40
Tschannen-Moran and Hoy argue that to be useful and generalizable teacher efficacy measures should have the ability to address teachers‘ assessment of both
their competence across the wide range of activities and tasks they are asked to perform Tschannen-Moran Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, Hoy,
1998.
In its development, the OSTES had been tested through three studies ending up with the examination of the factor structure, reliability and validity of the new
measure. From the original 52-item scale at the first study, it resulted in a measure of a 24-item long form version and 12-item short form OSTES
Tschannen-Moran Hoy, 2001. The both the 24-item and 12-item scales measure three aspects of teaching tasks teachers required to perform in teaching.
Those three aspects are the efficacy for instructional strategy, classroom management and student engagement.
2.3 New perspective on teacher efficacy research
Although many research studies have suggested the positive influences of teacher sense of efficacy on teaching quality in general, especially related to
teachers‘ behavior in the classroom Alinder, 1994; Coladarci, 1992; Guskey, 1984
teachers‘ attitude about teaching Berman et al., 1977; Guskey, 1988; Stein Wang, 1988, the way teachers refer to students Ashton Webb, 1986; Meijer
Foster, 1988; Soodak Podell, 1996, and the ways to cope with problems Gibson Dembo, 1984, a different direction of teacher efficacy research has
become apparent. Researchers seem to have begun exploring a new perspective
41
on efficacy research. Some research, for example Wheatley ‘s 2000, explores the
possible contribution of teacher efficacy doubt, and other research by Schaufeli and Salanova 2007 investigates teacher inefficacy, rather than efficacy, in
relation to the burnout and work engagement.
Karl F. Wheatley Wheatley, 2000, 2002, 2005, proposed a challenge to the importance of high sense of efficacy beliefs. In the context of teacher reform, he
expressed his doubt on the level of efficacy beliefs that would really contribute to the success of any teacher reform program. In one of the articles he even stated
the possibility of positive teacher efficacy as an obstacle to education reform Wheatley, 2000. He started questioning the potential support of positive
efficacy beliefs for education reform raising problems related to the ways in which teacher efficacy can promote reform in education.
However, it is not evident how to develop teachers‘ efficacy beliefs so as to promote reformed classroom teaching. The success of intervention
effort aimed at changing teacher efficacy and teaching practices continues to
be modest … Wheatley, 2000. Wheatley 2000 further suggests that positive efficacy is an obstacle especially
when it concerns the reform in education. His research introduces a new argument on the influences of teachers‘ efficacy doubts on the educational practices. He
also suggests that it is efficacy doubt that has potential benefits on educational reform. According to Wheatley, efficacy doubts may support and enhance the
professional learning of teachers, foster teacher reflection, support motivation to
42
learn and responsiveness to diversity as well as promote productive collaboration Wheatley, 2000.
Schaufeli and Salanova 2007 investigate the relation between efficacy and burnout in teachers. In the research, they challenged the traditional view that lack
of efficacy is a dimension of teacher burnout. They instead proposed to investigate the case by constructing an inefficacy scale, instead of a reverse
version of efficacy scale, one used by Maslach, Jackson and Leiter 1986 to capture the real meaning of burnout.
Such new efforts open an opportunity to come up with different research direction and research findings on the issue. Such different findings will also provide new
perspectives on how researchers should teachers‘ self-efficacy beliefs.
2.4 Sources of teachers’ efficacy beliefs
