1_dunnrakes - National Forum Journals - Dr. Kritsonis

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL VOLUME 26, NUMBER 1, 2008-2009

I THINK I CAN: AN ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF TEACHER EFFICACY ON LEARNER-CENTERED BELIEFS Karee E. Dunn University of Arkansas Glenda C. Rakes University of Tennessee at Martin ABSTRACT For more than ten years, national agencies and educators have advocated for learnercentered reform in schools (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium, 1992; National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education Unit Standards, 2006), yet, little change has occurred (Cuban, 2007). As with any educational innovation or paradigm, a number of intervening variables may exist. The purpose of this study was to examine the influence teacher efficacy might have on teachers' learnercentered beliefs. Learner-centered beliefs were used as a proxy for learner-centered behavior, because beliefs are often the best indicator of future action (Ajzen, 1996, 2002; Bandura, 1986). Results indicated that teacher efficacy significantly influenced learnercentered beliefs. These results and their implications are discussed.

Introduction

A

s students in the United States continue to lag behind their international counterparts, researchers continue to examine a number of variables that play a role in promoting student success (Darling-Hammond, 2007). A great deal of valuable research examines what teachers should do to create successful learning environments (i.e., Bacon, 2005; ChanLin, 2007), yet too little attention is paid to the teachers themselves. In most cases a new innovation is touted as the great hope for reading, science, or 4

5

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

mathematics achievement; then teachers are given a two-day training session during which large amounts of surface level knowledge is disseminated (Belzer, 2005). Teachers then return to the classroom go back to their previous routines, and administrators are surprised, disappointed, and frustrated by the lack of innovation implementation. However, if more attention were paid to what teachers bring to professional development opportunities and what variables lead to action in the classroom from the transfer of knowledge about an innovation, teachers might be more likely to engage in the practices presented during professional development. This, in turn, may lead to more pleasant surprises for administrators and policy makers. As Darling-Hammond (1996) more eloquently stated, “If a caring qualified teacher for every child is the most important ingredient in education reform, then it should no longer be the factor most frequently overlooked” (p. 194). For more than ten years, national agencies and educators have advocated for learner-centered reform in schools (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium, 1992; National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education Unit Standards, 2006). However, little real change has occurred (Cuban, 2007). Although teachers are introduced to the foundational learner-centered theories in teacher education preparation programs and learner-centered innovations throughout in-service professional development, many teachers still engage in one-size-fits-all teacher-centered practices. Perhaps one possible explanation for the lack of connection between theory and practice can be framed through conceptual change theory. Conceptual change theory highlights the importance of addressing both cold facts and hot emotions and beliefs in the learning process (Pintrich, Boyle, & Marx, 1993). Sinatra (2005) describes this as a warming trend when applied to learning. Perhaps if a warming trend is applied to teacher professional development, more learner-centered action would result.

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

6

The purpose of the present study was to examine the warming influence of teacher efficacy on learner-centered beliefs. Learnercentered beliefs were selected for the purposes of this study as an indicator of learner-centeredness because we did not have access to the teachers during the teaching process. The assumption that beliefs may serve as a proxy for behavior is based on Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory as well as a research base that supports the idea that one's beliefs are the best predictor of future action (i.e., Ajzen, 1996, 2002; Glasman & Albarracîn, 2006). Furthermore, the selection of learner-centered beliefs as a proxy for learner-centered behavior is supported by a body of literature that indicates that learner-centered beliefs are potent predictors of learner-centered behaviors (Deemer, 2004; Lotter, 2004; McCombs, 2002; Ross, Cousins, & Gadalla, 1996; Zielinski & Preston, 1992). Learner-Centered Education To understand learner-centered beliefs, one must first understand what "learner-centered" means. Learner-centered education is based on the American Psychological Associations (APA, 1997) 14learner-centered principles (see Table 1). Learner-centered education reflects a paradigm shift from the traditional teacher-centered classroom format in which teachers lecture and students sit passively in rows while taking notes and tests. By comparison, learner-centered teachers are aware of, responsive to, and respectful of the diverse needs students present in the classroom (McCombs & Whisler, 1997). From this perspective, teachers incorporate strategies that support success for all learners within and beyond the classroom. For example, learner-centered teachers provide time for critical reflection and allow students to have input into the selection of classroom activities. In learner-centered classrooms, students are encouraged to question not only the subject matter, but also why they are expected to learn the material or how it is taught.

7

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Table 1 Learner-Centered Psychological Principles1

COGNITIVE AND METACOGNITIVE FACTORS Principle 1: Nature of the learning process. The learning of complex subject matter is most effective when it is an intentional process of constructing meaning from information and experience. Principle 2: Goals of the learning process. The successful learner, over time and with support and instructional guidance, can create meaningful, coherent representations of knowledge. Principle 3: Construction of knowledge. The successful learner can link new information with existing knowledge in meaningful ways. Principle 4: Strategic thinking The successful learner can create and use a repertoire of thinking and reasoning strategies to achieve complex learning goals. Principle 5: Thinking about thinking Higher order strategies for selecting and monitoring mental operations facilitate creative and critical thinking. Principle 6: Context of learning Learning is influenced by environmental factors, including culture, technology, and instructional practices.

APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs (1997, November). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school reform and redesign. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 1

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

8

MOTIVATIONAL AND AFFECTIVE FACTORS Principle 7: Motivational and emotional influences on learning What and how much is learned is influenced by the learner’s motivation. Motivation to learn, in turn, is influenced by the individual’s emotional states, beliefs, interests and goals, and habits of thinking. Principle 8: Intrinsic motivation to learn The learner’s creativity, higher order thinking, and natural curiosity all contribute to motivation to learn. Intrinsic motivation is stimulated by tasks of optimal novelty and difficulty, relevant to personal interests, and providing for personal choice and control. Principle 9: Effects of motivation on effort Acquisition of complex knowledge and skills requires extended learner effort and guided practice. Without learners’ motivation to learn, the willingness to exert this effort is unlikely without coercion. DEVELOPMENTAL AND SOCIAL FACTORS Principle 10: Developmental influence on learning As individuals develop, they encounter different opportunities and experience different constraints for learning. Learning is most effective when differential development within and across physical, intellectual, emotional, and social domains is taken into account.

Principle 11: Social influences on learning Learning is influenced by social interactions, interpersonal relations, and communication with others.

9

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES FACTORS Principle 12: Individual differences in learning Learners have different strategies, approaches, and capabilities for learning that are a function of prior experience and heredity. Principle 13: Learning and diversity Learning is most effective when differences in learners’ linguistic, cultural, and social backgrounds are taken into account. Principle 14: Standards and assessment Setting appropriately high and challenging standards and assessing the learner and learning progress—including diagnostic, process, and outcome assessment—are integral parts of the learning process. In teacher-centered classrooms, the burden of student learning is placed on the teacher. The teacher must disseminate information for students to absorb. Conversely, in learner-centered classrooms the onus of learning is transferred from the teacher to the learner. The learner-centered teacher is responsible for creating a learning environment that supports the learning process for all students. In learner-centered classrooms, the student is responsible for learning material, and the teacher is responsible for attending to the unique characteristics that a student presents as he or she creates effective learning environments (McCombs & Whisler, 1997). Thus, learner-centered classrooms have evolved beyond the one-size-fits-all, teacher-centered, lecture-oriented view of learning and have moved towards custom-built classrooms for optimal learning. This means that for one year or for one topic, a teacher may vary lesson plans to incorporate various methodology such as jig-saw groups, Web Quests, or lecture to better suit the idiosyncrasies of his or her students (Fogarty, 1995). Although the transfer of learnercentered theory into practice is challenging (Lohr & Eikleberry, 2007), student benefits make it well worth the effort. In fact, research indicates that, from kindergarten to graduate school, students in learner-centered classrooms are more motivated and academically

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

10

successful when compared to students in more teacher-centered classrooms (McCombs & Quiat, 1999). Although there is a great deal of research that supports the importance of each individual learner-centered principle and the positive student outcomes that manifest in learner-centered classrooms, little learner-centered change has occurred over the last ten years (Cuban 2007). Labree (2004) and Vogler (2006) suggest that the lack of learner-centered school change can be linked to the preexisting beliefs that many teachers hold that may interfere with learner-centered action. More specifically, many teachers believe that teaching is a process of transmitting knowledge and dispensing information (Pajares, 1992, 1993), which is in staunch contradiction with learner-centered education. Therefore, it is important to further explore teachers' beliefs about teaching and what influences those beliefs. Teacher Beliefs For the purposes of this study, teacher beliefs are defined as an individual's perception of information about a specific object or idea (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The predictive power of beliefs with regard to specific behaviors has been widely researched and documented (i.e. Ajzen, 1996, 2002; Glasman & Albarracîn, 2006; Huang, 2003). Although the investigation of beliefs in isolation is valuable, it is also important to investigate the interplay of teacher beliefs within the context of larger belief systems because beliefs do not exist in a vacuum (Fives & Buehl, 2008). By better understanding the interplay of beliefs, we may then uncover the nature of the influence such belief profiles have on behavior. Therefore, we investigated the influence of teacher efficacy on learner-centered beliefs.

11

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Teacher Efficacy Beliefs Teacher efficacy reflects a teacher's self-reflective appraisal of his or her ability to bring about desired student outcomes (TschannenMoran & Hoy, 2001). This deceivingly simple construct has become a cornerstone in the investigation of teacher beliefs and behavior (Fives, 2005). Teacher efficacy is based on the social cognitive theory of Bandura (1986, 1997), which espouses that one's cognitive beliefs affect one's behavior. Thus, if a teacher fails to believe that he or she possesses the requisite teaching abilities needed to engage in new teaching practices, such as learner-centered instruction, then that teacher is unlikely to engage in those classroom innovations. Research links teacher efficacy with a number of outcomes, such as student achievement (Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2004; Ross & Cousins, 1993) and the implementation of new teaching ideas that involve risk, difficulty, and shared student control, all of which are appropriate in describing learner-centered education (Ross, 1998). The self-reflective cognitive belief of efficacy has also been donned an excellent indicator of future action (Bandura, 1986, 1997). Dunn (2007) found a small, but significant relationship between cumulative teacher efficacy and efficacy for student engagement with regard to learner-centered beliefs in a small sample of urban teachers; however, further investigation is needed to better establish the influence of teacher efficacy on learner-centered beliefs. Efficacy is a powerful construct that is important to the classroom and professional development. Its importance is amplified by its trainable nature. Efficacy can be addressed through various types of professional development such as modeling, mastery experiences, and vicarious learning (Bandura, 1997) as well as peer coaching (Bruce & Ross, 2008). Before effort is put forth to address efficacy and well as learner-centered beliefs in professional development, it is first important to establish a relationship between these two constructs in teachers.

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

12

Thus, the authors sought to better understand the influence of teacher efficacy on teachers' learner-centered beliefs. This study is important because if learner-centered beliefs predict learner-centered action, and teacher efficacy informs learner-centered beliefs and action, a new view of the dynamic between learner-centered beliefs and teacher efficacy may lead to the development of more effective teacher professional development. Statement of the Problem Because teachers who report higher levels of efficacy are more attuned to their students’ needs and characteristics, we hypothesized that teachers who report higher-level efficacy beliefs would also report higher levels of learner-centered beliefs. As a result, our research question was as follows: Does teacher efficacy for student engagement, instructional strategies, and classroom management influence their learner-centered beliefs? Methodology The convenience sample for this study consisted of 74 graduate students enrolled in a masters program in education at a public midsouthern university that is accredited by the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. All subjects were employed as PK-12 teachers. A summary of demographic information is presented in Table 2.

13

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Table 2 Respondent Demographics Variable Sex

n

percent

Male Female

11 63

14.9 85.1

5-6 Middle School 7-9 7-12 10-12

13 18 05 14 24

17.6 24.3 06.8 18.9 32.4

Bachelors Masters Specialist Doctorate

52 19 2 1

70.3 25.7 2.7 1.4

Urban Rural Suburban

7 56 11

9.5 75.7 14.9

1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 - 15 years 16 - 20 years 21 - 25 years

11 8 11 9 6 13 7 7 2

14.9 10.8 14.9 12.2 8.1 17.6 9.5 9.5 2.8

Grade Taught

Highest Degree Earned

School Location

Years Teaching Experience

Note: N=74.

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

14

Procedures After receiving approval from the Institutional Review Board, subjects were invited to participate via email, provided with the URL for the survey, and asked to complete the measures along with questions regarding basic demographic information. Subjects completed a Web-based version of the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) and the Teacher Beliefs Survey (TBS). All responses were voluntary and anonymous. No individually identifiable information was collected from respondents. Instruments Teacher Beliefs Survey The learner-centered beliefs subscale of the TBS was used in this study to assess learner-centeredness in this sample of teachers. This measure was selected for the current study for two reasons. First, it aligns with the definition of learner-centeredness used for this study. Second, it has been extensively used with thousands of teachers. The learner-centered beliefs subscale of the TBS is based on APA’s (1997) 14 learner-centered psychological principles (see Table 1), which provide the framework for learner-centered education. The TBS employs a four point Likert scale and consists of 14 statements. Participants respond to each of the 14 statements based on the extent to which they agree or disagree with each item (McCombs & Whisler, 1997). This measure was verified in a validation study with more than 1,707 undergraduate students (McCombs, 2002). The reliability coefficient for this measure is .86.

15

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES). Teacher efficacy was assessed with the TSES developed by Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, and Hoy (1998). The TSES was selected for this study because it aligns with the definition and conceptualization of teacher efficacy used in this study. This measure was also selected because it goes beyond the general assessment of teacher efficacy and measures efficacy for instructional practices, classroom management, and student engagement. Teachers respond to each item based on their opinion about how much they can exert influence a given situation. The nine responses range from nothing, very little, some influence, quite a bit, or to a great deal. In this study, the 12-item short form of the TSES was used to prevent participant fatigue and to encourage greater survey completion rates (Stanton, Sinar, Balzer, & Smith, 2002). In addition, the short form of the TSES has similar reliability coefficients as the longer 24item measure (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). The reliabilities of the three subscales ranged from .81 to .86. The TSES consists of a 9-point Likert scale measure. Other studies that have examined the reliability of the TSES have found substantial reliabilities (e.g., Benton-Borghi, 2006; Knoblauch, 2004). Data Analysis In order to examine the influence of scores on the three TSES subscales on the learner-centered subscale from the TBS, the data were analyzed using multiple regression. The TBS scores were entered as the dependent variable and the three TSES subscale scores (efficacy for instructional practices, classroom management, and student engagement) were entered as the independent or predictor variables. The significance and size of the coefficient of determination were examined to determine if the set of independent variables had a significant influence on teachers’ learner-centered beliefs. Further, the magnitude of impact for each independent variable was examined.

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

16

Results Each measure was reliable. Cronbach’s alpha measured the internal consistency of items on the surveys. The reliability alpha for the learner-centered beliefs subscale of the TBS was .75. The reliability alpha for the TSES efficacy for instructional practices, classroom management, and student engagement subscales were .88, .89, and .91 respectively. Multiple linear regression was used to determine whether efficacy for instructional practices, classroom management, and student engagement influenced teachers’ learner-centered beliefs. The independent variables were teacher efficacy for instructional practices, classroom management, and student engagement. The dependent variable was learner-centered beliefs. The sample size for the analyses was 74 primarily rural mid-southern teachers. The means, standard deviations, and correlations are displayed in Table 2.

17

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Table 2 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for Regression of Efficacy for Instructional Practices, Classroom Management, and Student Engagement and Learner-Centered Beliefs (N = 74) 1 1 L.C. Beliefs

2

3

4

1.00

2 Eff. Stud. Eng.

.36

1.00

3 Eff. Ins. Strat.

.37

.71

1.00

4 Eff. Class Man.

.25

.72

.70

1.00

3.21 .33

25.53 5.36

27.01 5.07

28.08 5.03

Mean Standard Deviation

The three independent variables were entered into the regression equation simultaneously. Preliminary examination of the results indicated there was no extreme multicollinearity in the data (all variance inflation factors were less than 3). Exploratory analysis also indicated that the assumptions underlying the application of multiple linear regression (independence, normality, heteroschedasticity, and linearity) were met. The regression results indicated that the set of independent variables significantly influenced 16% of the variance in learner-centered beliefs (F (3, 70) = 4.44, p < .01). None of the independent variables had a significant unique influence on learnercentered beliefs.

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

18

Discussion The results of this study supported the hypothesis that teacher efficacy does influence teachers' learner-centered beliefs. More specifically, the results indicated that collectively, teacher efficacy for instructional practices, classroom management, and student engagement significantly influenced learner-centered beliefs. This results differ slightly from Dunn’s (2007) findings that demonstrated a small but significant correlation between cumulative teacher efficacy and efficacy for student engagement with regard to learner-centered beliefs in a small sample of urban teachers. For the sample of teachers who responded to the present study, it appears that the collective influence of the three teacher efficacy subscales was more potent than that of any single scale. The difference in the results may be due to the nature of the demographics of the two sample populations (e.g., rural vs. urban). This finding also supports Ross' (1998) assertion that teachers with lower efficacy are more resistant to teaching ideas that involve risk, difficulty, and shared student control, all of which are characteristic of learner-centered teaching. This may be a reflection of their belief that they do not possess the requisite skills needed to engage in more challenging teaching tasks like those involved in learner-centered education. The results of the current study support this position by further substantiating the influence of teacher efficacy on learner-centered beliefs, which is important in establishing a need to address these teacher beliefs in professional development aimed at creating more learner-centered teachers and classrooms. Limitations This study was limited in scope due to the nature of the small sample size. The findings may not be generalized to the greater teacher education student population due to the lack of standardization in training practices in teacher education programs and in-service professional development across the country. In light of these

19

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

limitations, future research should examine this relationship in larger populations in different areas of the country. Implications for Future Research The finding that teacher efficacy significantly influences teacher learner-centered beliefs is important because efficacy training may be provided in many forms, with research providing strong support for peer modeling as a highly effective technique (Bandura, 1997; Bruce & Ross, 2008). Future research should investigate the implementation of both peer modeling as well as the effects of other interventions on both teacher efficacy and learner-centered beliefs. As intimated earlier, future research should investigate the effects of incorporating teacher efficacy training in professional development efforts that focus on the promotion of learner-centered innovations. Another avenue for future research could be the development of an efficacy scale that assesses efficacy specifically for learner-centered teaching. The TSES used in this study was developed to assess general aspects of teaching efficacy. In addition, future research should also investigate other variables that may influence teachers’ learnercentered beliefs such as experiences participating in and observing learner-centered classrooms. Teachers’ epistemological beliefs may also provide further insight into misconceptions teachers may hold about how individuals learn that may interfere with the adoption of learner-centered beliefs. By providing those involved in teacher training with a better understanding of variables that influence learner-centered beliefs, instruments that assess these beliefs (i.e., TSES, TBS), and means of influencing these beliefs, researchers may find a productive path to designing effective professional development needed to encourage leaner-centeredness in teachers and promote learner-centered educational reform.

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

20

Conclusion The results of this study highlight the importance of further investigating and addressing teachers’ efficacy in any attempt to persuade teachers to adopt learner-centered beliefs. Until teachers adopt learner-centered beliefs, they are unlikely to engage in learnercentered practices (Deemer, 2004; Lotter, 2004; McCombs, 2002; Ross, Cousins, & Gadalla, 1996; Zielinski & Preston, 1992). This study also supports research that indicates that unless teachers are confident in their teaching abilities, they are unlikely to adopt beliefs that lead to the adoption of challenging new learner-centered teaching practices. As a result, this study draws attention to the need to be address teacher efficacy during any inservice professional development program designed to encourage more learnercenteredness in teachers. To achieve a learner-centered paradigm shift in schools, future research should investigate means of addressing teacher efficacy through specific training interventions as well as the effects of this type of training on both teacher efficacy and learner-centered beliefs. As a result, professional development stakeholders may make noticable progress in their efforts to provide a caring and qualified learner-centered teacher for every child.

21

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

REFERENCES Ajzen, I. (1996). The directive influence of attitudes on behavior. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking motivation and cognition to behavior (pp. 385–403). New York: Guilford Press. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665-683. American Psychological Association (APA) (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school reform and redesign (Rev. Ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved February 1, 2007, from www.apa.org/ed/lcp2/lcp14.html Bacon, D. R. (2005). The effect of group projects on content-related learning. Journal of Management Education, 29(2), 248-267. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bruce, C. D., & Ross, J. A. (2008). A model for increasing reform implementation and teacher efficacy: Teacher peer coaching in grades 3 and 6 mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(2), 346-371. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company. Benton-Borghi, B. H. (2006). Teaching every student in the 21st century: Teacher efficacy and technology. (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 2006). Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(07A), 2540. Belzer, A. (2005). Improving professional development systems: Recommendations from the Pennsylvania adult basic and literacy education professional development system evaluation. Adult Basic Education, 15(1), 33-55.

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

22

Bruce, C. D., & Ross, J. A. (2008). A model for increasing reform implementation and teacher efficacy: Teacher peer coaching in grades 3 and 6 mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(2), 346-370. ChanLin, L. (2008). Technology integration applied to project-based learning in science. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(1), 55-65. Cuban, L. (2007). Hugging the middle: Teaching in an era of testing and accountability, 1980-2005. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 15(1), 33-57. Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 4-10. Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). The flat earth and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our future. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318-334. Deemer, S. A. (2004). Classroom goal orientation in high school classrooms: Revealing links between teacher beliefs and classroom environments. Educational Research, 46(1), 73-90. Dunn, K. E. (2007). Teacher beliefs: An exploration of the relationship of teacher efficacy and years teaching to teachers' learnercentered beliefs. National Forum of Applied Educational Research, 20(3), 1-18. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Fives, H. (2005). Exploring the relationships of teachers’ efficacy, knowledge, and pedagogical beliefs: A multimethod study. (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Maryland, 2003). Dissertation Abstracts International, 64, 3188. Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2008). What do teachers belief? Developing a framework for examining beliefs about teachers' knowledge and ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 134-176. Fogarty, R. (1995). Best practices for the learner-centered classroom: A collection of articles. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight Training and Publishing.

23

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Glasman, L. R., & Albarracîn, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitudebehavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 778-882. Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2004). Collective efficacy beliefs: Theoretical developments and, empirical evidence, and future directions. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 3-13. Huang, J. (2003). A study of novice elementary school teachers' teaching beliefs and their performances in teaching. Bulletin of Educational Research, 49(1), 171-197. Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (1992). Model standards for beginning teacher licensing and development: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, D.C: Council of Chief State School Officers. Knoblauch, D. E. (2004). Contextual factors and the development of student teachers’ sense of efficacy. (Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 2004). Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(09A), 3343. Labaree, D. F. (2004). The Ed school’s romance with progressivism. Brookings Papers on Education Policy, 2004, 89-117. Pajares, F. (1993). Pre-service teachers' beliefs: A focus for teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 15(2), 45-54. Lohr, L. L., & Eikleberry, C. (2007). Learner-centered usability. Tools for creating a learner-friendly instructional environment. Performance Improvement, 40(4), 24-27. Lotter, C. (2004). Pre-service science teachers’ concerns through classroom observations and student teaching: Special focus on inquiry teaching. Science Educator, 13(1), 29-38. McCombs, B. L. (February 2002). The learner-centered framework: A research-validated rational for defining healthy educational environments. University of Denver Research Institute: Talking paper for education committee hearing. Sacramento, CA. Retrieved November 5, 2007, from http://www.amersports.org/library/reports/9.html

Karee E. Dunn & Glenda C. Rakes

24

McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. McCombs, B. L., & Quiat, M. A. (1999). A study of the learnercenteredness of the Community for Learning (CFL) Program. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Center for Research in Human Development in Education. Retrieved October 30, 2007, from http://www.temple.edu/Lss/pdf/spotlights/ 500/ spot500.pdf National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (2006). National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education Unit Standards. Retrieved April 16, 2007, from http://www.ncate.org/institutions/unitstandardsrubrics.asp?ch=4

Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teacher’s beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332. Pajares, F. (1993). Pre-service teachers' beliefs: A focus for teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 15(2), 45-54. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. B. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167-199. Ross, J. (1998). The antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. Advances in Research on Teaching, 7, 49-74. Ross, J., & Bruce, C. (2007). Professional development effects on teacher efficacy: Results of randomized field trial. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(1), 50-60. Ross, J., & Cousins, J. B. (1993). Enhancing secondary school students' acquisition of correlational reasoning skills. Research in Science and Technology Education, 11, 191-206. Ross, J. A., Cousins, J. B., & Gadalla, T. (1996). Within-teacher predictors of teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 385-400. Sinatra, G. (2005). The "warming trend" in conceptual change research: The legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 107-115.

25

NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Stanton, J. M, Sinar, E. F., Balzer, W. K., & Smith, P. C. (2002). Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 167-194. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805. Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202-248. Vogler, K. E. (2006). Impact of high school graduation examination on Tennessee science teachers’ instructional practices. American Secondary Education, 35(1), 33-57. Zielinski, E. J., & Preston, D. (1992, March). The evolution of preservice science teachers’ concerns about teaching. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching. Boston: MA.