From an agentic perspective, Bandura’s (2000) social cognitive theory emphasizes human beings as producers of experiences and shapers of events. The core foundation of human agency is self-efficacy, which refers to the beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments (Bandura, 1997, p. 3). When the construct of self-efficacy is applied to the field of education, teacher self-efficacy (TSE) may be conceptualized as the individual teachers’ beliefs in their own ability to plan, organize and carry out activities required to attain given educational goals (Federici & Skaalvik, 2014, p. 128). Teachers with high self-efficacy appear to benefit better performance of their students in a variety of disciplines, increments of their students’ self-efficacy, and the adoption of more suitable strategies for dealing students, especially those with difficulties (Barros, da Silva, Laburú, & Costa, 2014). After reviewing the TSE literature, Klassen, Tze, Betts, and Gordon (2011) pointed out the internationalization of TSE research, with researchers and research participants from non-North American settings showing a statistically significant increase in 1998–2009 in comparison to the preceding 12 years. Moreover, in recognizing the important role that TSE plays in effective teaching and learning conditions, the Teacher and Learning International Survey (TALIS), initiated by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, selected TSE as one of the key policy themes for study (OECD, 2009, 2014).

Research on TSE has received an increasing amount of attention over the past few decades. The quantity of TSE research published in academic journals has significantly increased, with a mean of 5.7 articles per year published in 1986–1997 and a mean of 18.2 articles per year in 1998–2009 (Klassen et al., 2011). The rise in the number of TSE studies results in the need of knowledge aggregation. A research synthesis aims to describe, analyze and draw conclusions on the research evidence, and helps inform professional practice (Ring, Ritchie, Mandava, & Jepson, 2011). On the one hand, synthesis of quantitative evidence usually uses the procedures of meta-analysis to statistically analyze a large collection of analysis results from individual studies (Glass, McGaw, & Smith, 1981). The techniques of meta-analysis have been used to analyze quantitative studies on TSE in relation to teaching effectiveness (Klassen & Tze, 2014), teachers demographics in relation to TSE (Chen, 2009; Shahid, 2001), teaching beliefs in relation to teaching efficacy (Chang, 2012), and the relationships among dimensions of TSE (Shahid, 2001).

On the other hand, synthesis of qualitative evidence seeks to synthesize or amalgamate individual qualitative reports that relate to a specific topic or focus in order to arrive at the new or enhanced understanding about the phenomenon under study (Paterson, 2012). It emerges in response to the proliferation but relative undervaluation and underutilization of the findings of qualitative studies. The urge to synthesize qualitative research findings derives also from the desire to secure the place denied to qualitative research as a source of the evidence-based practice process. Although the amount of qualitative TSE research is less than their quantitative counterparts (Klassen et al., 2011; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, & Hoy, 1998), the qualitative studies have revealed some interesting and valuable findings. For example, Wheatley’s (2000) longitudinal case studies identified eight types of positive TSE which might in fact damaged education reform. He argued that negative TSE could give impetus to teacher learning and change (Wheatley, 2002). However, the information and knowledge derived from individual qualitative studies of TSE has lack of integration and connection. This study aims to explore what TSE means, how TSE develops and changes, and what influences TSE has through synthesizing the qualitative evidence of TSE.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman. Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. Barros, M. A., da Silva, F. R., Laburú, C. E., & Costa, L. G. (2014). Self-efficacy of beliefs of teachers: An analysis of Brazilian high school physics teachers. In S. L. Britner (Ed.), Self-efficacy in school and community settings (pp. 75–91). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Federici, P. A., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2014). Teacher and principal self-efficacy: Relations with autonomy and emotional exhaustion. In S. L. Britner (Ed.), Self-efficacy in school and community settings (pp. 125–150). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. C. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59–76. Klassen, R. M., Tze, V. M. C., Betts, S. M., & Gordon, K. A. (2011). Teacher efficacy research 1998-2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 21-43. Lin, Y.-P. (2002). An inquiry of teacher efficacy of English teachers in elementary schools (Unpublished master thesis). National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan. Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. OECD. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2014). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Paterson, B. L. (2012). “It looks great but how do I know if it fits?”: An introduction to meta-synthesis research. In K. Hannes & C. Lockwood (Eds.), Synthesizing qualitative research: Choosing the right approach (pp. 1‒20). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Ring, N., Ritchie, K, Mandava, L, & Jepson, R. (2011). A guide to synthesizing qualitative research for researchers undertaking health technology assessment and systematic reviews. Saini, M., & Shlonsky, A. (2012). Systematic synthesis of qualitative research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. New York, NY: Springer. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202–248. Wheatley, K. E. (2000). Positive teacher efficacy as an obstacle to educational reform. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 34, 14-27. Wheatley, K. E. (2002). The potential benefits of teacher efficacy doubts for educational reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 5–22.