205
perspective, teachers are assigned a role model function for the students. This role model function is also reflected in the Javanese words for teacher,
‗
guru
’. For Javanese, the word guru is an acronym for
digugu
and
ditiru
, meaning people to whom the society listens and looks up as a model. These two factors,
the obedient nature of the students and the role model function, helped teachers establish a perception of control among the participants and served as a source
of the teachers‘ efficacy beliefs in the region.
6.3.4 Teachers’ efficacy for student engagement
In this study, student engagement was deemed an important factor in the achievement of teaching objectives. It is believed to be a factor of effective
learning Ainley, 2004. Measured using an eight- item subscale, teachers‘
efficacy for student engagement came up as the third highest among five teacher
s‘ efficacy subscales. The mean score of 4.71 on a 7-point scale indicated that the participants were at 67 confidence in engaging their
students in learning.
The result was to some extent lower than expected. Given that Indonesian students were highly obedient and respectful to the teachers, it was expected
that teachers would not experience problems in engaging their students. A possible explanation why teachers rated their confidence in student engagement
lower than their confidence in classroom management was related to their own perception about engaging the students. For the participants, engaging students
in the classroom activities was definitely influenced by the obedient and
206
respectful nature of the students. However, there seemed to be another more important aspect of the teachers that could strengthen the engagement of the
students. This aspect concerned with the teachers ability to design and then present activities that were able to actively involve the students. The idea was
supported by the interview data where the participants referred to student engagement as ‗active participation‘ and ‗active involvement‘. While they
identified classroom management as controlling the students, they identified engaging the students as involving the students in active participation.
Based on the perception of the participants, being obedient did not always mean being actively involved. If the teachers viewed engagement as involving a high
degree of active involvement, being too obedient would raise problems. And this seemed to be the case. The nature of being obedient among the students
might be viewed as passive involvement. This was why teachers rated themselves higher in their efficacy for classroom management, but lower in
their efficacy for students‘ engagement. For the participants, managing, or in their sense controlling the class was easier than engaging the students in the
classroom activities.
6.3.5 Teachers’ efficacy for curriculum implementation
