The purpose of the present study was to explore the relationships between classroom teachers’ self-efficacy and their willingness to implement curriculum reform. The sample of this study included 255 classroom teachers. The data in this study were collected using the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale and the Teachers’ Willingness to Implement Curriculum Reform Inventory. The results of Pearson correlation analyses indicated that classroom teachers’ self-efficacy was significantly correlated with teachers’ willingness to implement curriculum reform. The stepwise regression analyses revealed that teachers’ self-efficacy for student engagement and self-efficacy instructional strategies is a significant predictor of teachers’ willingness to implement curriculum reform.
References
1.
AkşitN. (2007). Educational reform in Turkey.International Journal of Educational Development,27(2), 129–137.
2.
AllinderR. M. (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the instructional practices of special education teachers and consultants.Teacher Education and Special Education,17(2), 86–95.
3.
AndersonR. D., & HelmsJ. V. (2001). The ideal of standards and the reality of schools: Needed research.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38(1), 3–16.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York: W. H. Freeman.
6.
BrouwersA., & TomicW. (2003). A test of the factorial validity of the Teacher Efficacy Scale.Research in Education,69, 67–80.
7.
BulutM. (2007). Curriculum reform in Turkey: A case of primary school mathematics curriculum.Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education,3(3), 203–212.
8.
CabaY., CakıroğluJ., & SarıkayaH. (2005). A study of the validity and reliability of Turkish version of the teacher efficacy scale.Education and Science,30(137), 74–81.
9.
CanN. (2009). The leadership behaviors of teachers in primary schools in Turkey.Education,129(3), 436–447.
10.
CapraraG. V., BarbaranelliC., StecaP., & MaloneP. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level.Journal of School Psychology,44, 473–490.
11.
CeritY. (2007, November). The level of classroom teachers’ self-efficacy. Paper presented at the 1th national meeting of the elementary, Ankara.
12.
CorrentiR., & RowanB. (2007). Opening up the black box: Literacy instruction in schools participating in three comprehensive school reform programs.American Educational Research Journal,44(2), 298–338.
13.
CousinJ. B., & WalkerC. A. (2000). Predictors of educators’ valuing of systemic inquiry in schools.Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation (special issues), 25–33.
14.
DatnowA. (2005). The sustainability of comprehensive school reform models in changing district and state contexts.Educational Administration Quarterly,41(1), 121–153.
15.
DayC. (2002). School reform and transitions in teacher professionalism and identify.International Journal of Educational Research,37, 677–692.
16.
DenzineG. M., CooneyJ. B., & McKenzieR. (2005). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Teacher Efficacy Scale for prospective teachers.British Journal of Educational Psychology,75, 689–708.
17.
EkiciG. (2006). A study on vocational high school teachers’ sense of self-efficacy beliefs.Eurasian Journal of Educational Research,24, 87–96.
18.
ElkindD. (2004). The problem with constructivism.Educational Forum,68(4), 306–312.
19.
EvansE. D., & TribbleM. (1986). Perceived teaching problems, self-efficacy, and commitment to teaching among pre-service teachers.Journal of Educational Research,80(2), 81–85.
20.
EversW. J. G., BrouwersA., & TomicW. (2002). Burnout and self-efficacy: A study on teachers’ beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in the Netherlands.British Journal of Educational Psychology,72, 227–243.
21.
FlourisG., & PasiasG. (2003). A critical appraisal of curriculum reform in Greece (1980–2002).European Education,35(3), 73–90.
22.
FuchsL. S., FuchsD., & BishopN. (1992). Instructional adaptation for students at risk.Journal of Educational Research,86(2), 70–84.
23.
GhaithG., & YaghiH. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and attitudes towards the implementation of instructional innovation.Teaching and Teacher Education,13(4), 451–458.
24.
GoddardR. D., & SkrlaL. (2006). The influence of school social composition on teachers’ collective efficacy beliefs.Educational Administration Quarterly,42(2), 216–235.
25.
GreenbergJ., & BaronR. A. (2000). Behavior in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26.
GürsimsekI., & GöregenliM. (2004). The relationship between normative-humanistic attitudes and discipline beliefs in a Turkish pre-school teachers’ sample.Teacher Development,8(1), 81–92.
27.
GuskeyT. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation.Teaching and Teacher Education,4, 63–69.
28.
HaA., WangA. C., SumR. K., & ChanD. W. (2008). Understanding teachers’ will and capacity to accomplish physical education curriculum reform: The implications for educational development.Sport, Education and Society,13(1), 77–95.
29.
HaneyJ. J., CzerniakC. M., & LumpeA. T. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,33(9), 971–993.
30.
JohnsonC. (2007). Technical, political and cultural barriers to science education reform.International Journal of Leadership in Education,10(2), 171–190.
31.
KalinJ., & ZuljanM.V. (2007). Teacher perceptions of the goals of effective school reform and their own role in it.Educational Studies,33(2), 163–175.
32.
KırkgözY. (2008). Curriculum innovation in Turkish primary education.Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,36(4), 309–322.
33.
KlassenR. M., BongM., UsherE. L., ChongW. H., HuanV. S., WongI. Y. F., & GeorgiouT. (2009). Exploring the validity of a teachers’ self-efficacy scale in five countries.Contemporary Educational Psychology,34, 67–76.
34.
LeeJ., & LoL. N. K. (2007). The accelerated schools for quality education project: Experiences of school change in Hong Kong.Improving Schools,10(2), 180–198.
35.
LiebermanA., & MaceD. H. P. (2008). Teacher learning: The key to educational reform.Journal of Teacher Education,59(3), 226–234.
36.
Loucks-HorsleyS., HewsonP. W., LoveN., & StilesK. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
37.
MEB. (2005). The handbook of the elementary curriculum.Ankara: The National Education Ministry Publication.
38.
NielsenD. C., BarryA. C., & StaabP. T. (2008). Teachers’ reflections of professional change during a literacy-reform initiative.Teaching and Teacher Education,24, 1288–1303.
39.
OlsenB., & KirtmanL. (2002). Teacher as mediator of school reform: A examination of teacher practice in 36 California restructuring schools.Teachers College Record,104(2), 301–324.
40.
ÖztürkI. H. (2011). Curriculum reform and teacher autonomy in Turkey: The case of the history teaching.International Journal of Instruction,4(2), 113–128.
41.
PellegriniE. K., & ScanduraT. A. (2006). Leader-member exchange (LMX), paternalism, and delegation in the Turkish business culture: An empirical investigation.Journal of International Business Studies,37(2), 264–279.
42.
PintoR. (2005). Introduction curriculum innovation in science: Identifying teachers’ transformation and design of related teacher education.Science Education,89(1), 1–18.
43.
PodellD. M., & SoodakL. C. (1993). Teacher efficacy and bias in special education referrals.Journal of Educational Research,86, 247–253.
44.
PowellJ., & AndersonR. D. (2002). Changing teachers’ practice: Curriculum materials and science education reform in the USA.Studies in Science Education,37, 107–135.
45.
PutnamR., & BorkoH. (1997). Teacher learning: Implications of new views of cognition. In BiddleB. J., GoodT. L., & GoodsonI. F. (Eds.), The International Handbook of Teachers and Teaching (pp. 1223–1296). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
46.
RiceJ. K., & MalenB. (2003). The human costs of education reform: The case of school reconstitution.Educational Administration Quarterly,39(5), 635–666.
47.
RoehrigG. H., KruseA. K., & KernA. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,44(7), 883–907.
48.
RossJ. A. (1992). Teacher efficacy and the effect of coaching on student achievement.Canadian Journal of Education,17, 51–56.
49.
RossJ. A. (1994). The impact of an inservice to promote cooperative learning on the stability of teacher efficacy.Teaching and Teacher Education,10(4), 381–394.
50.
RossJ. A. (1998). The antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. In BrophyJ. (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching, Vol. 7 (pp. 49–73). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
51.
RowanB., & MillerR. J. (2007). Organizational strategies for promoting instructional change: Implementation dynamics in schools working with comprehensive school reform providers.American Educational Research Journal,44(2), 252–297.
52.
SargentT. C. (2006). Institutionalizing educational ideologies: Curriculum reform and the transformation of teaching practices in rural China. (Doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania University), UMI: 3225538.
53.
SchynsB. (2004). The influence of occupational self-efficacy on the relationship of leadership behavior and preparedness for occupational change.Journal of Career Development,30(4), 247–261.
54.
SelviK. (2006, September). The perceptions of classroom teachers related to the elementary curriculum. Paper presented at the 16th annual meeting of the Education Science, Mugla.
55.
SmylieM. A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational and psychological antecedents to individual teacher change.American Educational Research Journal,25(1), 1–30.
56.
SwarsS. L. (2005). Examining perceptions of mathematics teaching effectiveness among elementary preservice teachers with differing levels of mathematics teacher efficacy.Journal of Instructional Psychology,32(2), 139–147.
57.
Tschannen-MoranM., & HoyA. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct.Teaching and Teacher Education,17, 783–805.
58.
Tschannen-MoranM., Woolfolk HoyA., & HoyW. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure.Review of Educational Research,68, 202–248.
59.
TufekciogluM., & TurgutS. (2008, May). The perceptions and challenges of measurement and assessment applying in the new elementary curriculum. Paper presented at the 7th national meeting of the classroom teachers, Çanakkale.
60.
UstunA. (2008, September). The problems and solving problems related to structural factors in the new elementary curriculum. Paper presented at the 18th annual meeting of the Education Science, Sakarya.
61.
WeiselA., & DrorO. (2006). School climate, sense of efficacy and Israeli teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion of students with special needs.Education, Citizenship and Social Justice,1(2), 157–174.
62.
Woolfolk HoyA., & SperoR. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures.Teaching and Teacher Education,21, 343–356.
63.
YangH. (2004). Factors affecting student burnout and academic achievement in multiple enrollment programs in Taiwan's technical-vocational colleges.International Journal of Educational Development,24, 283–301.
64.
ZajdaJ. (2003). Educational reform and transformation in Russia.European Education,35(1), 58–88.
65.
ZimmermanJ. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what principals can do about it.NASSP Bulletin,90(3), 238–249.
