1877-0428 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.497

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 3252–3257

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

WCES-2010

The relationship between pre-service teachers’ self efficacy and their internet self-efficacy

Aysun Gürola *, Seda Akt a

a Faculty of Education, F rat University, Elaz , 23300, Türkiye

Received October 27, 2009; revised December 3, 2009; accepted January 14, 2010

Abstract

The present study seeks to investigate the relationship between pre-service teachers’ self efficacy and their internet self-efficacy beliefs. It also seeks to determine how much pre-service teachers’ self efficacy contributes to the prediction of their sense of internet self-efficacy. The study reported in this paper was conducted to examine the relationship between pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy and their self-efficacy in Faculty of Education. To this end, 248 pre-service teachers were selected from Faculty of Education in Firat University, in Turkey. The participants were asked to complete the ‘‘pre-service teachers’ Sense of Self-Efficacy Scale” and the ‘Pre-service Teachers’ Internet Self-Efficacy Questionnaire”. Data analysis and statistical calculations revealed that there is a significant relationship between pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy and their self-efficacy. To investigate of Internet Self-Efficacy might have more predictive power in predicting pre-service teacher’s self-efficacy, regression analysis was run. The conclusions and implications of the research were discussed with reference to the earlier findings. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Pre-service teacher; self-efficacy; teachers’ self-efficacy; pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy

1. Introduction

1.1. Pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy Educational researchers have attempted to measure pre-service teacher efficacy and pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. These attempts have been fraught with theoretical and measurement issues (Bandura, 1993; Deemer & Minke, 1999; Dellinger, 2005; Denzine et al., 2005; Guskey & Passaro, 1994; Henson, 2002; Pajares, 1992; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, & Hoy, 1998). Self-efficacy is grounded in the theoretical framework of social cognitive theory emphasizing the evolvement and exercise of human agency that people can exercise some influence over what they do (Bandura, 2006a). Bandura (2006a) maintains that in this conception, people are self-organizing, proactive, selfregulating, and self-reflecting. From this perspective, self-efficacy affects one's goals and behaviours and is influenced by one's actions and conditions in the environment (Schunk & Meece, 2006). Efficacy beliefs determine how environmental opportunities and impediments are

* Aysun Gürol. Tel.: 90 424 2120835; fax: 90 424 236 50 64 E-mail address: agurol@firat.edu.tr

Aysun Gürol and Seda Aktı / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 3252–3257 3253

perceived (Bandura, 2006a) and affect choice of activities, how much effort is expended on an activity, and how long people will persevere when confronting obstacles (Pajares, 1997).

During the last decade, , there has been a growing interest in pre-service teacher self-efficacy (e.g., Soodak & Podell, 1996; Wheatley, 2005) in the literature. A problem with research on teacher self-efficacy is that there is no consensus on how the construct should be conceptualized and how it should be measured. It has been conceptualized and measured differently by different researchers (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007; Tschannen-Moran &Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). In addition to the increased research interest in teacher efficacy and its correlation with teaching/learning behaviours in the classroom (Milner &Woolfolk-Hoy, 2003), much attention has been directed to the efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers. Recent research examined the influence of pedagogical methods courses and field experience courses throughout teacher education programs on pre-service teachers’ thoughts and beliefs about their teaching practice (Clift & Brady, 2005). Teacher self-efficacy refers to the teacher’s belief of his or her abilities to bring about valued outcomes of engagement and learning among students, including difficult and unmotivated students (see Bandura, 1977; Tschannen- Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, & Hoy, 1998). Specifically, teacher self-efficacy has been related to a variety of student outcomes that include achievement (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Ross, 1992), motivation (Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989), and students’ own sense of efficacy (Anderson, Greene, & Loewen, 1988), as well as to different teacher classroom behaviors that affect the teacher’s effort in teaching, and his or her persistence and resilience in the face of difficulties with students (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Gibson & Dembo, 1984; Meijer & Foster, 1988; Podell & Soodak, 1993; Soodak & Podell, 1993). It is also maintained that teachers with a high sense of self-efficacy are more enthusiastic in teaching (Allinder, 1994; Guskey, 1984), more committed to teaching (Coladarci, 1992; Evans & Tribble, 1986; Trentham, Silvern, & Brogdon, 1985), and more likely to stay in teaching (Glickman & Tamashiro, 1982). 1.2. Pre-service teachers’internet self-efficacy Social cognitive theory provided a solid theoretical foundation for concept of the Internet self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is an individual’s belief in his/her ability to successfully perform tasks of a particular domain (Bandura, 1993) and this belief influences his/her choice of activities, how much effort he/she will expend, and how long he/she will sustain effort in dealing with stressful situations (Bandura, 1993; Schunk, 1989; Zimmerman, 1995). The stronger the students’ beliefs in their efficacy, the more occupational options they consider possible, the greater the interests they show in them, the better they prepare themselves educationally for different career pursuits, and the greater their persistence and success in their academic coursework (Lent, Brown & Hackett, 1994). Internet self-efficacy has been defined as individuals’ perceptions about their own abilities toward using the Internet (Tsai & Tsai, 2003). Based on the unique features of the Internet, Tsai (2004) attempted to develop an instrument for assessing students’ Internet self-efficacy under two dimensions of online exploration and online communication. This study seeks to investigate the relationship between pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy and their self-efficacy beliefs. It also seeks to determine how much pre-service teachers’ internet self to the prediction of their sense of efficacy. To this end, the following two research questions were posed and investigated in this study:

1. Is there any relationship between pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy and their sense of self-efficacy? 2. Is there any relationship between the different subscales of pre-service teachers’internet self-efficacy and self- efficacy?

2. Method 2.1.Participants The participants of this study were 248 pre-service teachers (132 males, 116 females) teaching at Education Faculty in Firat University, Elazig (Turkey) in the 2008-2009 academic year. There are five sections of specialisation in the departmant: Turkish, Humanities, Mathematics, Science and Class Teaching. The total size of the group is 250. A total of 248 sets of questionnaires were distributed to pre-service teachers who indicated interest in participation. These pre-service teachers were requested to complete the questionnaires anonymously.

3254 Aysun Gürol and Seda Aktı / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 3252–3257

2.2. Instruments Pre-service Teachers’ Sense of Self-Efficacy Scale: Reviewing the existing measures on pre-service teacher’s self-efficacy (such as, the Web Efficacy Scale developed by Ashton et al. (1982), including seven items; the teacher efficacy scale by Gibson and Dembo (1984), including 30 items on a 6 point Likert scale; and Bandura’s teacher efficacy scale, 1997, comprising 30 items on a 9 point scale), the researchers decided to utilize the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale designed by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy, due to its comprehensiveness, integrity, and ease of administration. The Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale, also called Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES), encompasses two versions: long form (including 24 items) and short form (including 12 items). In the current study the long form was applied which includes three subscales: (1) efficacy in student engagement (ESE), (2) efficacy in instructional strategies (EIS), and (3) efficacy in classroom management (ECM). Each subscale loads equally on eight items, and every item is measured on a 7 point scale anchored with the notations: ‘‘nothing, very little, some influence, quite a bit, a great deal.” This scale seeks to capture the multi-faceted nature of pre-service teachers’ efficacy beliefs in a concise manner, without becoming too specific or too general. The total reliability and the reliability of each individual factor – reported by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) – are depicted in Table 1. In this study, the total reliability of the questionnaire was calculated 0.88 by using Cronbach’s alpha.

Table 1. Reability reports of Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES)

Mean SD Alpha OSTES 7.1 0.94 0.94 Efficacy in student engagement (ESE) 7.3 1.1 0.87 Efficacy in instructional strategies (EIS) 7.3 1.1 0.91 Efficacy in classroom management (ECM) 6.7 1.1 0.90

The Internet Self-Efficacy:. The internet self-efficacy instrument pre-dated the rise and importance of Internet related skills. In a recent study, Torkzadeh and Van Dyke (2001) developed a 17-item instrument for measuring the individual’s self-perception and self-competency in interacting with the Internet. They based their measurement development on Bandura’s conceptualization of self-efficacy and other studies of social and cognitive psychology. Later, they used this 17-item instrument in a study of training and Internet self- efficacy and reported a reliability of 0.96. We used 15 items of the instrument developed by Torkzadeh and Van Dyke for measuring Internet self-efficacy. Two items in the original instrument were deemed redundant and therefore excluded. Internet self-efficacy instruments used a seven point Likert-type scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. 2.3. Data analysis To ensure the normality of the distribution, descriptive statistics was employed. To determine the role of pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy in their self-efficacy, a Pearson product-moment correlation was applied to the data. To find out which components of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy might have more predictive power in predicting pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy, a regression analysis was conducted. 3. Results

Table 2 summarizes the descriptive results of the two instruments – pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy and self-efficacy questionnaires –used in this study.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and their internet self-efficacy.

Pre-service Teachers; N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Self-Efficacy 248 2,79 7,00 5,4479 0,81916

Internet Self-Efficacy 248 1,00 7,00 4,6144 1,08908

To investigate the correlation between pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy and their self-efficacy, a Pearson product-moment correlation was applied. The results of correlation revealed that there is a significant

Aysun Gürol and Seda Aktı / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 3252–3257 3255

correlation between pre- teachers’ internet self-efficacy and their scores in self-efficacy (r = 0.215, p < 0.01) (see Table 3).

Table 3. The results of correlation between pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and internet self-efficacy.

Total internet self-efficacy

Total pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy 0,215*

* Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.01.

It was also found that there is a statistically significant relationship between pre-service teachers’ internet self-efficacy and the 3 subscales which compose the total pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy. The relevant results are as follows: internet self-efficacy and (1) efficacy in student engagement (ESE) (r = 0.236, p < 0.01), (2) efficacy in instructional strategies (EIS) (r = 0.163, p < 0.01), (3) efficacy in classroom management (ECM) (r = 0.204, p < 0.01), (see Table 4).

Table 4. The results of correlation between components of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and their internet self-efficacy.

Total internet self-efficacy

Efficacy in student engagement (ESE) 0,236* Efficacy in instructional strategies (EIS) 0,163* Efficacy in classroom management (ECM) 0,204*

* Shows the existence of the significant relationship at the level of 0.01.

To investigate which components of internet self-efficacy might have more predictive power in predicting pre-service teacher’s self-efficacy and how other components contribute to this model, a regression analysis was conducted. As illustrated in Table 5, three subscales of pre- pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy – efficacy in student engagement, efficacy in instructional strategies, efficacy in classroom management – were found to be good predictors of the dependent variable (pre-service teachers’internet self-efficacy).

Table 5. The results of regression analysis for pre-service teachers’ self efficacy and their internet self-efficacy.

Model Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t

Sig.

B Std. Error Beta B Std. Error

1 (Constant) 3,172 ,653 4,857 ,000

Efficacy in student engagement ,240 ,172 ,205 1,399 ,163

Efficacy in instructional strategies ,028 ,083 ,022 ,334 ,739

Efficacy in classroom management ,164 ,171 ,133 ,955 ,341

a Dependent Variable: Internet self-efficacy

Table 6 shows the model summary statistics. The results indicate that the model containing all of the components of the internet self-efficacy test can predict 43% of the dependent variable, i.e., pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy. The R value is 0.208 showing the multiple correlation coefficients between pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and the components of the internet self-efficacy test. Its square value is 0.43.

Table 6. R2 table for internet self-efficacy as the predictor of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy.

Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std. Error of the Estimate

1 ,208a ,043 ,026 1,09481

a Predictors: Efficacy in student engagement, efficacy in instructional strategies, efficacy in classroom management 4. Discussion

As stated earlier, the present study intends to investigate whether there is any relationship between pre-service teachers’ for internet self-efficacy and their sense of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in Education Faculty. The results revealed that there is a significant positive relationship between pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and

3256 Aysun Gürol and Seda Aktı / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 3252–3257

their internet self-efficacy. The size of this correlation indicates that generally high levels of internet self-efficacy are related to high levels of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy.

Regarding the second research question, the findings revealed that among the 3 components of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy, efficacy in student engagement, efficacy in instructional strategies and efficacy in classroom management have the highest positive correlation with pre-service teacher’s internet self-efficacy.

On the other hand, the scale seeks to discern pre-service teachers’ efficacy beliefs concerning student engagement, instructional strategies, and classroom management. This study enriches the literature regarding pre-service teachers’ self efficacy and pre-service teacher’s internet self-efficacy by exploring the existence and extent of the relationship between these two affective aspects in pre-service teachers contexts. 5. Conclusions

In conclusion, in the lights of the research results, enhancing pre-service teachers’ self efficacy tends to have a positive influence on their sense of pre-service teacher’s internet self-efficacy. This in turn may lead to effective teaching and accordingly to successful student achievement since a strong sense of pre-service teacher efficacy has been found to be associated with teachers’ pedagogical success (Ghanizadeh and Moafian, in press) and student characteristics such as motivation, achievement, and efficacy (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Previous studies have also pointed to the role of teacher efficacy in shaping students’ attitudes toward school and subject matter. Accoridng to, Tschannen- Moran et al (1998) the higher the teaching efficacy of a teacher, the greater the students’ interest in school and learning materials. Our study should be replicated to find out whether similar results can be obtained elsewhere. In terms of the relationship between pre-service teachers’ self efficacy and pre-service teacher’s internet self-efficacy in terms of their gender, the research should be conducted with sufficient numbers of participants of each gender. Since this study was conducted only in Education Faculty in Firat University, further research needs to be carried out at high schools to compare the results.

References

Eastin, M. S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1). Retrieved October, 4, 2004. Available from <http:// www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol6/issue1/eastin.html>.

AlJabri, I. M. (1996). Gender differences in computer attitudes among secondary school students in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 37(1), 70-75.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New Work: W. H. Freeman. Durndell, A., & Haag, Z. (2002). Computer self efficacy, computer anxiety, attitudes towards the Internet and reported experience with the

Internet, by gender, in an East European sample. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(5), 521-535. Fountain, E. J. (2000). Constructing the information society: women, information technology, and design. Technology in Society, 22, 45–62. Hargittai, E., & Shafer, S. (2006). Differences in actual and perceived online skills: The role of gender. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 432-448. Jackson, L. A., Ervin, K. S., Gardner, P. D., & Schmitt, N. (2001). Gender and the Internet: Women communicating and men searching. Sex

Roles, 44(5-6), 363-379. Janssen Reinen, I. J., & Plomp, T. (1997). Information technology and gender equality: A contradiction in terminis? Computers & Education,

28(2), 65-78. Joiner, R., Gavin, J., Duffield, J., Brosnan, M., Crook, C., Durndell, A., Maras, P., Miller, J., Scott, A. J., & Lovatt, P. (2005). Gender, Internet

identification, and Internet anxiety: Correlates of Internet use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8(4), 371-378. Land, M. J. (1996). Evidence of gender disparity in children’s computer use and activities. Microfiche Paper ED432795. A paper presented at the

Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, 82nd, New Orleans, LA, August 4-7, 1999. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and

performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79-122. Levin, T., & Gordon, C. (1989). Effect of gender and computer experience on attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing

Research, 5(1), 69-88. Li, N., & Kirkup, G. (2007). Gender and cultural differences in Internet use: A study of China and the UK. Computers & Education, 48(2), 301-

317. McCarthy, M. (2000). Computers and the internet: Tools for lifelong learning. Journal of Renal Nutrition, 10(1), 44-48. Ministry of Education [MOE] (2001). The 1-9 Grades Science and Life Technology Curriculum Standards, Ministry of Education, Taiwan. Ministry of Education [MOE] (2007). Population statistics of school students at all levels in all city and county districts in Taiwan for the school

year of 2007-2008. Retrieved from http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/b0013/student.xls. Mumtaz, S. (2001). Children’s enjoyment and perception of computer use in the home and the school. Computers & Education, 36(4), 347-362.

Aysun Gürol and Seda Aktı / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 3252–3257 3257

Murphy, C., Coover, D., & Owen, S. (1989). Development and validation of the computer self-efficacy scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 893-899.

National Science & Technology Program Office for e-Learning. (2007). 2005-2006 e-Learning in Taiwan. Jungli, Taiwan: National Science & Technology Program Office for e-Learning.

Papastergiou, M. (2009). Enhancing physical education and sport science students’ self-efficacy and attitudes regarding information and communication Technologies through a computer literacy course. Computers & Education,54(1), 298-308.

Papastergiou, M., & Solomonidou, C. (2005). Gender issues in Internet access and favorite Internet activities among Greek high school pupils inside and outside school. Computers & Education, 44(4), 377-393.

Peng, H. Y., Tsai, C. C., & Wu, Y. T. (2006). University students' self-efficacy and their attitudes toward the Internet: the role of students' perceptions of the Internet. Educational Studies, 32(1), 73-86.

Rainer, R. K., Laosethakul, K., & Astone, M. K. (2003). Are gender perceptions of computing changing over time? Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43(4), 108-114.

Robertson, S. I., Calder, J., Fung, P., Jones, A., & O’Shea, T. (1995). Computer attitudes in an English secondary school. Computers & Education, 24(2), 73-81.

Sanders, J. (1984). The computer: boy, girl or androgynous? The Computing Teacher, 4, 31-34. Schunk, D. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and cognitive skill learning. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 3.

Goals and cognitions, pp. 13-44. San Diego: Academic. Schweingruber, H., Brandenburg, C., & Miller, L. (2001). Middle School Students’ Technology Practices and Preferences: Re-Examining Gender

Differences. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. 10(2), 125-140. Selwyn, N. (1998). The effect of using a home computer on students’ educational use of IT. Computers & Education, 31(2), 211-277. Sieverding, M., & Koch, C. S. (2009). (Self-)Evaluation of computer competence: How gender matters. Computers & Education, 52(3), 696-701. Torkzadeh, G., & Koufteros, X. (1994). Factorial validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training. Educational and

Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 813-821. Tsai, C.-C. (2006). What is the Internet? Taiwanese high school students’ perceptions. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(6), 767-771. Tsai, C. C., & Lin, C. C. (2004). Taiwanese adolescents' perceptions and attitudes regarding the Internet: Exploring gender differences.

Adolescence, 397(156), 725-734. Tsai, C.-C., Lin, S.S.J., & Tsai, M.-J. (2001). Developing an Internet Attitude Scale for high school students. Computers & Education, 37(1), 41-

51. Tsai, M.-J. (2004). Developing of the Internet self-efficacy scale. Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia

& Telecommunications (ED-MEDIA 2004) , 4409-4415, Lugano, Switzerland, June 21-26, 2004. Tsai, M.-J. & Tsai, C.-C. (2003). Information searching strategies in web-based science learning: the role of Internet self-efficacy. Innovations in

Education and Teaching International, 40(1), 43-50. Turkle, S. (1997). Life of the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Touchstone. Vekiri, I. & Chronaki, A. (2008). Gender issues in technology use: Perceived social support, computer self-efficacy and value beliefs, and

computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1392-1404. Volman, M., & van Eck, E. (2001). Gender equity and information technology in education: The second decade. Review of Educational

Research, 71(4), 613-634. Volman, M., van Eck, E., Heemskerk, I., & Kuiper, E. (2005). New technologies, new differences: Gender and ethnic differences in pupils’ use

of ICT in primary and secondary education. Computers & Education, 44(1), 35-55. Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2006). Developing an Information Commitment Survey for assessing students' web information searching strategies

and evaluative standards for web materials. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 120-132. Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies, pp. 202-231. New

York: Cambridge University Press.