Out-of-field teaching is broadly defined as a mismatch between a teacher’s specialised knowledge and their teaching assignment, i.e. which classes they teach, and this mismatch can occur in either subject area or grade level (Hobbs & Törner, 2019). As teachers’ degree backgrounds and certifications are often used to determine who is in- versus out-of-field in a particular jurisdiction (Shah et al., 2019), operationalisations of this concept vary from place to place (Ingersoll, 2019; Price et al., 2019; Vale & Drake, 2019). 

The issues with out-of-field teaching lie in its negative impacts on both students, in terms of their achievement (Goldhaber & Brewer, 1996; Hill & Dalton, 2013; Rowan, Chiang, & Miller, 1997; Sheppard, Padwa, Kelly, & Krakehl, 2020) and the instructional strategies used to support their learning (Arzi & White, 2008; Carlsen, 1993), and teachers, in terms of their wellbeing and retention in the profession (Du Plessis, Gillies, & Carroll, 2014). 

Despite policy changes aimed at reducing out-of-field teaching in some countries, for example, the highly qualified teachers requirement of the No Child Left Behind Act in the USA (The No Child Left behind Act, 2002), the phenomenon of out-of-field teaching is not disappearing (Ingersoll, 2019). Additionally, while a shortage of qualified teachers in a subject can cause higher rates of out-of-field teaching (Hobbs & Törner, 2019), hiring decisions of local school authorities and principals, based on practical considerations and budgets, can also play a large role (Du Plessis, Carroll, & Gillies, 2017). In either case, teachers are rarely teaching out-of-field by choice and often have little control over whether, or what, they will be teaching out-of-field. In response to this, this study adopts social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) as its theoretical framework, placing teachers’ voices at the center of the study. 

Qualifications, such as degrees or teaching certificates, are important in the development of content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge; however, it should be noted that this development is not isolated to periods of formal study and occurs from other sources throughout the teaching career (Hobbs & Törner, 2019; Loewenberg Ball, Thames, & Phelps, 2008). Both content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge are inherent to feelings of being in-field in a subject.

While earlier studies operationalised out-of-field teaching as a dichotomy of in- or out-of-field based solely on a teacher’s degree background and the subjects they teach (Ingersoll, 1999, 2002), some recent research has included a more nuanced understanding of the extent to which one is out-of-field or considers themselves to be out-of-field (Childs & McNicholl, 2007; Du Plessis et al., 2014; Hobbs, 2013; Sharplin, 2014). Hobbs’ “Adaptability scale for teaching out-of-field” describes each out-of-field teacher’s personal commitment and approach to teaching their out-of-field subject(s) as falling somewhere on a continuum from “just filling in” to “making the most of it” to “pursuing an interest” (2012, p. 27). At the latter end of this continuum, despite the continued existence of a mis-match between their degree background and their teaching assignment, the teacher “[has] expanded their identity to being a teacher of that subject,” no longer feels out-of-field, and is less inhibited by the difficulties associated with teaching out-of-field (Hobbs, 2012, p. 27). 

Therefore, the questions this paper asks are: What is the relationship between years of teaching experience within a particular subject and how out-of-field teachers feel in that subject? What is the relationship between years of teaching experience within a particular subject and teacher self-efficacy in that subject? 

Teachers were eligible for this study if they taught at least one science or mathematics class at the grade 9 through 12 (approximately ages 14-18) level in one of the four western Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, or Manitoba) in the 2020-2021 school year. While the study consists of a questionnaire and interviews, only data from the questionnaire is reported in this paper. Self-efficacy, one of the primary concepts of social cognitive theory, is used to investigate how teachers feel about their teaching capabilities when teaching in- or out-of-field. Higher teacher self-efficacy is associated with increases in engagement in professional development and implementation of new instructional strategies (Eun & Heining-Boynton, 2007) and lower levels of teacher burnout (Egyed & Short, 2006) and intents to leave (Martin, Sass, & Schmitt, 2012). The focus of this study is teaching out-of-field within the sciences and mathematics, however, for comparison purposes, teachers reported in the questionnaire on all classes they taught in the 2020-2021 school year by grouping their classes under the following twelve subject areas: general science, biology, chemistry, physics, earth/environmental science, computer science, mathematics, languages, social studies, arts education, vocational education, and health and physical education. For each subject area taught, teachers reported the number of years of experience they have teaching that subject area, rated the extent to which they feel out-of-field in that subject, and completed a subject specific version of the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). Ratings of the extent to which teachers felt out-of-field used a 4-point scale from “not at all, I feel in-field” to “very out-of-field”. The Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale is a 24-item instrument measuring teacher self-efficacy. Eight items load onto each of the scale’s three factors: instructional strategies, classroom management, and student engagement. Each item is rated on a 9-point scale from “nothing/not at all” to “a great deal”. The questionnaire received 220 responses from beginning teachers in the first years of their career to teachers with more than 30 years of experience (average = 16 years teaching experience). Respondents have an average age of 42 and 55% of them are women. The responding teachers are well distributed geographically, as they report teaching in 90 different school divisions/districts spread across the four provinces.

Analysis of the questionnaire data shows that teachers who identify themselves as out-of-field in general science, biology, chemistry, and mathematics have significantly lower overall teacher self-efficacy than their in-field counterparts in these subject areas (p < 0.001 for each). There was no statistically significant difference, however, in teacher self-efficacy between in- and out-of-field teachers of physics (p = 0.071). Graham et al. (2020) investigated the association between years of experience and teaching quality, as defined by CLASS scores from observations of teaching, and found no significant differences between novice (0-3 years) and experienced (>3 years) teachers. External measures, such as those used by Graham et al., provide evidence regarding the classroom impact of teachers’ development. However, teachers’ own ratings of their capabilities may provide additional insight as to how teachers develop their practice and their perceptions of this development, particularly when teachers are teaching out-of-field, which is found to be more common in the first years of their career. This paper will present findings from statistical models on the association between years of experience teaching a subject and teachers’ self-efficacy in that subject. Additionally, for teachers categorised as out-of-field based on fit between subject taught and degree background, the relationship between how out-of-field they feel and their years of experience teaching that subject will be presented. These findings will help us to understand whether, and how much, teaching out-of-field delays the development of higher teacher self-efficacy. Additionally, building on ideas such as Hobbs’ “Adaptability scale for teaching out-of-field” (Hobbs, 2012), this paper considers whether years of experience teaching a subject relate to feelings of being in-field in that subject.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Childs, A., & McNicholl, J. (2007). Science teachers teaching outside of subject specialism: Challenges, strategies adopted and implications for initial teacher education. Teacher Development, 11(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530701194538 Du Plessis, A. E., Carroll, A., & Gillies, R. M. (2017). The meaning of out-of-field teaching for educational leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(1), 87–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2014.962618 Du Plessis, A. E., Gillies, R. M., & Carroll, A. (2014). Out-of-field teaching and professional development: A transnational investigation across Australia and South Africa. International Journal of Educational Research, 66, 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.03.002 Graham, L. J., White, S. L. J., Cologon, K., & Pianta, R. C. (2020). Do teachers’ years of experience make a difference in the quality of teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 96, 103190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103190 Hobbs, L. (2012). Teaching Out-of-Field: Factors Shaping Identities of Secondary Science and Mathematics. Teaching Science, 58(1), 21–29. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=EJ991255 Hobbs, L. (2013). Teaching “out-of-field” as a boundary-crossing event: Factors shaping teacher identity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 271–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9333-4 Hobbs, L., & Törner, G. (2019). Teaching out-of-field as a phenomenon and research problem. In L. Hobbs & G. Törner (Eds.), Examining the Phenomenon of “Teaching Out-of-field” (pp. 3–20). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. Ingersoll, R. M. (1999). The problem of underqualified teachers in American secondary schools. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028002026 Ingersoll, R. M. (2002). Out-of-Field Teaching, Educational Inequality, and the Organization of Schools: An Exploratory Analysis. Ingersoll, R. M. (2019). Measuring out-of-field teaching. In L. Hobbs & G. Törner (Eds.), Examining the Phenomenon of “Teaching Out-of-field” (pp. 21–52). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. Shah, L., Jannuzzo, C., Hassan, T., Gadidov, B., Ray, H. E., & Rushton, G. T. (2019). Diagnosing the current state of out-of-field teaching in high school science and mathematics. PLOS ONE, 14(9), e0223186. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223186 Sheppard, K., Padwa, L., Kelly, A. M., & Krakehl, R. (2020). Out-of-Field Teaching in Chemistry and Physics: An Empirical Census Study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 00(00), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2019.1702268 Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1