Teacher Efficacy, Supervision, and the Special Education Resource-Room Teacher

The Gibson and Dembo Teacher Efficacy Scale was modified for use in the special education resource room context. A factor analysis of the modified instrument resulted in a factor structure comparable to one based on reg ular-education teachers, as reported in prior research. The relation between instructional supervision and teacher effica cy among these teachers was also examined. With sex, age, resource-room tenure, and job satisfaction held constant, the perceived utility?but not frequency?of supervision was sig nificantly related to teacher efficacy. The implications of these findings for both research and practice in the special education context are considered. Although the construct of teacher efficacy has enjoyed a considerable amount of empirical scrutiny in the past 15 years, few researchers have explored the import of this construct for the special education context. We had two general objectives in conducting this study: (a) to establish the validity of the Gibson and Dembo (1984) teacher effi cacy scale when revised for use with special education resource-room teachers and (b) to examine the association between teacher efficacy and the frequency and utility of instructional supervision that resource teachers reported receiving. We began with an overview of the teacher effica cy construct and associated research. Research on Teacher Efficacy The Teacher Efficacy Construct The past 15 years have borne witness to a flurry of research activity devoted to the study of teacher efficacy, or, as Dembo and Gibson (1985) defined the construct, "the extent to which teachers believe they can affect student learning" (p. 173). Researchers generally credit Bandura (1977) for providing the theoretical framework for studying this construct. In his theory of self-efficacy, Bandura argued that human behavior is influenced by the individual's beliefs regarding two classes of expectations: an outcome expectation, "a person's estimate that a given behavior will lead to certain outcomes," and an efficacy expectation, the "conviction that one can successfully execute the behavior required to produce the outcome" (Bandura, 1977, p. 193). Within the context of teaching, an outcome expectation is illustrated by the teacher who believes, for example, that skillful instruction can offset the effects of an impoverished home environment. Here, efficacy is expressed not for one's self but, rather, for an abstract collective of teachers?the "normative teacher" (Denham & Michael, 1981, p. 41). An efficacy expectation, in contrast, would be reflected by the teacher's confidence that he or she personally is capable of such instruction?that one possesses personal agency with respect to the task of pedagogy. Teacher efficacy researchers traditionally have labeled the two sets of beliefs teaching efficacy and personal teach ing efficacy, respectively (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Gibson & Dembo, 1984). This language invites confusion, however, given the superordinate construct teacher efficacy. Although for somewhat different reasons, Hoy and Woolfolk (1990) labeled these constructs general teaching efficacy and per sonal teaching efficacy, a distinction we simplify further to general efficacy and personal efficacy. However labeled, this distinction is critical "because individuals can believe that a particular course of action will produce certain outcomes, but if they entertain serious doubts about whether they can perform the necessary activ ities such information does not influence their behavior" (Bandura, 1977, p. 193). Thus, one may be confident in the abilities of the normative teacher, yet harbor considerable uncertainties about his or her own instructional prowess. Research on teacher efficacy typically has employed either the two items from the seminal Rand study (Berman Address correspondence to Theodore Coladarci, University of Maine, College of Education, 5766 Shibles Hall, Orono, ME 04469-5766.