsof self-efficacy, teacher educators may resort to specificintervention strategies such as counselling sessions andassociated techniques (Wadlington, Austin & Bitner,1992; Greenburg &MaUow, 1982). The ease ofadmin-istrationofSTEBI-B facilitates this approachbyenablingthe educator, ifnecessary, to allocate resources and timeto addressing the negative beliefs of selected groups ofstudents. The effects of any intervention program couldbe readilymonitoredwith STEBI-B. In addition, scienceteacher educators could profitably use the instrument toinform their own teaching practice and performance.

Teacher educators could assume a proactive role inassisting supervising teachers with the provision ofappropriate role models and classroom experiences toraise preservice teachers’ sense ofefficacy during fieldexperience activities. It is important that student teachersavoid practical teaching situations and classroom envi-ronments that sustain or create negative beliefs aboutscience and scienceteaching. The classroom supervisingteacher should be made aware of the nature of self-efficacy, how beliefs can be identified, and how positivebeliefs canbenurtured in student teachers. Furthermore,science teacher educators could participate in the devel-opment of supervising teachers’ awareness of self-efficacy by providing inseivice programs which informteachers ofthe latest research and practice in the area.

Teachers’ personal beliefs about science and scienceteaching may affect teaching style (Smith & Neale,1991), hencethe providers ofinseiviceteachereducationsuch as universities, school districts and individualschools need to make all practicing elementary schoolteachers aware ofthe importance ofboth dimensions ofself-efficacy, that changes in one orboth dimensions canoccur, and the possible effects on teaching performance,

curriculum planning and implementation. School ad-ministrators could take the science teaching self-efficacyofteachers into accountwhen allocatingteaching duties,science coordination and field experience supervisoryroles, and science resource management duties. It is notunreasonable to expect that teachers with high scienceteaching self-efficacy could provide strong leadership incourse design and implementation, and the personal andprofessional development of other classroom teachers.The development ofpracticing teachers’ knowledge ofself-efficacy and its possible ramifications can provideanadditionalbasis forimportantpersonalinsights intothenature of science and science teaching through criticalreflection, selfevaluation and selfimprovement In con-clusion, Berman, McLaughlin, Bass, Pauly and Zeilman(1977) note that the eventual success of any inservice orteacher change program may depend on addressing is-sues underpinning the development of teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs.

References

Ashton,P.T,Webb.R.B,&Doda,N.(1983). Astudy ofteachers’ sense ofefficacy, (final report, execu-tive summary). Gainesville: University ofFlorida.

Ashton,P.T..&Webb,R.B.(1986).MaJb^flA^r-ence: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achieve-ment. New York: Longman.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unify-ing theory ofbehavioral change. Psychological Review,84(2), 191-215.

Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., &Ziellman, G. (1977. April). Federalprograms supportingeducational change: Vol. 7. Factors affecting implemen-tationandcontinuation^ 1589/7 HEW) SantaMonica,CA: Rand.

Caracosta, R., & Michael, W.B. (1986). The con-struct and concurrent validity of a measure of academicself-concept and one of locus of control for a sample ofuniversity students. Educational and PsychologicalMeasurement, 46,735-744.

Dembo.M.H., &Gibson, S. (1985). Teachers’ senseofefficacy: Animportantfactor in school improvementThe Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 173-184.

Enochs, L.G.. & Riggs. I.M. (1990). Further devel-opmentofanelementary science teaching efficacybeliefinstrument: A preservice elementary scale. School Sci-ence and Mathematics, 90(8). 694-706.

Fraser. B.J., Tobin, K., & Lacy. T. (1988). Study ofexemplary primary science teachers. Research in Sci-ence and Technology Education, 6,25-38.

Gibson. S.. & Dembo, M.H. (1984). Teacher effi-


Teachers9 Sense of Efficacy

cacy: A construct validation. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 76,569-582.

Ginns, I.S.. & Foster, WJ. (1983). Prcservice el-ementary teacher attitudes to science and science teach-ing. Science Education, 67(2), 277-282.

Ginns, LS., Muller-Stamp. E.M., & Walters. J.J.(1992). Primary school teacher perceptions of the sci-ence process skills. (Tech, Rep. No. 4). Brisbane:Queensland University ofTechnology. Centre forMath-ematics and Science Education.

Greenburg, S.L.. & Mallow. J.V. (1982). Treatingscience anxiety in a university counselling center. ThePersonnel and Guidance Journal, 16,48-50.

Greenwood. G.E.. Olejnik, S.F., & Paricay, F.W.(1990). Relationships between four teacher efficacy be-liefpatterns and selected teachercharacteristics. J<w/^/

of ResearchandDevelopment in Education, 23(2), 102-106.

KobaUa. T.R., & Crawley, F.E. (1985). The influ-ence ofattitude on science teaching and learning. SchoolScience and Mathematics, 55(3), 222-232.

Lucas, KJB., & Dooley, J.H. (1982). Studentteacherattitudes toward science and scienceteaching. JournalofResearch in Science Teaching, 79(9), 805-809.

Lucas, K.B.. & Tulip. D.F. (1992. March). Anexplanatory modelofstudentpersistence in apreservicescience andmathematics teacher education course. Pa-per presented at the Annual Meeting of the NationalAssociation for Research in Science Teaching, Cam-bridge, MA.

Michael,W.B.,Denny,B.,Knapp-Lee,L.,&Michael,J.J. (1984). The development and validation ofa prelimi-nary research form ofan academic self-concept measurefor college students. Educational and PsychologicalMeasurement, 44,373-381.

Morrisey, J.T. (1981). An analysis of studies onchanging the attitude of elementary student teacherstoward science and science teaching. Science Education,

65(2). 157-177.Riggs, IM. & Enochs. L.G. (1990). Toward the

developmentofanelementaryteacher’s scienceteachingefficacy belief instrument Science Education, 74(6),625-637.

Schibeci, R.A. (1984). Attitudes to science: Anupdate. Studies in Science Education, 11,26-59.

Shrigley, R.L.. Koballa, T.R.. & Simpson, R.D.(1988). Defining attitude for science educators. Journalof Research in Science Teaching, 25,659-678.

Shulman.L.(1987). Knowledgeandteaching: Foun-dations ofthenewreform. HarvardEducationalReview,57(1), 625-637.

Smith, D.C., &Neale, D.C. (1991). The constructionofsubject matterknowledgeinprimary scienceteaching.Advances in Research on Teaching, 2.187-243.

Tilgner, PJ. (1990). Avoiding science in theelemen-tary school. Science Education, 74(4). 421-431.

Trice. A.D. (1985). An academic locus of controlscale for college students. Perceptual and Motor Skills,61,1Q43-1046.

Tulip. D.F., & Lucas, KJ3. (1991). Persistence andwithdrawal by students in a preservice science and math-ematics teacher education course. Research in ScienceEducation, 27,320-327.

Wadlington. E.. Austin. S.. & Bitner, J. (1992). Thetreatmentofmath anxiety andnegativemathself conceptin college students. College Student Journal, 26,61-63.

Woolfolk, A£.. Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W.K< (1990).Teachers’ sense ofefficacy and their beliefs about man-aging students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 62,137-148.

Note: The authors can be reached at The Centre forMathematics and Science Education, Queensland Universityof Technology-Kelvin Grove, Victoria Paik Road, LockedBag No. 2. Red Hill Q4059, Australia.


Documents

Changes in Preservice Elementary Teachers' Sense of Efficacy in Teaching Science