(Special Issue) The Influence of School Environment, Teacher Background and Student Performance on the Self-efficacy of Teachers in Rural Schools
Author: Tsui-Chun Hu (College of Education, National Taiwan Normal University), Tsung-Jun Chang (Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, National Taiwan Normal University)
Vol.&No.：Vol. 68, No. 3
Date：September 2023
Pages：179-208
DOI：https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202309_68(3).0006
Abstract：
Teacher turnover is a global concern in the field of education (Ingersoll, 2003; Moon, 2007) and is particularly prevalent in schools with poor economies and high proportions of minority students (Kersaint et al., 2007; Lankford et al., 2002). Students in rural areas have faced educational disadvantages because of various factors, such as geographical environment, family socioeconomic status, availability of learning resources, and prevailing learning culture. Therefore, addressing teacher turnover and enhancing their teaching efficacy are imperative (Song et al., 2011; Sung et al., 2014). Teacher efficacy is strongly associated with teaching success (Ross et al., 1996; Woolfolk et al., 1990) and teachers’ professional performance. Teachers with higher levels of teaching efficacy tend to exhibit higher professional performance (Chesnut & Burley, 2015; Wang et al., 2017; Ware & Kitsantas, 2007). For example, teacher efficacy is positively associated with student achievement (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Klassen & Tze, 2014). In addition, teachers’ persistence, enthusiasm, commitment, and teaching behavior considerably affect their beliefs related to self-efficacy (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001) and students’ motivation to learn (Midgley et al., 1989). Gibson and Dembo (1984) demonstrated that teachers with higher levels of self-efficacy are better equipped to help students cope with learning setbacks and offer less critical feedback on students’ mistakes. Additionally, teachers with higher levels of self-efficacy exhibit higher levels of patience when working with students who are struggling to maintain learning pace; these teachers are more willing to use new teaching methods to meet the needs of such students (Soodak & Podell, 1993). Furthermore, teachers with higher levels of self-efficacy are more capable of using teaching methods that enhance student engagement (Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008), implementing effective classroom management strategies (Emmer, 1994), and fostering positive student-teacher relationships (Ashton & Webb, 1986). Conversely, studies have indicated that teachers who choose to leave the teaching profession have significantly lower levels of self-efficacy than do those who decide to remain in this field (Glickman & Tamashiro, 1982). Factors contributing to teacher attrition include familial obligations, work pressure (Ho, 2022), self-doubt regarding teaching abilities (Fives et al., 2007; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007), and insufficient preparation resulting in low self-efficacy (Haberman, 1996; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007).
Although studies have focused on the learning status of students in rural schools, few studies have explored the needs of rural teachers and the support and assistance they should receive. Therefore, the present study was conducted to address this research gap and offer a reference for relevant policymaking. This study had three main objectives. First, a teacher self-efficacy scale tailored to the specific context of rural schools was developed. This scale included factors that may influence teacher efficacy. The reliability and validity of this scale were examined. This scale may serve as a reference for subsequent research on teacher efficacy in rural areas. Second, we performed a comparative analysis of the self-efficacy levels of rural teachers by analyzing various personal factors, including those associated with their experience and background. Furthermore, we investigated the potential effects of factors related to the school environment and student performance on the self-efficacy levels of rural teachers. Our study may serve as a reference for education authorities engaged in designing teachers’ professional development courses and rural education policies.
To attain our goals, a teacher self-efficacy scale was designed and administered to 262 rural school teachers. Additionally, the scale was administered to an extended sample of 412 teachers to analyze how certain personal factors drove the differences in self-efficacy between the two cohorts. The analysis yielded the following major findings. First, a confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the favorable reliability and validity of the scale. Second, in terms of the personal experience of rural teachers, the seniority of teachers did not affect their efficacy levels; this finding is consistent with the findings of Tschannen-Moran and Johnson (2011) and Klassen and Chiu (2010) but not with those of Wolters and Daugherty (2007). Third, regarding the factors related to the background of rural teachers, male teachers demonstrated higher levels of both teaching and class management efficacies than did female teachers. This finding is consistent with that of Klassen and Chius (2010), who reported that male teachers are slightly more effective in terms of class management than are female teachers. Moreover, we found that age differences did not necessarily translate into variance in teachers’ self-efficacy level; this finding is consistent with that of another study indicating that seniority does not influence teacher efficacy. Fourth, regarding the effect of the school environment on teacher efficacy, the perception of the overall school environment significantly affected teachers’ teaching efficacy and negatively affected their class management efficacy. Fifth, teachers’ perception of school support within the context of the school environment (including administrative support and teachers’ collaborative efforts) positively affected their teaching and class management efficacies. Sixth, positive student behavior and performance enhanced the self-efficacy of rural teachers; however, negative student performance did not exert a significant effect on teachers’ self-efficacy.
Based on the aforementioned findings, we propose some suggestions for follow-up research and practical applications. Future studies can compare teacher efficacy and factors influencing this parameter between rural and urban teachers to elucidate the roles of various influencing factors in different teaching environments. Additionally, teachers’ resilience can be included as an intermediary variable to elucidate whether resilience mediate the correlations between predictor and outcome variables. Regarding practical implications, educational institutions are encouraged to develop robust mechanisms for supporting and fostering collaboration among teachers. Such mechanisms would increase teachers’ self-efficacy levels. Furthermore, schools should provide professional development opportunities for rural teachers. Finally, appropriate professional development activities that are specifically tailored to the needs of teachers in remote areas should be designed to increase their self-efficacy levels.
Keywords：rural education, teachers in rural schools, teachers’ self-efficacy