Teachers’ ESD self-efficacy and practices: a longitudinal study on the impact of teacher professional development

Figures & data

Figure 1. Timing of the seminars and surveys across the professional development program.

Table 1. Sample and basic demographics from respondents at each data collection moment.

		School 1	School 2	School 3	School 4	Full sample
All surveys	Sample size	116	73	121	104	414
	Response rate	55%	72%	74%	68%	66%
	Gender ratio (F:M)	0,76	0,65	0,91	0,67	0,75
	Mean age (in years)	30,15	30,5	30,25	29,3	30
Survey 1	Sample size	19	14	25	20	78
	Response rate	54%	70%	78%	61%	65%
	Gender ratio (F:M)	0,78	0,66	0,88	0,68	0,75
	Mean age (in years)	29,5	29	30	28,25	29,25
Survey 2	Sample size	14	13	22	12	61
	Response rate	30%	59%	71%	39%	47%
	Gender ratio (F:M)	0,74	0,69	0,91	0,71	0,76
	Mean age (in years)	30	30	29,5	28,75	29,5
Survey 3	Sample size	24	12	26	31	93
	Response rate	51%	55%	84%	97%	70%
	Gender ratio (F:M)	0,87	0,68	0,88	0,61	0,76
	Mean age (in years)	30,25	31,5	30,5	29,5	30,5
Survey 4	Sample size	39	18	30	22	109
	Response rate	95%	95%	86%	79%	89%
	Gender ratio (F:M)	0,79	0,65	0,9	0,68	0,76
	Mean age (in years)	30,5	31	30,5	29,75	30,5
Survey 5	Sample size	20	16	18	19	73
	Response rate	49%	84%	51%	68%	59%
	Gender ratio (F:M)	0,7	0,58	1	0,68	0,74
	Mean age (in years)	30,5	31	30,75	30,25	30,75

Table 2. Descriptive results (M ± SD) for teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs at the five time points.

Item	I feel confident that I can currently…	Dec ‘16	Sep ‘17	Feb ‘18	Nov ‘18	Jun ‘19
SEFF_01	… realize education for sustainable development (ESD) in my school	3.00 ± 1.07	3.80 ± 1.05	3.33 ± 1.01	3.37 ± 0.99	3.60 ± 0.89
SEFF_02	… evaluate an ESD project that I / we have implemented	2.91 ± 1.08	3.72 ± 1.14	3.33 ± 1.10	3.33 ± 1.17	3.45 ± 1.12
SEFF_03	… teach for sustainable development	3.53 ± 1.02	3.87 ± 0.90	3.70 ± 0.98	3.72 ± 1.05	3.93 ± 0.79
SEFF_04	… determine educational objectives in relation to sustainable development and the students I teach	3.54 ± 1.09	3.98 ± 0.96	3.62 ± 1.00	3.64 ± 1.00	3.85 ± 0.84
SEFF_05	… develop dynamic learning environments for teaching sustainability issues	3.05 ± 0.94	3.57 ± 0.97	3.20 ± 0.96	3.33 ± 0.97	3.44 ± 0.87
SEFF_06	… deal with environmental aspects of issues related to sustainable development	3.45 ± 0.98	3.72 ± 1.02	3.52 ± 1.04	3.63 ± 1.01	3.70 ± 0.84
SEFF_07	… deal with social aspects of issues related to sustainable development	3.31 ± 1.02	3.87 ± 0.96	3.58 ± 1.01	3.57 ± 0.93	3.68 ± 0.88
SEFF_08	… deal with economic aspects of issues related to sustainable development	2.91 ± 1.10	3.56 ± 0.94	3.15 ± 1.02	3.26 ± 0.94	3.41 ± 0.91
SEFF_09	… deal with the political aspects of issues related to sustainable development	2.69 ± 1.04	3.44 ± 0.98	2.83 ± 1.08	3.21 ± 0.93	3.26 ± 0.93
SEFF_10	… deal with the international aspects of issues related to sustainable development	2.85 ± 1.01	3.44 ± 0.90	3.00 ± 1.06	3.35 ± 0.86	3.41 ± 0.88
SEFF_11	… work with sustainable development in line with the objectives of the curriculum and guidelines	3.56 ± 1.08	3.93 ± 0.87	3.67 ± 0.98	3.75 ± 0.94	3.86 ± 0.92
SEFF_12	… work with sustainable development based on a multidisciplinary approach	3.54 ± 1.10	3.98 ± 1.01	3.63 ± 1.04	3.61 ± 0.97	3.88 ± 0.87
SEFF_ESD	Scale mean	3.19 ± 0.82	3.74 ± 0.78	3.39 ± 0.84	3.49 ± 0.79	3.63 ± 0.66

Reported on a five-point Likert scale.

Table 3. Descriptive results (M ± SD) for teachers’ self-reported ESD practices at the five time points.

Item		Dec ‘16	Sep ‘17	Feb ‘18	Nov ‘18	Jun ‘19
PRAC_01	When my students read texts at school, usually we critically examine the content	3.68 ± 0.99	3.69 ± 0.92	3.70 ± 0.94	3.68 ± 1.02	3.86 ± 0.77
PRAC_02	In school, I encourage my students to take a stand and have their own opinion on the issues we work with	4.51 ± 0.66	4.34 ± 0.79	4.34 ± 0.90	4.36 ± 0.81	4.42 ± 0.71
PRAC_03	I use many teaching approaches, depending on the character of knowledge	4.15 ± 0.76	4.08 ± 0.92	4.24 ± 0.83	4.19 ± 0.87	4.33 ± 0.71
PRAC_04	In my lessons, there are often conversations in which different views are presented and discussed	3.96 ± 0.95	3.97 ± 0.89	3.65 ± 1.06	3.81 ± 1.11	4.22 ± 0.71
PRAC_05	Societal actors from e.g. municipality, business or SMEs* are included in the learning environment in my teaching	2.81 ± 1.08	2.82 ± 1.12	2.80 ± 1.08	2.95 ± 1.19	3.14 ± 1.17
PRAC_06	In school, I let my students work with how the past, present and future are linked in various matters	3.79 ± 0.94	3.70 ± 1.01	3.82 ± 1.07	3.86 ± 1.01	4.14 ± 0.90
PRAC_07	In my teaching, nature or other outdoor environments are used	3.26 ± 1.40	3.41 ± 1.41	3.34 ± 1.41	3.52 ± 1.40	3.33 ± 1.34
PRAC_08	In school, I let my students work with local and global issues and how they fit together	3.42 ± 1.17	3.39 ± 0.95	3.46 ± 1.13	3.50 ± 1.10	3.73 ± 0.93
PRAC_09	In teaching, I tie an event to the current operating environment	3.78 ± 0.99	3.82 ± 0.97	3.68 ± 1.06	3.94 ± 0.88	3.88 ± 1.00
PRAC_10	In school, I let my students work with the economic, social and environmental problems linked	3.12 ± 1.29	3.16 ± 1.29	3.12 ± 1.20	3.18 ± 1.20	3.42 ± 1.00
PRAC_ESD	Scale mean	3.64 ± 0.64	3.63 ± 0.67	3.61 ± 0.77	3.70 ± 0.67	3.85 ± 0.57

Reported on a five-point Likert scale.

Note: ^* SMEs = small and medium enterprises.

Figure 2. Changes in teachers’ self-efficacy for ESD and self-reported ESD practices across the five time points in the professional development program.

Table 4. Mean values, standard deviations, effect size and correlations between SEFF and PRAC at the five time points.

Estimate	Dec ‘16	Sep ‘17	Feb ‘18	Nov ‘18	Jun ‘19
SEFF M ± SD	3.19 ± 0.82	3.74 ± 0.78*	3.39 ± 0.84	3.49 ± 0.79*	3.63 ± 0.66*
Effect size (d)	/	0.68	/	0.37	0.66
PRAC M ± SD	3.64 ± 0.64	3.63 ± 0.67	3.61 ± 0.77	3.70 ± 0.67	3.85 ± 0.57*
Effect size (d)	/	/	/	/	0.36
r (SEFF-PRAC)	0.436*	0.508*	0.572*	0.690*	0.791*

* Marks significant estimates. For SEFF and PRAC these are t-test comparisons to the baseline value in December 2016. For non-significant differences, no effect sizes were estimated.

Data availability statement

Data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.