The Contribution of Prior Student Achievement and School Processes to Collective Teacher Efficacy in Elementary Schools.

Collective teacher efficacy refers to teacher perceptions that they constitute an effective instructional team, capable of bringing about learning in students. Previous research demonstrates that a school staff with a strong sense of collective efficacy is likely to generate high student achievement. This study of 2170 teachers in 141 elementary schools used structural equation modeling to examine the antecedents of collective teacher efficacy. The study found that prior student achievement in grade 6 mathematics predicted collective teacher efficacy, as predicted by social cognition theory. The study also found that school processes that promoted teacher ownership in school directions (shared school goals, school-wide decision making, fit of plans with school needs, and empowering principal leadership) exerted an even stronger influence on collective teacher efficacy than prior student achievement. School cohesions and support contributed to collective teacher efficacy but only in domains in which the school had control over its directions. Contribution of Prior Student Achievement 3 The Contribution of Prior Student Achievement and Collaborative School Processes To Collective Teacher Efficacy in Elementary Schools Collective teacher efficacy is “the perceptions of teachers in a school that the efforts of the faculty as a whole will have a positive effect on students” (Goddard, Hoy, & Hoy, 2000, p. 480). The construct has been proposed, on theoretical and empirical grounds, as an addition to individual teacher efficacy in studies of the effects of teacher cognition on school outcomes. In contrast with the large number of studies on the antecedents of individual teacher efficacy, there have been few attempts to understand factors that contribute to the emergence of collective teacher efficacy. This study examined the effect of two sets of variables that have theoretical appeal as possible predictors: prior student achievement and school processes, particularly patterns of staff interaction. Literature Review Self-efficacy, Teacher Efficacy and Collective Teacher Efficacy In social cognitive theory, self-efficacy is “beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments” (Bandura, 1997, p. 2). Self-efficacy influences behavior through cognitive processes (especially goal setting), motivational processes (especially attributions for success and failure), affective processes (especially control of negative feelings), and selection processes (Bandura, 1993). Individuals who feel that they will be successful on a given task are more likely to be so because they adopt challenging goals, try harder to achieve them, persist despite setbacks, and develop coping mechanisms for managing their emotional states. Teacher efficacy is a teacher’s expectation that he or she will be able to bring about student learning. It is a set of self-efficacy beliefs that refer to the specific domain of the teacher’s professional behavior. Teacher efficacy may be correlated with other dimensions of self-efficacy. For example, Authors (2001) found that teachers’ expectations about their ability to Contribution of Prior Student Achievement 4 teach with computers (i.e., teacher efficacy) was positively correlated (r=.57) with expectations about their ability to use computers to accomplish personal goals (i.e., self-efficacy for personal computer use). Despite such inter-correlations among self-efficacy domains, self-efficacy is not a generalized expectancy. Self-efficacy is situationally specific. It develops from a subject's appraisal of past experience with particular tasks or with activities similar to it, although perceptions of efficacy can be modified by other sources of information such as observing the performances of others (Bandura, 1997). Teacher efficacy is of interest to school improvement researchers because teacher efficacy consistently predicts willingness to try out new teaching ideas, particularly techniques that are difficult to implement and involve risks such as sharing control with students (Czerniak & Schriver-Waldon, 1991; Dutton, 1990; Hani, Czerniak, & Lumpe, 1996; Riggs & Enochs, 1990; Ross, 1992). High expectations of success motivate classroom experimentation because teachers anticipate they will able to achieve the benefits of innovation and overcome obstacles that might arise. School improvement researchers have also focused on teacher efficacy because teachers with high expectations about their ability to teach produce higher student achievement in core academic subjects (Anderson, Green, & Lowen, 1988; Ashton & Webb, 1986; Authors, 1992; 1993; Cancro, 1992; Moore & Esselman, 1994; Watson, 1991) and on affective goals like self-esteem (Borton, 1991), self-direction (Rose & Medway, 1981), motivation (Roeser, Arbreton, & Anderman, 1993) and attitudes to school (Miskel, McDonald, & Bloom, 1983). Teacher efficacy contributes to achievement because high efficacy teachers try harder, use management strategies that stimulate student autonomy, attend more closely to low ability student needs, and modify students’ ability perceptions (evidence reviewed in Authors, 1998-a). Collective teacher efficacy differs from teacher efficacy in that collective teacher efficacy refers to expectations of the effectiveness of the staff to which one belongs, whereas teacher Contribution of Prior Student Achievement 5 efficacy refers to expectations about one’s own teaching ability. Although collective and individual teacher efficacy are correlated (Goddard & Goddard, 2001), they are conceptually distinct. For example, it is not hard to imagine a teacher who believed she would be more or less successful than her staff as a whole. Collective teacher efficacy has attracted researcher interest for theoretical and empirical reasons. Bandura (1997) argued that self-efficacy is not an omnibus trait but a differentiated set of self-beliefs linked to distinct realms of human functioning. For this reason he rejected most teacher efficacy scales because they “are, in the most part, still cast in a general form rather than being tailored to domains of instructional functioning” (1997, p. 243). Bandura also recommended that self-efficacy instruments be written at the same level of generality as the outcomes they potentially predict: For group outcomes, measures that probe the characteristics of the group are required, not estimates of individual functioning aggregated to the collective. Goddard and others created a collective teacher efficacy measure that addressed Bandura’ critique. Their instrument is based on two dimensions of collective teacher efficacy (analysis of the teaching task and perceptions of teaching competence) derived from an extensive review of the teacher efficacy research (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy & Hoy, 1998). The instrument asks teachers to report their perceptions of the ability of their staff. Collective teacher efficacy is a powerful predictor of student achievement. Bandura (1993) found that collective teacher efficacy was a stronger predictor of achievement than student socio-economic status or stability of the study body. Goddard (2001) found that collective teacher efficacy explained 47-50% of the between-school variance in mathematics and reading achievement. Goddard et al. (2000) and Goddard and Goddard (2001) obtained similar results. They argued that collective teacher efficacy influences student achievement by creating school norms and sanctions that motivate Contribution of Prior Student Achievement 6 persistence. The same argument was used by Tschannen-Moran and Goddard (2001) to explain the effect of collective teacher efficacy on faculty trust. Sources of Efficacy Information In this section we identify, from social cognition theory, potential contributors to collective teacher efficacy. We focus on contributors related to prior achievement and to professional interactions within a school staff. Bandura (1986) argued that the sources of individual and collective self-efficacy information are similar. Bandura proposed (and evidence collected by Lent, Lopez, & Bieschke, 1991 and Lopez & Lent, 1992 demonstrated) that the most powerful source of efficacy information is mastery experiences. Teachers who perceive themselves to have been successful on a particular task, either individually or as part of a collective, believe they have the ability to perform that task and anticipate that they will be successful in future encounters with it. Such expectations encourage teachers to set higher goals and to persist until they have been attained. The best proxy for mastery experiences at the school level might be prior achievement scores of the school. Such scores are likely to be the strongest predictor of collective teacher efficacy in jurisdictions where school achievement is defined by a mandated assessment in which an external test based on a common standard is used to compare schools. The only two studies to investigate the link between collective teacher efficacy and prior achievement confirmed the relationship. Bandura (1993) found that achievement in reading and mathematics measured at the beginning of the year predicted collective teacher efficacy measured at the end of the year. Goddard (2001) found that 65% of the between-school variance in collective teacher efficacy could be attributed to a reading test administered one year earlier. Social interactions among teachers and with administrators influence whether teachers interpret prior school achievement as evidence of mastery. Collaboration among teachers Contribution of Prior Student Achievement 7 promotes individual teacher efficacy (Authors, 1992; Chester & Beaudin, 1996; Louis, 1991; Morrison, Walker, Wakefield, & Solberg, 1994; Rosenholtz, 1989). In a longitudinal study of fluctuations in teacher efficacy during a period of high stress, Authors (1997) found that collaboration contributed to teachers