A comparison between primary school principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of students’ online risk behaviours: the role of perceived self-efficacy

ABSTRACT

The present study aimed to investigate and compare school principals’ and teachers’ perceptions regarding online risk behaviours in school-aged children, examining simultaneously the predictive role of their perceived self-efficacy in their perceptions under study. The participants were 237 principals and 295 teachers, mainly from Central Macedonia and Attica, who completed a self-reported online questionnaire. According to the findings, participants declared awareness of students’ online risk behaviours. However, compared to teachers, principals to a greater extent felt confident to manage this issue and support school community involvement in the prevention of/intervention in it. Furthermore, principals’ self-efficacy in promoting students’ learning/ethical behaviours in school and teachers’ self-efficacy in managing students’ behavioural problems inside a classroom predicted positively their perceptions under study. The findings indicate the necessity of applying differentiated related training programmes for principals and teachers, highlighting simultaneously the importance of their perceived self-efficacy in how they approach the issue studied.

KEYWORDS:

• Students’ online risk behaviour
• school principals
• teachers
• perceptions
• self-efficacy

Compliance with ethical standards

The article is in compliance with ethical standards.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Notes

1. In a sample of 300 and 600 people, loadings of more than .29 and .21, accordingly, are accepted (Field, 2005).

2. For the parameter of ‘perceived adequacy of university training’ regarding students’ safe online behaviour, teachers’ and principals’ answers to the related questions are given in percentages, as the above parameter was not confirmed as a factor distinct from the factor analysis of the perceptions scale.

Additional information

Funding

This research was not funded by any agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.