Session Information
99 ERC SES 03 C, Interactive Poster Session
Poster Session
Contribution
Self-efficacy has been widely established as an important construct in educational research and can be defined as the belief that own capabilities are strong enough to reach a set goal (Bandura, 1977). To date, there is extensive research on self-efficacy for student outcomes (Bartimote-Aufflick et al., 2016) and for teachers (e.g., Perera et al., 2019; Hajovsky et al., 2020). However, it has been less focus on school leaders’ self-efficacy (Fischer, 2020), which can be defined as the leaders’ belief in their own competence to induce change in their school (Fischer 2020; Tschannen-Moran & Gareis, 2004), and which proves to be a predictor of student achievement (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2008), organizational learning (Hesbol, 2019), and crisis management (Röhl et al., 2022). In particular, few findings exist on the sources and conducive factors that influence school leaders’ self-efficacy. Taking up this desideratum, the present study that is presented in the poster addressed the research question of what factors foster school leaders’ innovation-related self-efficacy.
Bandura (1977) proposed that mastery experience, vicarious experience, social persuasions, and physical and emotional states are antecedents of self-efficacy. The influence of these factors on self-efficacy has been widely researched and empirically proven (e.g., Pfitzner-Eden, 2016). We firstly hypothesize that mastery experience (here, perceived achievement), vicarious experience (here, mentors as role models), verbal persuasion (here, encouragement from mentors or colleagues), and emotional state (here, exhaustion) impact school leaders’ innovation-related self-efficacy (H1). Secondly, studies on factors which are included in professional training and development opportunities have indicated to influence school leaders’ self-efficacy positively (Anselmus et al., 2022; Fischer, 2020; Versland, 2016). Based on these findings, we hypothesize that also leadership-related professional development factors increase school leaders’ innovation-related self-efficacy (H2).
Method
To investigate our hypotheses, we used a representative sample of N = 405 school leaders in Germany collected by a professional survey provider in 2019. We measured school leaders’ innovation related self-efficacy using four items provided by Schmitz and Schwarzer (2002; ω = .811). Additionally, we surveyed the possible sources of self-efficacy mentioned by Bandura as well as completed qualifications programs and professional development activities with single items. Furthermore, we controlled for school leaders’ gender, migration background, professional experience, school size, - and type. Specifying a structural equation model including all assumed predictors of self-efficacy, results show that perceived achievement (β = .282, p < .001) and encouragement from team (β = .259, p < .001) both had significant effects on innovation-related self-efficacy in school leaders, as well as exhaustion (β = .103, p = .028). Mentors as role model (β = .027, p = .417), and encourager (β = -.005, p = .485) showed no significant effects. Regarding school leaders’ professional development activities, analysis revealed a significant effect of participation in university trainings and courses (β = .109; p = .007) and professional learning networks (β = .101, p = .032). Contrary to expectations, there were no significant effects of participating in leadership qualification programs, in-service trainings offered by the school administration, or other job-related learning opportunities.
Expected Outcomes
In summary, many of the sources postulated by Bandura (1997) as well as the conduciveness of professional learning for self-efficacy can be confirmed to some extent. However, it should be noted that the findings are solely based on cross-sectional analyses and therefore no causal statements can be made. Nevertheless, our results demonstrate the value of leadership preparation programs that permit the participants to explore different work-related tasks and promote feelings of mastery, as well as the importance of team cooperation for the development of self-efficacy. Furthermore, the findings point to the open question of how mentoring relationships, often leadership qualification programs, and in-service training provided by school administrations can be made more conductive to school leaders’ self-efficacy development.
References
Anselmus Dami, Z., Budi Wiyono, B., Imron, A., Burhanuddin, B., Supriyanto, A., & Daliman, M. (2022). Principal self-efficacy for instructional leadership in the perspective of principal strengthening training: work engagement, job satisfaction and motivation to leave. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2064407. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2064407 Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-08589-000 Bartimote-Aufflick, K., Bridgeman, A., Walker, R., Sharma, M., & Smith, L. (2016). The study, evaluation, and improvement of university student self-efficacy. Studies in Higher Education, 41(11), 1918–1942. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.999319 Fisher, Y. (2020). Self-efficacy of School Principals. In Oxford research encyclopedia, education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/97680190264093.013.910 Hajovsky, D. B., Chestnut, S. R., & Jensen, K. M. (2020). The role of teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in the development of teacher-student relationships. Journal of School Psychology, 82, 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.09.001 Hesbol, K. A. (2019). Principal self-efficacy and learning organizations: influencing school improvement. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preperation, 14(1), 33–51. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: the contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 496–528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321501 Perera, H. N., Calkins, C., & Part, R. (2019). Teacher self-efficacy profiles: determinants, outcomes, and generalizability across teaching level. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58, 186–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.02.006 Pfitzner-Eden, F. (2016). Why do I feel more confident? Bandura’s sources predict preservice teachers’ latent changes in teacher self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1486). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01486 Röhl, S., Pietsch, M., & Cramer, C. (2022). School leaders’ self-efficacy and its impact on innovation: findings of a repeated measurement study. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 174114322211324. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221132482 Schmitz, G. S., and R. Schwarzer. 2002. "Individuelle und kollektive Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Lehrern." In Selbstwirksamkeit und Motivationsprozesse in Bildungsinstitutionen, edited by Matthias Jerusalem and Diether Hopf, 192-214. Belz. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. (2004). Principals’ sense of efficacy. Assessing a promising construct. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(5), 573–585. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230410554070 Versland, T. M. (2016). Exploring self-efficacy in education leadership programs: what makes the difference? Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 11(3), 298 https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230410554070320
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.