Primary school teachers’ sense of professional agency and inadequacy in teacher–student interaction

Figures & data

Figure 1. Hypothesised model of longitudinal relations between teacher’s professional agency and inadequacy in teacher–student interaction.

Table 1. Participants’ gender and work experience at the first (T1) and second time points of measurement (T2).

		T1	T2
Gender (N/%)	Female	642/78.8%	421/80.2%
	Male	172/21.1%	104/19.8%
	Total	815	525
	Response rate (T2) 64.4%
Work experience (years)	Min/Max	1/41	1/56*
	Mean	19.02	21.88

*A few participants were on maternity leave, which means that their work experience was not affected during the study.

Table 2. Model fit comparison of the models.

	x2	df	p*	CFI	TLI	RMSEA
CLE
Baseline model	179,833	50		0.941	0.922	0.056
Factor loadings invariant	185,903	55	0.28	0.940	0.928	0.054
Measurement intercepts invariant	212,527	60	0.00	0.930	0.923	0.056
REF
Baseline model	41,918	17		0.976	0.960	0.042
Factor loadings invariant	49,382	20	0.06	0.972	0.960	0.042
Measurement intercepts invariant	92,916	23	0.00	0.932	0.918	0.061
Partially invariant: Measurement intercepts invariant, released Ref21 and Ref21_2	59,153	22	0.00	0.964	0.954	0.046
INAD
Baseline model	40,988	7		0.957	0.908	0.077
Factor loadings invariant	42,798	9	0.76	0.957	0.929	0.068
Measurement intercepts invariant	66,411	11	0.00	0.930	0.904	0.079
Partially invariant: Measurement intercepts invariant, released [Inad33 Inad33_2]	43,774	10	0.68	0.957	0.936	0.064

*Satorra-Bentler’s Chi-difference test.

Table 3. Correlations, means, and standard deviations of the observed mean variables used in the study.

Variable	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.
1. CLE1	1.00
2. CLE2	0.62	1.00
3. REF1	0.45	0.26	1.00
4. REF2	0.38	0.46	0.62	1.00
5. INAD1	−0.53	−0.39	−0.16	−0.12	1.00
6. INAD2	−0.41	−0.53	−0.06	−0.21	0.49	1.00
N	814	523	814	523	815	522
M	5.45	5.60	5.88	6.02	2.85	2.58
SD	0.70	0.65	0.77	0.74	1.25	1.18
Cronbach’s α	0.82	0.81	0.68	0.73	0.73	0.74

The item scale: 1 (completely disagree) − 7 (completely agree).

All correlations were significant at p < 0.01.

Paired samples t-test: the mean difference between all pairs (CLE1&CLE2, REF1&REF2, INAD1&INAD2) was statistically significant (p < .01).

Figure 2. The model fit: χ2(300, N = 815) = 772.060, p = .000, RMSEA = .044 (90% CI .040–.048), CFI = .908, TLI = .900, SRMR = .067. All of the regressions and correlations were significant at p-level < .01, except the dashed regression between Ref1 and Inad2 (p = .058).

Table

Scales and items*
Teachers’ professional agency (TPA) in the classroom
Collaborative environment and transformative practice (6 items)
Cle11: I’ve been able to build functioning interactive relationships with my students.
Cle12: I’m able to create a nice atmosphere together with my students.
Cle13: When planning my work I’m able to utilise the feedback I get from my students.
Cle14: I can modify my teaching to adjust to different groups of students.
Cle15: I’m able to find teaching methods to engage even the most challenging groups of students.
Cle16: I’m able to find ways to support the learning processes of all my students.
Reflection in the classroom (4 items)
Ref21: I still want to learn a lot about teaching.
Ref22: I’d like to understand young people’s ways of thinking and acting better.
Ref23: I regularly endeavour to estimate my success in teaching situations.
Ref24: I think we can all learn something in a teaching situation.
Socio-contextual burnout inventory (STBI)
Inadequacy in teacher–student interaction (INAD) (3 items)
Inad31: The challenging students make me question my abilities as a teacher.
Inad32: I often feel I have failed in my work with students. Inad33: Dealing with problematic situations considering my students often upsets me.
*The item scale: completely disagree—1 2 3 4 5 6 7—completely agree.