Teachers’ self-efficacy has long been recognized as a significant predictor of student outcomes, influencing students' academic performance, motivation, and overall well-being. However, a more nuanced understanding of student-specific teacher self-efficacy (TDSET) teachers’ self-efficacy regarding individual students—has gained increasing attention in the field of inclusive education. This study investigates the impact of teachers’ student-specific self-efficacy (TDSET) on students’ academic self-concept, school well-being, and social inclusion. The research particularly focuses on whether these relationships between students with and without special educational needs (SEN).

The study is framed within Bandura’s (1997) social cognitive theory, which posits that self-efficacy plays a critical role in shaping behavior, motivation, and achievement. Teachers’ belief in their ability to support and engage individual students significantly influences classroom dynamics and student perceptions of inclusion (Zee & Koomen, 2016). Further, the study aligns with inclusive education frameworks, which emphasize the importance of fostering a sense of belonging, academic confidence, and emotional well-being for all students, particularly those with SEN (Schwab, 2019).

This study addresses the following research questions: Does teachers’ student-specific self-efficacy predict students’ perceptions of inclusion, measured as academic self-concept, emotional well-being, and social inclusion over time? Does students’ SEN status moderate the relationship between teachers’ student-specific self-efficacy and students’ perceptions of inclusion?

The primary objective of this research is to provide empirical insights into how teachers’ perceptions of their ability to support individual students influence key student outcomes. The study aims to explore how teachers’ efficacy beliefs shape students’ experiences in inclusive classrooms, determine whether these relationships differ for students with and without SEN, and identify implications for teacher training programs to better equip educators in fostering inclusive environments.

This study is situated within social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1997), which highlights self-efficacy as a key determinant of motivation and behavior. Specifically, teachers’ beliefs in their ability to support individual students may shape their instructional strategies, classroom interactions, and expectations, ultimately affecting student outcomes. Zee and Koomen (2016) extend this notion by emphasizing that student-specific self-efficacy influences teachers’ ability to build strong relationships with students, which is essential in inclusive settings.

Additionally, the study engages with inclusive education theory, which argues that meaningful inclusion goes beyond physical integration into classrooms; it also encompasses students’ perceptions of social belonging, emotional support, and academic identity (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011; Schwab, 2019). Prior research suggests that students with SEN are often at risk of lower academic self-concept and social exclusion, making it critical to examine whether teachers’ student-specific self-efficacy can mitigate these risks (McCoy & Banks, 2012).

Furthermore, Foucault’s (1977) perspective on normalization and educational practices provides a socio-political lens for understanding how systemic expectations shape both teacher and student behaviors. In education systems that emphasize standardized performance, students who do not conform to normative academic expectations may face exclusionary pressures. By investigating how teacher self-efficacy interacts with these broader institutional and societal factors, this study contributes to ongoing discussions on how to enhance equity and inclusion in education.

This study contributes to the literature by expanding the understanding of teacher self-efficacy beyond a general construct, instead examining its student-specific dimension. By identifying how teacher-student interactions influence perceptions of inclusion, this research provides actionable insights for improving teacher training, classroom practices, and policy frameworks. The findings may inform targeted professional development programs that enhance educators’ confidence in supporting diverse learners, particularly those with SEN, fostering more inclusive educational environments.

Methodology A quantitative methodology was adopted to examine the relationship between teachers’ student-specific self-efficacy (TDSET) and students’ perceptions of inclusion, academic self-concept, and school well-being. Data was collected from a sample of 42 teachers and 576 students in inclusive classrooms across Austria. The primary data collection instrument was the Perception of Inclusion Questionnaire (PIQ), which assesses students’ emotional well-being, social inclusion, and academic self-concept (Venetz et al., 2015). Teachers completed a separate TDSET scale for each student (Schwab, 2019). Teachers’ student-specific self-efficacy (TDSET) was assessed using a modified version of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001), adapted to focus on teachers’ efficacy regarding individual students (Schwab, 2019). The TDSET scale consists of four items measuring instructional strategies, student engagement, behavior management, and emotional support, rated on a five-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (completely true). Higher scores indicate stronger self-efficacy beliefs regarding specific students. Students’ perceptions of inclusion were measured using the Perception of Inclusion Questionnaire (PIQ) (Venetz et al., 2015), which consists of three subscales: • Emotional Well-Being (EMO): Measures how students feel about their school experience (e.g., "I like it in school"). • Social Inclusion (SOC): Assesses students’ sense of belonging and peer relationships (e.g., "I have a lot of friends in my class"). • Academic Self-Concept (ACSC): Evaluates students’ perceptions of their academic abilities (e.g., "I am able to solve very difficult exercises"). Each subscale contains four items, with responses recorded on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 4 (certainly true). Prior research has demonstrated strong reliability and validity for both the TDSET (Schwab, 2019) and PIQ (Venetz et al., 2019) instruments. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to ensure the reliability and validity of measurement scales (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2017). Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to analyze the relationships between TDSET and student outcomes. A moderation analysis examined whether students’ SEN status influenced these relationships. Missing data was handled using full information maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation (Enders, 2010). Participants were informed of their rights, including voluntary participation and the option to withdraw before data analysis. Personal identifiers were removed to ensure confidentiality, and data was stored securely in compliance with ethical guidelines (British Educational Research Association, 2018). Researchers acknowledged their duty of care to report safeguarding concerns in cases of harm, abuse, or endangerment, following institutional protocols.

Findings The findings of this study indicate that teachers' student-specific self-efficacy (TDSET) plays a significant role in shaping students' perceptions of inclusion, academic self-concept, and school well-being. Structural equation modeling (SEM) demonstrated that higher TDSET levels were associated with enhanced academic self-concept (β = 0.203, p = 0.001), greater social inclusion (β = 0.232, p < 0.001), and improved emotional well-being (β = 0.139, p = 0.020). These results align with previous research highlighting the importance of teacher self-efficacy in fostering student engagement and achievement (Zee & Koomen, 2016). Moderation analysis revealed that SEN status influenced the relationship between TDSET and emotional well-being (β = -0.108, p = 0.032), suggesting that while TDSET positively impacts students’ emotional well-being overall, its effect is weaker for students with SEN. However, no significant moderation effects were found for academic self-concept or social inclusion, indicating that TDSET positively influences these domains for both SEN and non-SEN students. This suggests that while teacher efficacy fosters an inclusive and supportive academic environment, additional interventions may be required to specifically address the emotional needs of students with SEN (Schwab et al., 2022). These findings emphasize the importance of teacher training programs that strengthen student-specific self-efficacy, particularly in inclusive educational settings. They also underscore the critical role of teacher-student relationships in shaping students’ academic identity, social belonging, and overall school experience. By developing targeted strategies that support teachers in working with diverse student needs, inclusive education can be further enhanced, ensuring equitable opportunities for all learners.

References •Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman. •British Educational Research Association. (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research. BERA. •Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. Guilford Press. •Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813-828. •Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Pantheon Books. •McCoy, S., & Banks, J. (2012). Simply academic? Why children with special educational needs don’t like school. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 27(1), 81-97. •Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Muthén & Muthén. •Schwab, S. (2019). Teachers’ student-specific self-efficacy in relation to teacher and student variables. Educational Psychology, 39(1), 4-18. •Schwab, S., Lindner, K.-T., & Savolainen, H. (2022). Investigating teachers’ dyadic self-efficacy and its correlations to students’ perceptions of teacher efficacy and student well-being. Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2022.2094342 •Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805. •Venetz, M., Zurbriggen, C. L. A., Eckhart, M., Schwab, S., & Hessels, M. G. P. (2015). The Perceptions of Inclusion Questionnaire (PIQ). Deutsche Version. Retrieved from https://piqinfo.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/piq-deutsch.pdf •Venetz, M., Zurbriggen, C. L. A., & Schwab, S. (2019). What do teachers think about their students’ inclusion? Consistency of students’ self-reports and teacher ratings. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1637. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01637 •Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981-1015.