Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

The Relationship Between U.S. High School Science Teacher’s Self-Efficacy, Professional Development, and Use of Technology in Classrooms

Zahrah Aljuzayri 1 *
1 Western Michigan University* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 4, Issue 1, January 2021, pp. 45-62
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 1075 DOWNLOADS: 601 Publication date: 15 Jan 2021
ABSTRACT
There have been a limited number studies that examined the relationship between professional development (PD) and self-efficacy with technology tool use, specifically concerning high school science teachers. The main goal of this quantitative study was to identify any specific correlations between science teacher self-efficacy and the professional development science teachers received for those specific classroom technologies. Participants were comprised of a randomized sample set of high school science teachers throughout 46 different US States.The data was collected by using an online survey via the Qualtrics survey platform. The survey was sent to 3000 science instructors and 104 in total completed it. The results suggest that science teachers’ efficacy was high with course management systems and student wireless or digital devices, but not for social networking/media. There was no significant connection between technological self-efficacy and PD for related technology tools. However, it is possible that science teachers are already highly efficacious in terms of technology, and observational studies are recommended to see when and how teachers actually use technology in their classrooms.
KEYWORDS
professional development, relationship, science teacher’s, self-efficacy, technology tools.
CITATION (APA)
Aljuzayri, Z. (2021). The Relationship Between U.S. High School Science Teacher’s Self-Efficacy, Professional Development, and Use of Technology in Classrooms. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.414
REFERENCES
  1. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H Freeman and Company.
  2. Bandura, A. (2004). Cultivate self-efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In E. A. Locke (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp.120-136). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  3. Bandura, A. (2005). Evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (Eds.) Great Minds in Management. (pp. 9-35) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Bray-Clark, N., & Bates, R. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications for professional development. Professional Educator, 26(1), 13- 22.
  5. Brinkerhoff, J. (2006). Effects of a long-duration, professional development academy on technology skills, computer self-efficacy, and technology integration beliefs and practices. Journal of research on technology in education, 39(1), 22-43.
  6. Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British journal of educational technology, 39(5), 775-786.
  7. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of applied psychology, 78(1), 98.
  8. Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and teacher education, 18(8), 947-967.
  9. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
  10. Gavora, P. (2010). Slovak pre-service teacher self-efficacy: Theoretical and research considerations. The New Educational Review, 21(2), 17-30.
  11. Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers' Use of Educational Technology in US Public Schools: 2009.
  12. First Look. NCES 2010-040. National Center for Education Statistics.
  13. Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-based nursing, 18(4), 66-67.
  14. Hanover Research (HR). (2014). Trends in higher education marketing, recruitment, and technology. Washington, DC. Retrieved from.
  15. Holden, H., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self- efficacy on teachers' technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 343-367.
  16. Johnson, L., Becker, S. A., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC horizon report: 2015 museum edition. The New Media Consortium.
  17. Koh, J. H., & Frick, T. W. (2009). Instructor and student classroom interactions during technology skills instruction for facilitating preservice teachers' computer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(2), 211-228.
  18. Killion, J. (2013). Establishing Time for Professional Learning. Learning Forward.
  19. Moore-Hayes, C. (2011). Technology integration preparedness and its influence on teacher-efficacy. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadiel’apprentissage et de la technologie, 37(3).
  20. Marwan, A. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions of teaching with computer technology: reasons for use and barriers in usage. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 5(6), 35-42.
  21. McCormick, J. & Ayres, P. L. (2009). Teacher self-efficacy and occupational stress: A major Australian curriculum reform revisited. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(4), 463-476.
  22. Miles, K. H., Odden, A., Fermanich, M., Archibald, S., & Gallagher, A. (2003). Inside the black box of school district spending on professional development: Lessons from comparing five urban districts. Journal of Education Finance, 30(1), 1-26.
  23. National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Technology in schools: Suggestions, tools and guidelines for assessing elementary and secondary education. Retrieved January 1, 2004, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs 2003/tech_schools/chapter7.asp#2
  24. Overbaugh, R., & Lu, R. (2008). The impact of a NCLB-EETT funded professional development program on teacher self-efficacy and resultant implementation. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(1), 43- 61.
  25. Pimentel, J.L. (2010). A note on the usage of Likert Scaling for research date analysis. USM R&D journal, 18(2), 109-112
  26. Penuel, W. R. (2006). Implementation and effects of one-to-one computing initiatives: A research synthesis. Journal of research on technology in education, 38(3), 329-348.
  27. Pan, S. C., & Franklin, T. (2011). In-Service Teachers' Self-Efficacy, Professional Development, & Web 2.0 Tools for Integration. New Horizons in Education, 59(3), 28-40.
  28. Powell-Moman, A. D., & Brown-Schild, V. B. (2011). The Influence of a Two-Year Professional Development Institute on Teacher Self-Efficacy and Use of Inquiry- Based Instruction. Science Educator, 20(2), 47-53.
  29. Siebert, M. C. (2006). An examination of students’ perceptions of goal orientation in the classroom and teachers’ beliefs about intelligence and teacher efficacy. (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Kansas State University.
  30. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2009). Does school context matter? Relations with teacher burnout and job satisfaction. Teaching and teacher education, 25(3), 518-524.
  31. Swan, B. G., Wolf, K. J., & Cano, J. (2011). Changes in teacher self-efficacy from the student teaching experience through the third year of teaching. Journal of Agricultural Education, 52(2), 128.
  32. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing and elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
  33. Watson, J. (2006). Can an ethic of caring be maintained? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 54(3),257-259.
  34. Yidana, I. (2007). Faculty perceptions of technology integration in the teacher education curriculum: A survey of two Ghanaian universities. (Ph.D., Ohio University).
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.