Exploration of science teaching self-efficacy outside professional development context for inquiry-based teaching

Figures & data

Figure 1. (a) Distribution of science instructors by gender. (b) Distribution of science instructors by school type. (c) Distribution of science instructors by school location. (d) Distribution of science instructors by academic qualification. (e) Distribution of science instructors by years of teaching experience.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of instructors’ personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE) and science teaching outcome expectancy (STOE).

Component of self-efficacy	Responses
	SD	D	U	A	SA	Average item mean	Average item standard deviation
	n(%)	n(%)	n(%)	n(%)	n(%)
Personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE)						3.89	.75
I wonder if I have the necessary skills to teach science content embedded in the processes of science.	81(26.3)	142(46.1)	47(15.3)	29(9.4)	9(2.9)
It is difficult to guide JHS students to evaluate and examine the quality of data.	85(27.6)	177(57.5)	22(7.1)	24(7.8)	0(0.0)
I don’t know what to do to turn JHS students on to do science like actual scientists.	65(21.1)	153(49.7)	43(14.0)	41(13.3)	6(1.9)
When a JHS student has a difficulty in how to manipulate science equipment, I am usually at a loss as to how to help him do it.	93(30.2)	148(48.1)	23(7.5)	44(14.3)	0(0.0)
Science teaching outcome expectancy (STOE)						2.79	.69
Increased effort in writing science concepts on the board for students to copy is related to their performance.	21(6.8)	48(15.6)	70(22.7)	135(43.8)	34(11.0)
If parents comment that their child is showing more interest in science, it is probably due to the teacher telling students answers they are expected to learn.	23(7.5)	73(23.7)	85(27.6)	77(25.0)	50(16.2)
If JHS students are not performing well in collecting and recording science data, it is likely due to ineffective teaching of how to collect and record data.	34(11.0)	47(15.3)	103(33.4)	98(31.8)	26(8.4)
The teacher is generally responsible for the achievements of JHS students in how to formulate hypothesis of science phenomena.	8(2.6)	55(17.9)	114(37.0)	102(33.1)	29(9.4)
If JHS students are not performing like actual scientists do, it is likely due to ineffective teaching of how scientists work.	34(11.0)	94(30.5)	83(26.9)	79(25.6)	18(5.8)
JHS students’ achievements in science is directly related to their teacher’s effectiveness in defining and explaining science concepts and principles.	0(0.0)	33(10.7)	34(11.0)	161(52.3)	80(26.0)
Self-efficacy of science teaching						3.23	.51
Note: High mean is inquiry-based, low mean is traditional-oriented							N = 308

SD = Strongly disagree, D = Disagree, U = Uncertain, A = Agree, SA = Strongly agree.

Table 2. One-way MANOVA of differences in science instructors’ self-efficacy based on school-type.

Effect	Value	F	Hypothesis df	Error df	Sig	Partial ŋ^2
Pillaice trace	.059	9.482*	2	305	.000	.059
Wilk’s Lambda	.941	9.482*	2	305	.000	.059
Hotelling’s trace	.062	9.482*	2	305	.000	.059
Roy’s largest root	.062	9.482*	2	305	.000	.059

* p < .05, N = 176(Public JHS instructors), N = 132(Private JHS instructors).

Table 3. One-way ANOVAs of differences in instructors’ STOE and PSTE based on school-type.

Component of self-efficacy	Source of variation	Sum of squares	df	Mean square	F	Sig	Partial ŋ^2
STOE	Between groups	101.007	1	101.007	6.045*	.015	.019
	Within groups	5113.214	306	16.710
	Total	91728.000	308
PSTE	Between groups	106.027	1	106.027	12.367*	.001	.039
	Within groups	2623.402	306	8.573
	Total	77410.000	308

* p<.025, N = 176(Public JHS instructors), N = 132(Private JHS instructors).

Table 4. Average item means and average item standard deviations of public and private JHS instructors’ ratings of items on science teaching outcome expectancy (STOE).

Item	Average item mean		Average item standard deviation
	Public JHS teachers	Private JHS teachers	Public JHS teachers	Private JHS teachers
Increased effort in writing science concepts and principles on the board for JHS students is directly related to their academic performance.	2.79	2.42	1.14	.98
If parents comment that their child is showing interest in science at school, it is probably due to the teacher telling students answers they are expected to learn.	2.98	2.59	1.10	1.26
If students are not performing well in collecting and recording scientific data, it is most likely due to ineffective teaching of how to collect and record data.	3.17	3.05	1.18	1.03
The teacher is generally responsible for the achievements of students in how they formulate hypotheses for science phenomena.	3.30	3.28	1.02	.87
If JHS students are not performing like actual scientists do, it is most likely due to ineffective teaching of how actual scientists work.	2.80	2.91	1.15	1.05
JHS students’ achievements in science are directly related to their teacher’s effectiveness in defining and explaining science concepts and principles	2.23	1.85	.90	.83
Science teaching outcome expectancy (STOE)	2.88	2.68	0.69	0.66

N = 176(Public JHS instructors), N = 132(Private JHS instructors).

Note: High means represent inquiry STOE, low means represent traditional STOE.

Table 5. Average item means and average item standard deviations of public and private JHS instructors’ ratings of items on personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE).

Item	Average item mean		Average item standard deviation
	Public JHS teachers	Private JHS teachers	Public JHS teachers	Private JHS teachers
I wonder if I have the necessary skills to teach content embedded in the processes of science.	3.97	3.65	1.00	1.01
I find it difficult guiding JHS students to examine and evaluate the quality scientific data on their own.	4.15	3.91	.74	.88
I don’t know what to do to turn JHS students on to do science like actual scientists do.	3.90	3.54	.94	1.04
When a JHS student has difficulty in how to manipulate science equipment and materials, I am usually at a loss as to how to help him do it better.	4.05	3.80	.92	1.02
Personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE)	4.02	3.72	0.72	0.75

N = 176(Public JHS instructors), N = 132(Private JHS instructors).

Note: High means represent inquiry-based PSTE, low means represent traditional PSTE.

Table 6. One-way MANOVA of differences in science instructors’ self-efficacy based on school location.

Effect	Value	F	Hypothesis df	Error df	Sig	Partial ŋ^2
Pillaice trace	.025	3.942*	2	305	.020	.025
Wilk’s Lambda	.975	3.942*	2	305	.020	.025
Hotelling’s trace	.026	3.942*	2	305	.020	.025
Roy’s largest root	.026	3.942*	2	305	.020	.025

* p < .05, N = 145(Rural JHS instructors), N = 163(Urban JHS instructors).

Table 7. One-way ANOVAs of differences in instructors’ STOE and PSTE based on school location.

Component of self-efficacy	Source of variation	Sum of squares	df	Mean square	F	Sig	Partial ŋ^2
STOE	Between groups	5.593	1	43.593	2.580	.109	.008
	Within groups	5170.628	306	16.897
	Total	91728.000	308
PSTE	Between groups	45.583	1	45.583	5.197*	.023	.017
	Within groups	2683.846	306	8.771
	Total	77410.000	308

* p<.025, N = 145(Rural JHS instructors), N = 163(Urban JHS instructors).

Table 8. Average item means and average item standard deviations of rural and urban JHS instructors’ ratings of items on personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE).

Item	Mean		Standard deviation
	Rural JHS teachers	Urban JHS teachers	Rural JHS teachers	Urban JHS teachers
I wonder if I have the necessary skills to teach content embedded in the processes of science.	3.88	3.79	1.04	.99
I find it difficult guiding JHS students to examine and evaluate the quality scientific data on their own.	4.13	3.98	.74	.87
I don’t know what to do to turn JHS students on to do science like actual scientists do.	3.87	3.64	1.00	.99
When a JHS student has difficulty in how to manipulate science equipment and materials, I am usually at a loss as to how to help him do it better.	4.10	3.80	.93	.99
Personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE)	4.00	3.80	.75	.74

N = 145(Rural JHS instructors), N = 163(Urban JHS instructors).

Note: High means represent inquiry-based PSTE, low means represent traditional PSTE.

Table 9. One-way MANOVA of differences in science instructors’ self-efficacy based on academic qualification.

Effect	Value	F	Hypothesis df	Error df	Sig	Partial ŋ^2
Pillaice trace	.058	4.594*	4	610	.001	.029
Wilk’s Lambda	.942	4.648*	4	608	.001	.030
Hotelling’s trace	.062	4.702*	4	606	.001	.030
Roy’s largest root	.062	9.401*	2	305	.000	.058

* p < .05, N = 200(Pre-university certificate instructors), N = 105(Graduate instructors), N = 3(Postgraduate instructors).

Table 10. One-way ANOVAs of differences in instructors’ STOE and PSTE based on academic qualification.

Component of self-efficacy	Source of variation	Sum of squares	df	Mean square	F	Sig	Partial ŋ^2
STOE	Between groups	179.841	2	89.920	5.448*	.005	.034
	Within groups	5034.380	305	16.506
	Total	91728.000	308
PSTE	Between groups	64.616	2	32.308	3.698**	.026	.024
	Within groups	2664.812	305	8.737
	Total	77410.000	308

* p<.025, **p<.05, N = 200(Pre-university certificate instructors), N = 105(Graduate instructors), N = 3(Postgraduate instructors).

Table 11. Scheffe post-hoc analysis of differences in instructors PSTE based on academic qualification.

Dependent variable	Qualification of respondent (I)	Qualification of respondent (J)	Mean difference (I – J)	Standard error	Sig
PSTE	Pre-university certificate	Graduate	−.9555*	.3562	.029
		Postgraduate	−1.0983	1.7193	.816
	Graduate	Pre-university certificate	.9555*	.3562	.029
		Postgraduate	−.1429	1.7308	.997
	Postgraduate	Pre-university certificate	1.0983	1.7193	.816
		Graduate	.1429	1.7308	.997

^* *p<.05, N = 200(Pre-university certificate instructors), N = 105(Graduate instructors), N = 3(Postgraduate instructors).

Table 12. Average item means and average item standard deviations of graduate and certificate JHS instructors’ ratings of items on personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE).

Item	Mean		Standard deviation
	Graduate JHS teachers	Certificate JHS teachers	Graduate JHS teachers	Certificate JHS teachers
I wonder if I have the necessary skills to teach content embedded in the processes of science.	3.98	3.75	1.00	1.02
I find it difficult guiding JHS students to examine and evaluate the quality scientific data on their own.	4.15	4.00	.76	.83
I don’t know what to do to turn JHS students on to do science like actual scientists do.	3.96	3.64	.96	1.00
When a JHS student has difficulty in how to manipulate science equipment and materials, I am usually at a loss as to how to help him do it better.	4.10	3.85	.88	1.01
Personal science teaching efficacy (PSTE)	4.05	3.81	.73	.74

N = 200(Pre-university certificate JHS instructors), N = 105(Graduate JHS instructors).

Note: High means represent inquiry-based PSTE, low means represent traditional PSTE.

Table 13. Scheffe post-hoc analysis of differences in instructors STOE based on academic qualification.

Dependent variable	Qualification of respondent (I)	Qualification of respondent (J)	Mean difference (I – J)	Standard error	Sig
STOE	Pre-university certificate	Graduate	−1.5233*	.4896	.009
		Postgraduate	−3.1233	2.3632	.419
	Graduate	Pre-university certificate	1.5233*	.4896	.009
		Postgraduate	−1.6000	2.3789	.798
	Postgraduate	Pre-university certificate	3.1233	2.3632	.419
		Graduate	1.6000	2.3789	.798

^* *p<.05, N = 200(Pre-university certificate instructors), N = 105(Graduate instructors), N = 3(Postgraduate instructors).

Table 14. Average item means and average item standard deviations of graduate and pre-university certificate JHS instructors’ ratings of items on science teaching outcome expectancy (STOE).

Item	Mean		Standard deviation
	Graduate JHS instructors	Pre-university certificate JHS teachers	Graduate JHS instructors	Pre-university certificate JHS instructors
Increased effort in writing science concepts and principles on the board for JHS students is directly related to their academic performance.	2.89	2.49	1.15	1.03
If parents comment that their child is showing interest in science at school, it is probably due to the teacher telling students answers they are expected to learn.	3.15	2.62	1.10	1.18
If students are not performing well in collecting and recording scientific data it is most likely due to ineffective teaching of how to collect and record data.	3.21	3.06	1.20	1.07
The teacher is generally responsible for the achievements of students in how they formulate hypotheses for science phenomena.	3.37	3.25	1.11	.87
If JHS students are not performing like actual scientists do, it is most likely due to ineffective teaching of how actual scientists work.	3.00	2.97	1.73	1.21
JHS students’ achievements in science are directly related to their teacher’s effectiveness in defining and explaining science concepts and principles	2.33	2.14	1.53	.78
Science teaching outcome expectancy (STOE)	3.00	2.70	.72	.65

N = 200(Pre-university certificate JHS instructors), N = 105(Graduate JHS instructors).

Note: High means represent inquiry STOE, low means represent traditional STOE.