PREDICTIVE POWER OF SELF-EFFICACY AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT ON ACADEMIC SATISFACTION IN TEACHER CANDIDATES

Farklı kavramsal çerçevelerin birbirleriyle ne tür bir ilişki içinde olduklarının bilinmesi hem gerekli eğitsel anlayışın oluşması hem de öğrenme süreçlerinde öğrencilerin davranışlarındaki farklılıkların nedenlerinin anlaşılması açısından önemlidir. Bu perspektiften hareketle bu çalışmada öğretmen adaylarında akademik doyumu yordamada öz yeterlik ve akademik katılımın rolü incelenmiştir. Çalışma tarama modelinde betimsel bir araştırma niteliğindedir. Araştırmaya Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi'nde farklı bölümlerde öğrenim gören 336 üçüncü (n = 113) ve dördüncü (n = 223) sınıf öğrencisi katılmıştır. Katılımcıların 90'ı erkek, 246'sı kızlardan oluşmuştur. Veri toplama araçları olarak Öğretmen Öz Yeterlik, Akademik Katılım ve Akademik Doyum Ölçekleri kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde değişkenler arasındaki olası ilişkileri belirlemek için Pearson korelasyon, özyeterlik ve akademik katılımn birlikte akademik doyumu yordama gücü için de adımsal regresyon (stepwise regression) teknikleri kullanılmıştır. Korelasyon analizleri akademik doyumun öz yeterliğin öğretim stratejilerini kullanma ve öğrenci katılımını sağlama boyutları ve akademik katılım ile pozitif yönde ilişkili olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca yapılan regresyon analizleri sonucunda öz yeterlik ve akademik katılımın birlikte akademik doyum değişkenliğini anlamlı olarak yordadığı görülmüştür. Buna göre akademik doyumun en güçlü yordayıcılarının öz yeterliğin üç alt boyutu ve akademik katılım olduğu gözlenmiştir. Bu sonuçlar, eğitim ortamlarının, programaların ve öğrencilerin öğrenme davranışlarının etkililiğinin değerlendirilmesinde dikkate alınabilecek birçok önemli ipuçları sunmuştur. Çalışmada elde edilen bulgular eğitsel doğurguları açısından tartışılmış ve ilgililere önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARINDA ÖZ YETERLİK VE AKADEMİK KATILIMIN AKADEMİK DOYUMU YORDAMA GÜCÜ

The need to understand the nature of the relations between various theories and thus to explain the differences in the quality of students’ behaviours is important for educational activities. In light of this perspective, the purpose of this study was to investigate the role of the teacher candidates’ self-efficacy and academic involvement on academic satisfaction. The descriptive survey model was used in the study. The participants were 336 third (n = 113) and fourth (n = 223) grade undergraduate students included 90 male and 246 female studying in different majors at the Faculty of Education in Pamukkale University. Teacher Self-Efficacy, Academik Involvement and Academic Satisfaction Scales were used to gather the data. The bivariate correlation coefficients and stepwise regression analyses were performed to analyze the data to answer the questions conducted in the study. Results showed that the academic satisfaction level of the candidate students is positively related with the sense of efficacy concerning instructional strategies, student engagement and academic involvement. In addition, regression analyses indicated that the contribution of self-efficacy and academic involvement together to the variance of academic satisfaction is significant. The best predictors of academic satisfaction were found as all there dimensions of the sense of efficacy and academic involvement. The findings presented many important cues for the evaluation of the effectiveness of educational environments, programs and learning behaviours of the students. In the study, implications of the findings were discussed and suggestions were given for educators and researchers The students’ life quality, their well being and academic performance are effected by plenty of factors such as their developmental characteristics and tendencies, social, cultural and educational frames that surround them from far to near. Satisfaction is an important relational part of this dynamic and for hat reason, factors affecting satisfaction has been a major concern for researchers in both academic and non-academic settings. Satisfaction in academic settings, has been defined as the level of satisfaction students attained from some college-related variables such as academic department, online courses, campus-wide, college experience, quality of instruction, major curriculum, advising, assessment, the quality of the university education, the contribution of that education to students professional life and the relationships between the students and the colleagues. Researches show that students with high level of satisfaction are likely to exert more effort in their educational studies and get high grades with the effects of their positive characteristics and environment. Although academic satisfaction has been searched with many factors related with academic settings, very little researches have been done about its relationship with personel variables such as self efficacy and academic involvement together. Also there is no research documenting the predictive power of self-efficacy and academic involvement on academic satisfaction. Research findings and their implications show that personel variables also have significantly predictor role in cognitive, emotional and behavioral reactions of students in and out of school settings and function as active frames during their process of self-regulation. For that reason, educational psychologists and educators need to understand whether the various theories provide insights into different constructs and thus explain the difference in the quality of students’ behaviours during the process of learning and development. Following this view, to verify the nature of the relations between the teacher self-efficacy, academic involvement and academic satisfaction become an important concern in the present study. Of these constructs teacher self-efficacy refers to the “teachers’ beliefs about their ability to have a positive affect on student learning and their achievement”. With the framework of Social cognitive theory, researchers have been studying on the teacher self-efficay construct and cited a wide spread of findings their implications and suggestions. Similar with the conceptualizations and reserach implications about self efficacy, students’ involvement in university activities is also considered advantagous to their overall educational experiences. It is also usefull for researchers, college and faculty administrators to design their investigation of student development and more effective learning environments. For hat reason, involvement has become a powerful concept in higher education. According to the student involvement theory, academic involvement is one of the specific forms of student involvement as out of class activities, honors programs, student-faculty interaction, athletic involvement etc. As discussed in literature, many findings and implications show the role of self efficacy and involvement in students performance, well being and personel tendencies. Researches also demonstrate that due to its affects on both individual and organizational performance, the stdents’ academic satisfaction level and the factors affecting it, is an important concern to university administration as well as academic and educational planners. Following this view, in this study, it is aimed to verify the nature of the relations between the teacher self-efficacy, academic involvement and academic satisfaction. Paralel to these relationships to examine the contributions (predictive power) of the teacher self-efficacy and academic involvement on academic satisfaction becomes the primary goal of the present study. It soughts to specifically answer the following questions: 1. Do teacher self efficacy and academic involvement correlate with academic satisfaction? 2. Do teacher self efficacy and academic involvement predict academic satisfaction together? Method The descriptive survey model was used in the study. The participants were 336 third (n = 113) and fourth (n = 223) grade undergraduate students included 90 male and 246 female studying in different majors at the Faculty of Education in Pamukkale University. Teacher Self-Efficacy, Academik Involvement and Academic Satisfaction Scales were used to gather the data. The bivariate correlation coefficients and stepwise regression analyses were performed to analyze the data to answer the questions conducted in the study. Results Results showed that the academic satisfaction level of candidate students is positively related with the sense of efficacy concerning instructional strategies, student engagement and academic involvement. In addition, regression analyses indicated that the contribution of self-efficacy and academic involvement together to the variance of academic satisfaction is significant. The best predictors of academic satisfaction were found as all there dimensions of the sense of efficacy and academic involvement. Discussion and Conclusion In this study, it was aimed to examine the contributions of the teacher candidates’ self-efficacy and academic involvement on their academic satisfaction. Also the reliability and validty of the Academic Involvement Scale was tested for a sample of Turkish candidate students. The results of the study, in general, confirmed the predictions. First of all, close relationships were found between teacher self efficacy, academic involvement and academic satisfaction. Second, regression analyses showed the contribitions of teacher self-efficacy and academic involvement on academic satisfaction. In that sense it was seen that efficacy concerning instructional strategies, student engagement, classroom management and academic involvement were the primary predictors of academic satisfaction. Finally, the results confirmed the prediction that the Academic Involvement Scale is a reliable and valid instrument to identify the level of the efforts students took part in their learning activities and academic works.In light of the results obtained in this study it could be said that as the level of efficacy concerning instructional strategies, student engagement, classroom management and academic involvement increases the level of academic satisfaction increases too. Paralel to these implications, the findings of this study demonstrate that as intrinsic perceptions, the candidate teachers’ beliefs in their implementation of alternative strategies, abilities to help the students to engage in learning activities and the capacity to tackle with disruptive or nosiy students in their classroom, the extent to which they work hard at their studies, the time they spend for studying, the degree of interest in their courses and good study habits have predictive power on academic satisfaciton. Concequently, although there are many factors that affect satisfaction, in this study, academic satisfaction is assumed to be a dependent variable on teacher self efficacy and academic involvement. The results concludes that, the proposed two factors (teacher self efficacy and academic involvement) were found to be important and were positively predicted student satisfaction. Therefore, the findings from the analyses can serve as cues for the planning processes of the universities, for the evaluation of the effectiveness of the colleges, departments and programs. In this sense, to increase teacher candidates’ academic satisfaction level, the colleagues should stimulate them to develop their sense of efficacy concerning the implementation of alternative instructional strategies, the student engagement in learning activities and effective classroom management skills. Further, the results imply that the instructors must strengthen their students qualified efforts and habits for their academic works so that their academic satisfaction increases. In short, the results point out the importance of the quality of university life for academic satisfaction.

PDF

___

Akçil, M., & Oğuz, A. (2015). Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin öz yeterlik inancı ile öğrenen özerkliğini destekleme davranışları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Turkish Studies - International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, Volume 10/11 Summer 2015, p. 1-16 DOI Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.8616 ISSN: 1308-2140, ANKARA-TURKEY.
Aman, R. R. (2009). Improving student satisfaction and retention with online instruction through systematic faculty peer review of courses. An unpublished doctoral dissertation. Oregon State University. AAT 3376735.
Anderson, R., Greene, M., & Loewen, P. (1988). Relationships among teachers’ and students’ thinking skills, sense of efficacy, and student achievement. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 34, 148-165.
Arbuckle, J. (2006). Amos 7.0 User’s Guide. Amos Development Corporation: Spring House, PA.
Armentrout, W. D. (1978). Neglected values in higher education: Needed reorganization in curricular and extra-curricular activities to provide significant experiences. The Journal of Higher Education, 50 (4), 17-20.
Ashton, P.T. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 35, 28-32.
Ashton, P.T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
Astin, A. W. (2001). What matters in college?. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
Astin, A.W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40 (5), 518-528.
Balkis, M. (2013). Academic procrastination, academic life satisfaction and academic achievement: The mediation role of rational beliefs about studying. Journal Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies. 13(1), 57-74.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122- 147.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 4, 71-81). New York: Academic Press. (Reprinted in H. Friedman [Ed.], Encyclopedia of Mental Health. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998).
Banta, T. (2001). Learning communities illustrate principles of good practice. Assessment Update, 13 (4), 3-4.
Benjamin, M., & Hollings, A. (1997). Student satisfaction: Test of an ecological model. Journal of College Student Development, 38 (3), 213-229.
Bergman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, M., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change: Vol. VII. Factors awecting implementation and continuation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 140 432).
Billups, F. D. (2008). Measuring college student satisfaction: a multi-year study of the actors leading to persistence. Paper presented at the 39th annual meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, October 23, Rocky Hill, CT.
Bono, T. J. (2011). What good is engagement? Predicting academic performance and college satisfaction from personality, social support, and student engagement. All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). Washıngton Unıversıty, St. Louıs.
Corts, D. P., Lounsbury, J. W. Saudargas, R. A., & Tatum, H. E. (2000). Assessing undergraduate satisfaction with an academic department: A method and case study. College Student Journal, 34 (3), 399-410.
Çapa, Y., Çakıroğlu, J., ve Sarıkaya, H. (2005). The development and validation of a Turkish version of teachers’ sense of efficacy scale. Eğitim ve Bilim (Education and Science), 30 (137), 74-81.
DeCenzo, D. A., & Robbins, S. P. (2010). Fundamentals of Human Resource Management. (10th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Elliot, K. M., & Healy M. A. (2001). Key factors influencing student satisfaction related to recruitment and retention. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 10, 1-11.
Elliott, K. M. (2003). Key determinants of student satisfaction. Journal of College Student Retention, 4(3), 271-279.
Gamsız, Ş., Yazıcı, H., & Altun, F. (2013). Öğretmenlerde a tipi kişilik, stres kaynakları, öz yeterlik ve iş doyumu. Turkish Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, Volume 8/8 Summer 2013, p. 1475-1488, ISSN: 1308-140, www.turkishstudies.net,DoiNumber:http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.5328, ANKARA-TURKEY.
Gibson, A. (2010). Measuring business student satisfaction: A review and summary of the major: a review and summary of the major predictors. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32 (3), 251-259.
Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 63-69.
Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98 (3), 184-191.
Heiman, T. (2008). The effects of e-mail messages in a distance learning university on perceived academic and social support, academic satisfaction, and coping. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(3), 237-248.
House, J. (2000). The effects of student involvement on the development of academic self-concept. Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 261-263.
Huang, Y. R., & Chang, S. M. (2004). Academic and cocurricular involvement: Their relationship and best combinations for student growth. Journal of College Student Development, 45 (4), 391-406.
Huang, Y-R. (2007). Relatedness between jobs and academic majors: its relationship to academic involvement of college students. International Journal of Educational Vocation Guide, 7, 111-122.
Hutley, K. (2004). Alexander Astin's theory of involvement: A summary. Retrieved from http://www.cat.ilstu.edu/conf/astin.shtml.
Kane, K. (2004). Quality matters: Inter-institutional quality assurance in online learning. Sloan-C View: Perspectives in Quality Online Education, 3 (11), 1-3.
Keup, J.R. (1999). Student value orientations about college: direct and indirect effects on student satisfaction. Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education,18-21.
Kuh, G. D., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., Andreas, R. E., Lyons, J. W., & Strange, C. C. (1991). Involving Colleges. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lathem, A.S. (1998). Teacher satisfaction. Educational Leadership, 55 (5), 82-83.
Lent, R. W., Sibgley, D., Sheu, H.B., Schmidt, J.A., & Schimidt, L.C. (2007). Relation of socialcognitive factors to academic satisfaction in engineering students. Journal of Career Assessment, 15, 87.
Logue, T.C., Lounsbry, J.W., Gupta, A., & Leong, F.T.L. (2007). Vocational ınterest themes and personality traits in relation to college major satisfaction of business students. Journal of Career Development, 33, 269.
Maehr, M., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10), pp.1-49, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Martirosyan, N.M., Saxon, D.P., & Wanjohi, R. (2014). Student satisfaction and academic performance in Armenian higher education. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 4 (2), 1-5.
Moore, W. P., & Esselman, M. E. (1992). Teacher efficacy, empowerment, and a focused instructional climate: Does student achievement benefit? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Ojeda, L., Flores, L. Y., & Navarro, R. L. (2011). Social cognitive predictors of Mexican American college students' academic and life satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58 (1), 61-71.
Olson, J. S. (2008). Career development, the undergraduate, and the academic adviser. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal. Retrieved on March 4, 2011 from: http://dus.psu.edu/mentor/081015jo.htm
Pace, C. R. (1984). Measuring the quality of college student experiences. Los Angeles: University of California, Higher Education Research Institute.
Pace, C. R. (1990). The Undergraduates. Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-578.
Peters, T. J. (1988). Individual attention: The key to keeping students in school. ACU-1 Bulletin, 4- 8.
Pike, G. R., & Killian, T. S. (2001). Reported gains in student learning: Do academic disciplines make a difference? Research in Higher Education, 42 (4), 429-454.
Pike, G. R., Kuh, G. D., & Gonyea, R. M. (2003). The relationship between institutional mission and students’ involvement and educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 44 (2), 241-261.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in Education: Theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Merrill.
Pinugu, J. N. (2013). College self-efficacy and academic satisfaction moderated by academic stress. The International Journal of Research and Review, 10, 34-51.
Ross, J. A. (1992). Teacher efficacy and the effect of coaching on student achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 17, 51-65.
Ross, R. K., Batzer, L., & Bennington, E. (2002) “Quality assurance for distance education: A faculty peer review process. Tech Trends, 46 (5), 48-54.
Salamı, S.O. (2010). Emotional intellıgence, self-effıcacy, psychological well-being and students’ attitudes: Implications for quality education, European Journal of Educational Studies, 2 (3), 247-257.
Schmitt, N., Oswald, F. L., Friede, A., Imus, A., & Merritt, S. (2008). Perceived fit with an academic environment: Attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 317-335.
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207- 231.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (4), 1059-1069.
Tessema, M. T., Ready, K., & Yu, W-C.W. (2012). Factors affecting college students’ satisfaction with major curriculum: Evidence from nine years of data. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2 (2), 34-44.
Topkaya, N., & Büyükgöze Kavas, A. (2015). Algılanan sosyal destek, yaşam doyumu, psikolojik yardım almaya ilişkin tutum ve niyet arasındaki ilişkiler: Bir model çalışması. Turkish Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, Volume 10/2 Winter 2015, p. 979-996 DOI Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.7768 ISSN: 1308-2140, ANKARA-TURKEY.
Trevas, D. (1996). Getting involved key to getting through college. Retrieved from https://www.tntech.edu.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
Yusuf, M. (2011). The impact of self-efficacy, achievement motivation, and self-regulated learning strategies on students’ academic achievement. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2623- 2626.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development. In A. Bandura (Ed.), SelfEfficacy in Changing Societies (202–231). New York: Cambridge Univ. Press