Psychology 2013. Vol.4, No.3A, 268-278 Published Online March 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/psych) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2013.43A040 Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 268 The Role of Teachers’ Self- and Collective-Efficacy Beliefs on Their Job Satisfaction and Experienced Emotions in School Georgia Stephanou1, Georgios Gkavras2, Maria Doulkeridou1 1Department of Early Childhood Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece 2Department of Primary School Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece Email: gstephanou@uowm.gr, egokesy1@otenet.gr Received December 13th, 2012; revised January 12th, 2013; accepted February 11th, 2013 This study aimed at investigating a) teachers’ job satisfaction, experienced emotions at school, self-effi- cacy and school collective-efficacy beliefs; b) the influential role of self-efficacy in the school collective- efficacy beliefs, and in the impact of the school collective-efficacy beliefs on job satisfaction and emo- tions; and c) the effect of self- and collective-efficacy beliefs on the impact of job satisfaction on emo- tions. The sample comprised 268 elementary school teachers (113 male, 155 female), who completed the scales at the middle of a school year. The results showed that a) the teachers experienced form moderate negative emotions to moderate positive emotions at school, particularly in the context-task- and self-re- lated emotions; b) teachers’ self-efficacy had positive effect on school collective-efficacy beliefs and job satisfaction, and on the impact of collective efficacy on job satisfaction; c) self-efficacy, collective effi- cacy and job satisfaction, as a group, explained from a small to moderate amount of the variance of the emotions, while the impact of job satisfaction on the emotions was to a significant extent mediated by teachers’ perceptions about their school collective efficacy; and d) self-efficacy had direct and indirect effect, through the interaction of collective efficacy and job satisfaction, on the emotions. The findings are discussed for their applications in educational practice and future research. Keywords: Collective-Efficacy; Emotions; Job Satisfaction; Self-Efficacy Introduction A teacher has to regulate his/her cognitive, emotional and motivational processes in various situations that are related to his/her professional career (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Carson & Templin, 2007; Efklides & Volet, 2005; Hargreaves, 1998; Sutton, 2004; Sutton & Wheatley, 2003). However, although recent research on teachers’ cognition, beliefs and conceptions about themselves has grown and expanded, the area remains unexplored (Hoy, Davis, & Pape, 2006). More precisely, there is little research in practicing teachers, particularly in elemen- tary school, about how teaches’ cognition, such as efficacy be- liefs, relate to their emotional experiences at school, the rela- tionship between teachers’ emotions and motivation, and how integral the interactive effects of these three concepts are in teacher development (Hoy et al., 2006; Reyna & Weiner, 2001; Stephanou & Mastora, submitted; Stephanou & Sivropoulou, 2008; Stephanou & Tsapakidou, 2007a; Sutton & Mudrey- Camino, 2003). In addition, although the teachers’ profess- sional role is context-related and socially-constructed, previous investigations have hardly examined the importance of teach- ers’ beliefs about the conjoint capability of their school faculty, that is collective efficacy, for their well-being and achievement, and for students’ academic development (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, Petitta, & Rubinacci, 2003; Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, & Steca, 2003; Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2004; Tschannen-Moran & Barr, 2004; Wheatley, 2005). Fur- thermore, while the role of both self-efficacy and collective- efficacy beliefs on organizational and group performance is relatively well established, their covariation on teachers’ well being, emotional experience and job satisfaction has much less examined (Capraca et al., 2003; Fernandez-Ballesteros, Diez- Nicolas, Capraca, Barbananelli, & Bandura, 2002; Labone, 2004; Ross, 1998; Stajkovic & Lee, 2002). Accordantly, this study focused on the role of elementary school teachers’ self-efficacy and collective efficacy beliefs on their job satisfaction and experienced emotions at school. Efficacy Beliefs and Effects on Job S atisfactio n One important self-referenced belief for teaching is a sense of efficacy. The model of teacher efficacy by Tschannen-Mo- ran, Woolfolk Hoy, & Hoy (1998), conceptualizing Bandura’s (1997) theory of efficacy, defines “teacher efficacy is the teach- er’s belief in his or her capability to organize and execute the courses of action required to successfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular context” (p. 232). A strong sense of self-efficacy supports a significant advan- tage in initial task engagement, motivation, effort, and resil- ience in front of the difficulties related to teaching career. Teachers’ self-efficacy positively influences their own behavior and motivation, and student achievement (Coladarci, 1992; Goddard & Goddard, 2001; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007; Tschannen-Moran & Johnson, 2011). For example, teachers with high self-efficacy evince greater control over the teaching/learning process (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Bor- gogni, Petitta et al., 2003; Jesus & Lens, 2005; Tschannen- Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). In turn, the synthesis of this
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. high control expectations over the teaching/learning process and high efficacy expectations contributes in their high success expectations, which is positively related to their own future success (Jesus & Lens, 2005). Teachers’ self-efficacy is also af- fects teaching (Coladarci, 1992). For instance, high self-effica- cious teachers, in comparison to low self-efficacious teachers, are more likely to use new curriculum materials, to change in- structional strategies, and to use multiple and different teaching styles in their classes to better meet the needs of their students (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Steca, & Malone, 2006; Kulinna & Cothran, 2003; Stephanou & Tsapakidou, 2007b; Tschannen- Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Other studies have docu- mented that teachers with high self-efficacy are more enthusi- astic for teaching, are open to new ideas and are willing to test various teaching methods to satisfy their students’ needs (Al- linder, 1994; Ross & Gray, 2006). Yet, teachers’ self-efficacy positively influences intrinsic interest, self-satisfaction and job satisfaction (Caprara et al., 2003; Caprara, et al., 2006; Klassen, Bong, Usher, Chong, Huan, Wong, & Georgiou, 2009; Zim- merman & Kitsantas, 1999). However, as previous researches (e.g., Caprara et al., 2003; Hoy & Miskel, 2008), in consistency with Bandura’s (1982, 1997, 2006) social cognitive theory, suggest, teachers’ self- efficacy beliefs may not sufficient to ensure success and attain satisfaction. Rather, achievement is also influenced by the teachers’ beliefs about the school, as a whole, capacity; that is the collective efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997; Goddard, Lo- Gerfo, & Hoy, 2004). Collective efficacy is “the perceptions of teachers in a school that the faculty as a whole can organize and execute the courses of action required to have a positive effect on students: (Hoy et al., 2006: p. 728). Like self-efficacy, the findings from research in collective efficacy in various settings, including work, socio-police and school, show that the stronger the individuals’ perceived col- lective efficacy, the stronger the persistency in the face of im- pediments and difficulties, the higher the outcome expectations and motivation in pursuing the goals, the higher the resilience to stressors, and the higher their performance accomplishments (see Bandura, 2000; Caprara et al., 2003; Klassen & Chiu, 2010; Klassen, Usher, & Bong, in press). Higher school collective efficacy also is related to higher rates of parental involvement and teacher innovation (Hoy & Miskel, 2008; Klassen et al., in press). Yet, a strong sense of school group capacity has positive effects on student achievement, particularly for children at risk (Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2000; Goddard et al., 2004; Ross, 1995, 1998; Tschannen-Moran & Barr, 2004; Woolfolk Hoy & Davis, 2005). Perceived group collective efficacy is influenced by its members’ personal efficacy, while, in turn, the shared sense of collective efficacy may have effects on self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997; Caprara et al., 2003). As Bandura (1982) proposed ‘Col- lective efficacy is rooted in self-efficacy. Inveterate self doubt- ers are not easily forged into a collective efficacious force’ (p. 143). Accordantly, this study, based on Bandura’s theory of efficacy beliefs, and Caprara, Borgogni, Barbaranelli, & Rubi- nacci’s (1999) model, considers the teachers’ self-efficacy as an influential factor of collective efficacy and as the main signifi- cant determinant of job satisfaction, since self-efficacious tea- chers manage class discipline, promote learning and cooperate effectively with families and colleagues, and they are able to create and maintain situations from which they derive others’ recognition and intrinsic rewards (Schmitz & Schwarzer, 1999; Skaalvik & Bong, 2005). But, because the capacity of school to fulfill its mission contributes to teachers’ satisfaction, which hat they derive from their own attainments, collective school effi- cacy has a positive effect on teachers’ job satisfaction (Caprara, Barbarelli, Borgogni, & Pettita et al., 2003; Cockburn & Haydn, 2004; Judge, Thoresen, Bono, & Patton, 2001). Emotions Teachers may experience the whole spectrum of emotions across the various situations relevant to their professional role; therefore, emotions should be examined in any comprehensive discussion of teachers’ motivation and behaviour (Astleitner, 2000; Frenzel, Goetz, Lüdtke, Pekrun, & Sutton, 2009; Har- greaves, 2000; Lambert, Mccarthy, O’Donnell, & Wang, 2009; Stephanou & Mastora, submitted; Sutton & Wheatley, 2003). Teachers may experience satisfaction, pride, enthusiasm, hap- piness and enjoyment for their good teaching, respectful rela- tionships with their colleagues, warm school climate, and stu- dents’ academic progress. In contrast, teachers may experience shame, hopelessness, anger, unhappiness and boredom for their unsuccessful teaching, negative relationships with their col- leagues, undesirable school situations, and students’ lack of academic progress. Teachers’ such emotional experience at school is considered precursor of their future behavior because it influences their self identity and motivation (Schutz & DeCuir, 2002; Somech & Drach-Zahavy, 2000). For example, teachers, who are con- stantly frustrated or sad by disruptive students or ineffective administration, are less intrinsically motivated, express a lack of enthusiasm for cultivating positive relationships with their students and report becoming tolerant, and less caring (Blase, 1986.). Teachers’ emotions in classes also influence cognitive information processing, quality of thinking, categorizing, strate- gies in pursuing the goals and self-regulation (see Boakaerts, Pintrich, & Zeidner, 2000; Efklides & Volet, 2005; Isen, 1993; Parrot & Spackman, 2000). According to Sutton and Wheatley (2003), teachers who experience positive emotions might gen- erate more teaching ideas and strategies that might contribute in developing ‘broad minded coping’ skills (Fredrickson, 2001: p. 223). These coping skills facilitate teachers to achieve their goals, such as teaching well and help students to learn. Yet, teachers’ emotions have important consequences in judgments and behaviours (see Bless, 2003; Parrott, 2003; Weiner, 2005, 2006). For example, in experimental study contacted by Keltner, Ellsworth and Edwards (1993), angry and sad students attrib- uted hypothetical misfortunes to the other and situational fac- tors, respectively. In addition, teachers’ emotions in classes are a significant factor of students’ motivation, behavior and well-being (Boek- aerts, 2007; Davis, 2003; Furrer & Skinner, 2003; Taxer & Frenzel, 2012; Vauras, Salonen, Lehtinen, & Kinnunen, 2009). For example, teachers’ positive emotions positively affected the students of various grade levels regarding motivation, achieve- ment and social behavior in classes (Turner, Midgey, Meyer, Gheen, Anderman, & Kang, 2002; Turner, Meyer, Midgley, & Patrick, 2003; Wentzel, 1996; Wong & Dornbusch, 2000). In contrast, teachers’ yelling made the children to feel small, ashamed, guilty, embarrassed and hurt (Thomas & Montomery, 1998), and their negative emotions are predictors of students’ development (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 269
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. Effects of Efficacy Beliefs on Job Satisfaction and Emotions Bandura (1997) has suggested that efficacy cognitions not only influence how people behave but they also elicit thought patterns and affective reactions to tasks that challenge personal capabilities (see also Pajares & Schunk, 2005; Skaalvik & Bong, 2005). Teachers with high self-efficacy are able to attain personal accomplishments and well-being, reduce stress, and are less vulnerable to depression, experience less negative emo- tions in teaching, and are more effective in meeting the needs of culturally diverse student groups (Ashton, Olejnik, & Croker, 1982; Bandura, 1994; Greenwood, Olejnik, & Parkay, 1990; Tucker, Porter, Reinke, Herman, Ivery, Mack, & Jackson, 2005). Conversely, people with low self efficacy are face diffi- culties in commitments to the goals they choose to pursue, blame themselves for their failure, believe that things are tougher than they really are, a belief that fosters anxiety and stress as they engage in a task, are slow to recover after failures or setbacks, and easily fall victim to depression (Bandura, 1994; Fiori, Mcilvane, Brown, & Antonucci, 2006; Muris, 2001; Pa- jares & Schunk, 2005; Ross, 1998; Stephanou, 2004; Wheatley, 2005). Also, despite the limited number of the researches on the as- sociation of collective efficacy with experienced emotions in school settings, there is evidence that, like self-efficacy, collec- tive efficacy positively influences achievement-related emo- tions (see Charalabidou under Stephanou supervision; Klassen et al., in press). Furthermore, teachers’ collective efficacy is expected to have indirect effects on their experienced emotions at school through self-efficacy because, as above discussed, it is influenced by self-efficacy. Finally, the teachers, similarly with other professionals who are high satisfied with their job, are more likely to experience positive emotions (see Muthuvelayutham & Mohanasundaram, 2012; Sy, Tram, & O’Hara, 2006). Moreover, the impact of job satisfaction on emotions is expected to be affected by efficacy beliefs, mainly self-efficacy, since the higher, compered to less, efficacious individuals are more capable in to comprehend and to adapt their emotions, better understand the causes of the formulation of their negative emotions, such as stress, and they use effective strategies of holding the consequences of negative emotions (Bandura, 1994; Fiori et al., 2006; Muris, Schmidt, Lambrichs, & Meesters, 2001; Skaalvik & Bong, 2005). Aim and Hypotheses of the Study This study aimed at investigating a) teachers’ job satisfac- tion, experienced emotions at school, self-efficacy and school collective-efficacy beliefs; b) the influential role of self-effi- cacy in collective-efficacy, and in the impact of collective- efficacy beliefs on job satisfaction and emotions; and c) the effect of self- and collective-efficacy beliefs on the impact of job satisfaction on the emotions. The following hypotheses were examined. The teachers will report a rate of job satisfaction, self-effi- cacy, and collective efficacy of the school, as a as whole. How- ever, no specific hypothesis is tested about the specific rate of each of the three concepts (Hypothesis 1). The teachers will experience various emotions at school but no specific hypothe- sis is tested about the extent of the intensity of each of the emo- tions (Hypothesis 2a). The teachers will mainly experience context- and task-related emotions (Hypothesis 2b). The teach- ers’ self-efficacy will positively influence their beliefs about collective efficacy of their school (Hypothesis 3). Self-efficacy and perceived school collective efficacy will have positive ef- fects on job satisfaction (Hypothesis 4a). Self-efficacy will be an influential determinant of the impact of school collective- efficacy on job satisfaction (Hypothesis 4b). Teachers’ self- efficacy, perceived school collective-efficacy and job satisfac- tion, separately, and, as a group, will positively influence their experienced emotion at school, mainly the self-, context- and future-related (Hypothesis 5a). Self-efficacy and perceived school collective-efficacy, together, will have positive effects on the impact of job satisfaction on the emotions (Hypothesis 5b). In addition, self-efficacy will be an influential factor of the impact of collective efficacy on the effect of job satisfaction on the emotions (Hypothesis 5c). Method Participants Τhe participants were 268 elementary school teachers (113 men, 155 women), who were recruited from 85 state schools from various regions of Greece, representing a variety of Greek school settings. Their age ranged from 25 to 57 years, with average age of 45 years, SD = 5.9. They reported teaching ex- perience from 3 to 27 years with balance among years of teaching experience. Measurements Emotions. The scale of the teachers’ experienced emotions at school consisted of seventeen emotions: Happiness, pleasure, pride, encouragement, confidence, calmness, not angry-angry, flow-not flow, cheerfulness, exciting, not irritated-irritated, hope, competence, not nervousness-nervousness, anxiety, en- thusiasm and not boredom-boredom. The teachers were asked to indicate the extent to which they usually experienced each of the above eighteen emotions at school during the current school year. The emotions had the form of adjectives, with the positive pole having the high score of 7 and the negative pole having the low score of 1 (e.g., happy 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 unhappy). The con- struction of the scale was based on previous similar re- searches (see Pekrun, Goetz, Frenzel, Barchfeld, & Perry, 2011; Schutz & DeCuir, 2002; Sutton & Wheatley, 2003; Weiner, 2001, 2005), and it is a valid and reliable research instrument in studying experienced emotions in education in Greek popula- tion (see Stephanou, 201; Stephanou, Kariotoglou, & Ntinas, 2011; Stephanou & Mastora, submitted). Cronbach’s alpha val- ue was .89. Self-efficacy, Perceived School Collective-efficacy, Job satisfaction. The teachers’ self-efficacy, perceived school col- lective-efficacy and job satisfaction were examined by a re- spective subscale which driven from Caprara et al.’s (2003) booklet. The teachers indicated the extent of their agreement with each of the item on a 7-point scale, which ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. The teachers’ self-efficacy was estimated via twelve items, which measured teachers’ beliefs in their ability to handle ef- fectively various tasks, challenges and obligations associated with their professional role in various setting and relations (e.g., “I am capable of dealing effectively with the problem behaviors of my students”). Cronbach’s alpha value was .84. Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 270
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. Nine items measured teachers’ beliefs that the school, as a whole, is capable to handle effectively, various demands, chal- lenges and difficulties that are related to its institutional role. (e.g., “Our school is capable of overcoming successfully the various difficulties that may arise”). Cronbach’s alpha = .77. The job satisfaction scale consisted of four items (e.g., “I am fully satisfied with my job”). The construction of this subscale was based on the by Borgogni’s (1999) modification of the Job Descriptive Index (Smith, Kendal, & Hulin, 1969). In the pre- sent study Cronbach’s alpha value was .73. Personal factors. A set of questions was about the partici- pants’ personal factors (e.g., gender, teaching experience). Procedure Permission to participate was obtained from each sample school prior to administering the scales. The participants were provided written information about the aim of this research. The teachers individually completed the scales in a quite class- room in front of the researches during school time. To ensure that the teachers had good time to form an impression about the examined variables, data were collected at the middle of a school year. Also, in order to ensure that any relation among the tested variables was not due to procedure used, the teachers completed, first, the emotion scale, then the job satisfaction teaching scale, followed by the collective-efficacy scale, and, finally, the self-efficacy scale. The teachers were asked to choose a code name and use it on all the questionnaires to match the scales that were responded by the same teacher. The participants were assured of anonymity and confidentiality. Results Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Collective Efficacy, Job Satisfaction and Emotions The presented findings in Table 1, confirming Hypothesis 1, show that the teachers’ self-efficacy, collective efficacy beliefs and job satisfaction ranged from moderate to high. The results from the repeated measures ANOVA, in which the teachers’ experienced emotions at school over the school year was the within-subjects factor, revealed that the teachers experienced a variety of intensity of emotions, F(17, 251) = 60.84, p < .01, η2 = .78. Specifically, inspection of the scores and standard deviation in Table 1 and the post hoc pairwise comparisons showed that the teachers experienced form mod- erate negative emotions to moderate positive emotions. Fur- thermore, competence, not boredom, pride, pleasure and hap- piness were the most intense positive emotions while anxiety, irritation, nervousness and non confidence were the most in- tense negative emotions. These results totally and partly confirmed Hypothesis 2a and 2b, respectively. Effects of S e l f- Efficac y on Collecti ve-Efficacy and Job Satisfaction The results form correlation coefficient analysis indicated that self-efficacy was positively related to collective efficacy (r = .82, p < .01). Furthermore, the results from bivariate regres- sion analysis revealed that the teachers’ self-efficacy had posi- tive effect on their perceptions of collective efficacy of school, explaining 55% of the variance, F(1, 266) = 33.64, p < .01, beta Table 1. Teachers’ self-efficacy, school collective-efficacy, job satisfaction and experienced emotions at school. Mean SD Self-efficacy 5.48 .76 Collective efficacy 5.38 .77 Job satisfaction 5.69 .79 Emotions Happiness 4.86 1.24 Pleasure 4.91 1.07 Pride 4.92 1.53 Encouragement 4.00 1.58 Confidence 4.57 1.13 Calmness 4.24 1.46 No anger – anger 4.04 1.71 Flow 4.62 1.14 Cheerfulness 4.80 1.33 Exciting 4.18 1.71 No irritation-irritation 3.77 1.85 Hope 4.27 1.58 Competence 5.02 1.33 No nervousness-nervousness 3.78 1.77 No anxiety-anxiety 3.66 1.70 Enthusiasm 4.77 1.45 Not boredom-boredom 4.97 1.52 = .74, t = 18.37, p < .01. These findings confirmed Hypothesis 3. The results form correlation coefficient analyses showed that the higher the self (r = .77, p < .01)- and collective (r = .65, p < .01)-efficacy, the higher the job satisfaction. In addition, the findings from hierarchical regression analysis, in which the teachers’ job satisfaction was the predicted variable, and their self-efficacy (entering into second step of the analysis) and school collective-efficacy (entering into first step of the analy- sis) were the predictor variables (Table 2), showed that a) self-efficacy and collective efficacy, together, positively in- fluenced job satisfaction, accounting 59% of the variance; b) collective efficacy and, mainly, self-efficacy contributed into generation of job satisfaction; and c) self-efficacy had direct effect on job satisfaction beyond that of collective efficacy, R2ch = .16. Thus, Hypotheses 4a and 4b were in the main confirmed. The Role of Sel f-E f fi c acy and Collective-Efficacy in the Impact of Job Satis faction on Emotions A series of hierarchical regression analyses, with enter method, were conducted, in which each of the teachers’ ex- perienced emotions at school over the school year was the pre- dicted variable, and self-efficacy, collective efficacy and job satisfaction were the predictive variables. Self-efficacy, collec- tive efficacy and job satisfaction were entered into third, sec- Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 271
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. Table 2. Results from hierarchical regression analyses for the effect of teachers’ self-efficacy on the impact of their school collective-efficacy beliefs on job satisfaction. Step R2ch R2 F (df) Fch (df) betat CΕ 1st .43 .43 109 (1, 266)109 (1, 266) .213.63 SΕ 2nd .16 .59 136 (2, 265)122 (1, 265) .5910.16 Note: All F-, Fch- and t- values, p < .01; CE: Collective efficacy; SE: Self- effi- cacy. ond and first step of the analysis, respectively. These analyses revealed the following results. The three concepts, as a group, explained from a small to moderate amount of the variance of the emotions, R2 ranged form .09 to .35, and mainly accounted in the variance in the emotions of happiness (R2 = .27), confidence (R2 = .31), hope (R2 = .24), flow (R2 = .35) and no boredom–boredom (R2 = .19). Also, the impact of job satisfaction on the emotions was to a significant extent mediated by teachers’ perceptions about their school collective efficacy, R2ch ranged from .017 (exciting) to .12 (happiness). Self-efficacy had direct, R2ch ranged from .016 for happi- ness to .052 for hope, and indirect effect, through the interac- tion of collective efficacy and job satisfaction, on the emotions. The teachers’ self-efficacy, collective efficacy and job satis- faction were positively associated with their experienced emo- tions over the school year. Furthermore, the higher the teach- ers’ self-efficacy was, the higher their perceptions of the school efficacy were and the higher their satisfaction with their job was, the more intense their positive emotions were. However, no one of the three concepts was correlated to the emotion of nervousness, while job satisfaction was not associated with the emotions of pleasure, encouragement, calmness, no anger-anger and competence. Also, while the efficacy beliefs and job satisfaction ac- counted in the variance in the emotional experience, their rela- tive power in influencing emotions differed across the emotions and within each emotion. More precisely, self-efficacy, com- pared to both collective efficacy and job satisfaction, was the most powerful formulator of most of the emotions, with the exception being in the emotions of calmness and flow, which were best predicted by the perceived collective efficacy, and in the emotions of cheerfulness and anxiety, which were only predicted by job satisfaction. On the other hand, collective ef- ficacy, in comparison to job satisfaction, was a more powerful determinant of the emotions, expect of the emotion of no bore- dom-boredom, into which collective efficacy had no significant contribution. Also, self-efficacy best predicted the emotions of hope, con- fidence, no irritation- irritation, no boredom-boredom, happi- ness, pleasure and encouragement than it did in the rest of the emotions. Collective efficacy was a more powerful formulator of the emotions of flow, confidence, excitement, no irritation- irritation, happiness and encouragement than of the rest of the emotions. Finally, the emotions of confidence, hope, happiness, no irritation-irritation and excitement, as compared to the other emotions were better predicted by job satisfaction. Hypotheses 5a, 5b and 5c were in the main confirmed by the above results. Discussion This study focused on the relationship of teachers’ self- and collective-efficacy beliefs with their job satisfaction and ex- perienced emotions at school. The results in the main con- firmed our hypotheses and previous research evidence. Efficacy Beliefs and Job Satisfaction The findings from the present study, supporting previous re- search evidence (e.g., Klassen et al., in press; Wolters & Daugherty, 2007), revealed that the elementary school teachers had from moderate to high self-efficacy and collective efficacy beliefs, and they were satisfied with their job. It seems that the participants worked in supportive school climate, with coopera- tive colleagues and parents, and with children making progress (Betoret, 2006; Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, & Petitta et al., 2003; Cockburn & Haydn, 2004; Goddard & LoGerfo, et al., 2004; Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007). These findings are in contrast to other studies which show that teachers in higher grade levels reported lower self-efficacy and job satisfaction than teachers in lower grade (see Klassen & Chiu, 2010). Research should examine how school level and context influence teachers’ efficacy beliefs and job satisfaction. Also, in consistency with previous researches (e.g., Hackman et al., 2000; Caprara et al., 2003; Caprara et al., 2006; Klassen & Chiu, 2010; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001), teachers’ self efficacy beliefs appeared to be a significant de- terminant of the formulation of their collective efficacy beliefs and job satisfaction. Furthermore, teachers’ self-efficacy had positive effects on their perceptions of school collective effi- cacy, which, in turn, influenced teachers’ job satisfaction. This specific finding suggests, in agreement with other researches (e.g., Klassen et al., in press), that not teachers’ self-efficacy and collective efficacy influence job satisfaction in the same way and extent. Emotions Confirming in the main our predictions, the teachers experi- enced a variation of intensity of emotions at their school, un- derlying the high importance of their professional role in their self-identity, since under high ego involvement conditions in- dividuals feel such emotional pattern (Frijda, 2009; Lambert et al., 2009; Roseman & Smith, 2001; Stephanou, 2011; Stepha- nou et al., 2011; Stephanou & Tsapakidou, 2007a; Sutton & Wheatley, 2003; Weiner, 2001, 2005). The teachers’ distinct professional role in their whole life was also supported by the nature of the reported emotions, based on Seligman’s (2002) view of classification of emotions. Specifically, they consid- ered the development of their professional life, by experiencing emotions which are related to the past (e.g., pride/shame), the present (e.g., pleasure/displeasure) and the future (e.g., confi- dence/non confidence, hope/ hopelessness). The teachers’ variation of the experienced emotions in school, in addition, reflects the respective variation of the sources. Furt hermore, the teachers mainly felt intense context (not bore- dom)-, task (pleasure)- and self (competence, pride)-related positive emotions, stressing the influential role of the context and self beliefs in it, in consistency with previous studies (Fri- jda, 2009; Pekrun & Stephens, 2009; Sutton & Wheatley, 2003). he teachers, on the other hand, experienced more intense the T Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 272
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 273 Table 3. Results from hierarchical regression analyses for the effect of teachers’ self-efficacy on the impact of collective efficacy on the effect of job satisfac- tion on the emotions. Emotions Steps R2 R 2ch F Fch beta t Job satisfaction 1st .13 42.43 .22 9.55 Collective efficacy 2nd .26 .124 46.82 44.35 .37 4.59 Happiness Self-efficacy 3rd .27 .016 33.72 5.81 .54 2.41 Job satisfaction 1st -- -- Collective efficacy 2nd .12 .12 18.44 21.87 .25 2.81 Pleasure Self-efficacy 3rd .14 .021 14.48 6.30 .57 2.51 Job satisfaction 1st .09 .09 28.65 .19 5.44 Collective efficacy 2nd .12 .03 19.57 9.96 .21 2.30 Pride Self-efficacy 3rd .12 -- 13.26 -- .49 5.20 Job satisfaction 1st -- -- Collective efficacy 2nd .17 27.75 19.89 .36 4.19 Encouragement Self-efficacy 3rd .18 .012 18.64 4.89 .52 3.69 Job satisfaction 1st .19 66.92 .29 10.55 Collective efficacy 2nd .28 .087 55.89 32.68 .48 3.38 Confidence Self-efficacy 3rd .31 .027 40.25 10.88 .64 3.23 Job satisfaction 1st -- -- Collective efficacy 2nd .10 14.78 .19 1.98 Calmness Self-efficacy 3rd .10 -- 9.61 -- --- Job satisfaction 1st -- -- Collective efficacy 2nd .07 19.42 .31 5.34 No anger-anger Self-efficacy 3rd .10 .031 9.89 9.13 .48 3.02 Job satisfaction 1st .25 91.82 .39 9.85 Collective efficacy 2nd .34 .089 69.98 35.98 .50 5.15 Flow Self-efficacy 3rd .35 -- 46.44 -- --- Job satisfaction 1st .09 28.48 .32 5.32 Collective efficacy 2nd .09 -- 14.39 -- --- Cheerfulness Self-efficacy 3rd .09 -- 9.65 -- --- Job satisfaction 1st .16 16.04 .21 4.99 Collective efficacy 2nd .17 .017 27.49 4.96 .43 5.48 Exciting Self-efficacy 3rd .18 .019 19.97 3.57 .47 2.89 Job satisfaction 1st .11 32.85 .23 8.02 Collective efficacy 2nd .14 .039 23.16 12.14 .40 2.02 No irritation - irritation Self-efficacy 3rd .20 .051 22.08 16.92 .69 4.11 Job satisfaction 1st .10 30.95 .22 9.23 Collective efficacy 2nd .19 .089 31.82 29.37 .40 2.68 Hope Self-efficacy 3rd .24 .052 28.64 18.91 .77 4.26 Job satisfaction 1st -- -- Collective efficacy 2nd .09 13.61 .24 2.71 Competence Self-efficacy 3rd .10 .019 10.73 5.62 .24 2.37 Job satisfaction 1st -- Collective efficacy 2nd -- No nervousness- nervousness Self-efficacy 3rd -- Job satisfaction 1st .05 8.89 .15 3.37 Collective efficacy 2nd -- -- -- -- --- Not anxiety - anxiety Self-efficacy 3rd -- -- -- -- --- Job satisfaction 1st .07 21.34 .18 3.55 Collective efficacy 2nd .09 .025 14.47 7.26 .28 3.23 Enthusiasm Self-efficacy 3rd .10 .019 10.77 3.89 .32 1.97 Job satisfaction 1st .17 55.34 .18 6.63 Collective efficacy 2nd .17 -- 27.93 -- --- Not boredom - boredom Self-efficacy 3rd .19 .021 21.31 6.85 .57 2.16 N ote: Only the variables that were related each other were included in the analyses; All F- and Fch-values, p < .01; t ≤ 2.51, p < .05, t > 2.51, p < .01.
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. self-task (anxiety)- and other (irritation, nervousness)-related negative emotions than the rest of the emotions, indicating the determinant role of the significant others, such as school ad- ministration, students and colleagues in their well being (see Buss & Hughes, 2007; Frenzel et al., 2009; Lambert et al., 2009; McCormick & Barnett, 2011; Parrrott, 2003; Schutz, Hong, Cross, & Osbon, 2006; Summers & Davis, 2006; Yoon, 2002). It should mentioned that high anxiety can impairs task rele- vant processing, such as solving the various problems that oc- cur every day in school (Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001; Schutz & DeCuir, 2002). Generally, teachers’ negative emotions may confront their goals and classroom management, and affect their intrinsic motivation and efficacy beliefs (see Blase, 1986; Derryberry & Tucker, 1994; Keltner et al., 1993; Emmer, 1994). Lack of intensive negative emotions at school may be partly explained by the participants’ educational level. Probably the primary school ‘caring for their students’ overcome the possible children’s misbehaviour and/or academic problems and, hence, in contrast to other studies in middle school (e.g., Hargreaves, 2000; Sutton, 2000), intense anger and irritation did not arise. Also, perhaps the colleagues and parents were cooperative re- sulting in lack of such emotions (Erb, 2002; Lasky, 2000). Effects of Efficacy Beliefs and Job Satisfaction on Emotions The pattern of the effect of teachers’ efficacy beliefs and job satisfaction on their experienced emotions at school supports the notion that perceptions of self, task and context contribute into an emotional experience in a given school situation (Boa- kaerts & Corno, 2005; Pekrun, Frenzel, Goetz, & Perry, 2007; Pekrun, Goetz, Daniels, Stupnisky, & Perry, 2010; Schutz & Lenehart, 2002; Stephanou, 2011, Stephanou et al., 2011; Tur- ner & Schallert, 2001; Weiner, 1992, 2001). Also, the teachers might have appraised the status of self- factors in pursuing their goals that include being good in teaching and fitting the mis- sion of their school, since emotions, such as anxiety, are ex- perienced in relationship to goals (Carver & Scheier, 2000; Frijda, 2005, 2009; Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002; Pekrun, Maier, & Elliot, 2009). Yet, the three concepts, as a group, mainly influenced the generation of the outcome (happiness)-, task (flow)-, future activity (not boredom)- and future behav- iour (confidence, hope)-related emotions, underling their sig- nificant role in teachers’ future behaviour, motivation and pro- fessional development (see Bandura, 2006; Reyna & Weiner, 2001; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007; Sutton & Mudrey-Camino, 2003; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). Confirmation of higher than lower self-efficacy, collective efficacy and job satisfaction reported more intense positive emotions, except of the emotion of nervousness, which was not predicted by any of the three concepts. This specific finding addresses the necessity of clarification of the sources (and con- sequences) of teachers’ emotions. As expected, teachers’ self-efficacy, as compared to their collective efficacy and job satisfaction, proved to be a signifi- cant advantage in their emotional experience at school, with the exception being in the emotions of calmness, flow and anxiety. More precisely, the emotions of calmness and flow were mainly formulated by collective efficacy, reflecting the contribution of the task- and context- related factors, such as administrators, parents, colleagues in school collective efficacy, and, in turn, in emotions. On the other hand, job satisfaction was the solo pre- dictor of the emotion of anxiety, which is goal related, while it had no effect on the emotions of pleasure, encouragement, calmness, no anger and competence. The limited role of job satisfaction on teachers’ positive emotions may hind that, although teachers gain satisfaction from their job, they experience stress (the experience of nega- tive emotions resulting from their work). This argument is supported by previous studies, documenting the major role of stress on teachers’ job satisfaction (Liu & Ramsey, 2008). Also, self-efficacy and collective efficacy beliefs had unique and complimentarily effect on the emotions, lending further support to the earlier findings about their dinstict conceptuali- zation (see Goddard et al., 2004). The nature of the emotions that were best predicted by self-efficacy may be partly explained by its influential factors (Bandura, 1997, 2006; Lapone, 2004; Ross, 1998; Tschannen- Moran & Johnson, 2011). Self-efficacy might have based on factors, such as ability, effort and motivation. Accordantly, it could be expected that competitive dependent-emotions, such as confidence and encouragement, and expectancy dependent- emotions, such as hope, would be predicted by self-efficacy (Ross, Cousins, & Gadalla, 1996; Weiner, 2005). The predic- tion of the general- and context-related emotions, such as pleas- ure, not irritation and no boredom, reflects the high self-effica- cious’ capacity in controlling their surroundings and enjoy task- involvement (see Bandura, 1997; Ross, 1998; Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Pajares & Schunk, 2005; Pekrun et al., 2010; Schmitz & Schwarzer, 1999; Wheatley, 2005). In a similar way, collective efficacy proved best predictor of the competitive dependent-emotions underling the teachers’ perceptions of their school, as a whole, capacity as well as it was determinant formulator of the context (flow, excitement)- and general (happiness)-related emotions, reflecting the ma- jor role of the school-related factors in in collective efficacy (see Caprara et al., 2003; Klassen et al., in press). Implications of the Findings in Education and Future Research Self efficacy was found to influence collective efficacy, while the two concepts had unique and complimentarily effect on teachers’ job satisfaction and emotions. Therefore, it is es- sential to design teacher in-service programs that promote self-efficacy, and foster the various school constituencies that develop a robust sense of collective efficacy. The present findings also suggest that emotional experience constitutes an important aspect of teacher’s involvement at school, and, accordantly, teachers’ recognition and regulation of their emotions is an essential part of effective professional life and subjective well-being. Self-factors, such as ability, motivation, effort and stress, along with school constituencies were considered as explanations of the present results. There- fore, it is interesting to examine how such factors influence the inter-correlations among the examined variables. To overcome the limitations of this study, and expand, in addition, knowl- edge about the considered variables, future research should be performed in various domains and academic subjects, and across teaching levels and ages. Conclusively, investigating teachers’ efficacy beliefs, along with job satisfaction and emotions, provides useful information in understanding their motivation and behaviour. Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 274
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. REFERENCES Allinder, R. M. (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the in- structional practice of special education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education and Special Education, 17, 86-95. doi:10.1177/088840649401700203 Ashcraft, M., H., & Kirk, E. P. (2001). The relationshis among working memory, math anxiety, and performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 224-237. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.224 Ashton, P. T., Olejnik, S., & Croker, L. (1992). Measurment problems in the study of teachers’ sense of efficacy. The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Re s ea rc h Association. New York. Astleitner, H. (2000). Designing emotionally sound instruction: The FEASP-approach. Instruc tional Science, 28, 169-198. doi:10.1023/A:1003893915778 Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Ency- clopedia of human behaviour (pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education: Vol. 5. Self efficacy and adolescence (pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Betoret, F. D. (2006). Stressors, self-efficacy, coping resources, and burnout among secondary school teachers in Spain. Educational Psychology, 26, 519-539. doi:10.1080/01443410500342492 Blase, J. J. (1986). A qualitative analysis of sources of teacher stress: Consequences for performance. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 13-40. Boekaerts, M. (2007). Understanding students’ affective processes in the classroom. In P. Schutz, R. Pekrun, & G. Phye (Eds), Emotion in education (pp. 37-56). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-012372545-5/50004-6 Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self-regulation in the classroom. Applied Psychology, 54, 199-231. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00205.x Borgogni, L. (1999). The social-cognitive approach to the study of organizational variables. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Padova: University of Padova. Buck, G. A., & Cordes, J. G. (2005). An action research project on preparing teachers to meet the needs of underserved student popula- tions. Journal of Scie nc e Te a ch er Education, 16, 43-64. doi:10.1007/s10972-005-6991-x Buss, M. T., & Hughes, J. N. (2007). Teachers’ attitudes toward emo- tions predict implementation of and satisfaction with a social-emo- tional curriculum. Washington DC: Society for Prevention Research. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, I., Petitta, I., & Rubinacci, A. (2003).Teachers’, school staff’s and parents’ efficacy beliefs as determinants of attitude toward school. European Journal of Psy- chology of Education, 18, 15-31. doi:10.1007/BF03173601 Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Steca, P. (2003). Ef- ficacy beliefs as determinants of teachers’ job satisfaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 821-832. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.821 Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 473-490. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.001 Caprara, G. V., Borgogni, I., Barbaranelli, C., & Rubinacci, A. (1999). Efficacy beliefs and organizational change. Sviluppo e Organizzazi- one, 174, 19-32. Carson, R. L., & Templin, T. J. (2007). Emotion regulation and teacher burnout: Who says that the management of emotional expression doesn’t matter? American Education Research Association Annual Convention, Chicago. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2000). Scaling back goals and readi- bration of the affect system are processes in normal adaptive self- regulation: Understanding “response shift” phenomena. Social Sci- ence and Medicine, 50, 1715-1722. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00412-8 Cockburn, A. D., & Haydn, T. (2004). Recruiting and retaining teach- ers: Understanding why teachers teach. London: Routledge Falmer. doi:10.4324/9780203464854 Coladarci, T. (1992). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching. Journal of Exp erimental E d u c a ti o n , 60, 323-337. doi:10.1080/00220973.1992.9943869 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experi- ence. New York: Harper Collins. Davis, H. A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student- teacher relationship on childern’s social and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38, 207-234. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3804_2 Derryberry, D., & Tucker, D. M. (1994). Motivating the focus of atten- tion. In P. M. Niedenthal, & S. Kitayama (Eds.), The hearts eye: Emotional influence in perception and attention (pp. 167-196). San Diego, CA: Academic press. Efklides, A., & Volet, S. (2005). Feelings and emotions in the learning process. Learning and Instruction, 15. Emmer, E. T. (1994). Teacher emotions and classroom management. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA. Erb, C. S. (2002). The emotional whirlpool of beginning teachers’ work. The Annual Meeting of the Canandian Society of Studies in Educa- tion. Torondo. Fernandez-Ballesteros, R., Diez-Nicolas, J., Capraca, G. V., Barbana- nelli, C., & Bandura, A. (2002). Structural relation of perceived col- lective efficacy. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 107-125. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00081 Fiori, K. L., McIlvane, J. M., Brown, E. E., & Antonucci, T. C. (2006). Social relations and depressive symptomatology: Self-efficacy as a mediator. Aging Mental Health, 10, 227-239. doi:10.1080/13607860500310690 Fredrickson, B. I. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psy- chology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Ameri- can Psychologist, 56, 218-226. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218 Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: Exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psy- chology, 101, 705-716. doi:10.1037/a0014695 Frijda, N. H. (2005). Emotion experience. Cognition & Emotion, 19, 473-498. doi:10.1080/02699930441000346 Frijda, N. H. (2009). Emotions, individual differences, and time course: Reflections. Cognition and Emotion, 23 , 1444-1461. doi:10.1080/02699930903093276 Goddard, R. D., & Goddard, Y., L. (2001). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between teacher and collective efficacy in urban schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 807-818. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00032-4 Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Collective efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 479-507. Goddard, R. D., LoGerfo, I., & Hoy, W. K. (2004). High school ac- countability: The role of perceived collective efficacy. Educational Policy, 18, 403-435. doi:10.1177/0895904804265066 Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2004). Collective ef- fi- cacy beliefs: Theoretical developments, empirical evidence, and fu- ture directions. Educational Researcher, 33, 3-13. doi:10.3102/0013189X033003003 Greenwood, G., Olejnik, S., & Parkay, F. W. (1990). Relationships be- tween four teacher efficacy belief patterns and selected teacher char- acteristics. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 23, 102-106. Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and trajectory of school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Develop- ment, 72, 625-638. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00301 Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 835-854. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00025-0 Hargreaves, A. (2000). Mixed emotions: Teachers’ perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 811-826. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00028-7 Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 275
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. Hoy, A. W., Davis, H., & Pape, S. J. (2006). Teacher knowledge and beliefs. In P. A. Alexander, & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of edu- cational psychology (2nd Edition, pp. 715-737). Mahwah, NJ: Law- rence Erlbaum. Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2008). Educational administration: The- ory, research, and pract i c e (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Isen, A. M. (1993). Positive affect and decision making. In M. Lewis, & J. M. Haviland, (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 261-277). New York: Guilford Press. Jesus, S., & Lens, W. (2005). An integrated model for the study of teacher motivation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54, 119-134. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00199.x Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quan- titative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376-407. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376 Keltner, D., Ellsworth, P. C., & Edwards, K. (1993). Beyond simple pessimism: Effects of sadness and anger on social judgement. Jour- nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 740-752. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.740 Klassen, R. M., Bong, M., Usher, E. L., Chong, W. H., Huan, V. S., Wong, I. Y., & Georgiou, T. (2009). Exploring the validity of the teachers’ self-efficacy scale in five countries. Contemporary Educa- tional Psychology,34, 67-76. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.08.001 Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers’ self- effi- cacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 741-756. doi:10.1037/a0019237 Klassen, R. M., Usher, E. L., & Bong, M. (in press). Teachers’ collec- tive efficacy, job satisfaction, and job stress in cross-cultural context. Journal of Experimental Education. Kulinna, P. H., & Cothran, D. (2003). Physical education teachers’ self- reported use and perceptions of various teaching styles. Learning and Instruction, 13, 597-609. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00044-0 Labone, E. (2004). Teacher efficacy: Maturing the construct through re- search in alternative paradigms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 341-359. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2004.02.013 Lambert, L. G., McCarthy, C., O’Donnell, M., & Wang, C. (2009). Measuring elementary teacher stress and coping in the classroom: Validity evidence for the classroom appraisal of resources, and de- mands. Psychology in t he Sc ho ol s, 46, 973-988. doi:10.1002/pits.20438 Lasky, S. (2000). The cultural and emotional polities of teacher-parent interactions. Te ac hin g T eac her Education, 16, 843-860. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00030-5 Liu, X. S., & Ramsey, J. (2008). Teachers’ job satisfaction: Analyses of the teacher follow-up survey in the United States for 2000-2001. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1173-1184. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.010 Muthuvelayutham, C., & Mohanasundaram, H. (2012). A study on the impact of occupational stress among teachers on job satisfaction and job involvement—An empirical study. European Journal of Social Sciences, 30, 339-351. McCormick, J. & Barnett, K. (2011). Teachers’ attributions for stress and their relationships with burnout. International Journal of Educa- tional Management, 25, 278-293. doi:10.1108/09513541111120114 Muris, P. (2001). Relationships between self-efficacy and symptoms of anxiety disorders and depression in a normal adolescent sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 337-348. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00027-7 Muris, P., Schmidt, H., Lambrichs, R., & Meesters, C. (2001). Protec- tive and vulnerability factors of depression in normal adolescents. Behavior Research and Therapy, 39, 555-565. doi:10.1016/S0005-7967(00)00026-7 Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2005). Self-efficacy and self-concept be- liefs: Jointly contributing to the quality of human life. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International ad- vances in self research Vol. II (pp. 95-122). Greenwich: Age Pub- lishing. Parrott, W. G. (2003). The nature of emotions. In A. Tesser, & N. Sch- warz (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual proc- esses (pp. 375-390). Oxford: Blackwell. Parrot, W. G., & Spackman, M. P. (2000). Emotion and memory. In M. Lewis, & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 476-490). New York: Guilford Press. Pekrun, R., Frenzel, A., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2007). The control- value theory of achievement emotions: An integrative approach to emotions in education. In P. A. Schutz, & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 13-36). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-012372545-5/50003-4 Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Daniels, L. M., Stupnisky, R. H., & Perry, R. P. (2010). Boredom in achievement settings: Control-value antecedents and performance outcomes of a neglected emotion. Journal of Edu- cational Psychology, 102, 531-549. doi:10.1037/a0019243 Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Barchfeld, P., & Perry, R. P. (2011). Measuring emotions in students’ learning and performance: The achievement emotions questionnaire (AEQ). Contemporary Educational Psychology 36, 36-48. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.002 Pekrun, R., Maier, M. A., & Elliot, A. J. (2009). Achievement goals and achievement emotions: Testing a model of their relations with academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 115-135. doi:10.1037/a0013383 Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2009). Goals, emotions, and emotion regulation: Perspectives of the control-value theory of achievement emotions. Human Development, 52 , 357-365. doi:10.1159/000242349 Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pren- tice Hall. Reyna, C., & Weiner, B. (2001). Justice and utility in the classroom: An atributional analysis of the goals of teachers; punishment and in- tervention strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 309- 319. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.309 Roseman I. J., & Smith, C. A. (2001). Appraisal theory: Overview, assuptions, varieties, controverties. In K. R. Scherer, & T. Johnson (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 3-18). Oxford: University Press. Ross, J. A. (1995). The impact of an inservice to promote cooperative learning on the stability of teacher efficacy. Teacher College Record, 97, 227-252. Ross, J. A. (1998). The antecedents and consequences of teacher effi- cacy. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (Vol. 7, pp. 49-73). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Ross, J. A., Cousins, J. B., & Gadalla, T. (1996). Within-teacher pre- dictors of teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 385-400. doi:10.1016/0742-051X(95)00046-M Ross. J. A., & Gray, P. (2006). Transformational leadership and teacher commitment to organizational values: The mediating effects of col- lective teacher efficacy. School Effectiveness and School Improve- ment, 17, 179-199. doi:10.1080/09243450600565795 Schmitz, G. S., & Schwarzer, R. (1999). Proaktive einstellung von lehrern: Konstruktbeschreibung und psychometrische analysen (tea- chers’ proactive attitude: Construct description and psychometric analyses). Zeitschrift für Empirische Pädagogik, 13 , 3-27. Schutz, P. A., & DeCuir, J. T. (2002). Inquiry on emotions in education. Educational Psychologist, 37, 125-134. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3702_7 Schutz, P. A., & Lenehart, S. J. (2002). Emotions in education. Edu- cational Psychologist, 37 , 67-78. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3702_1 Schutz, P. A., Hong, J. Y., Cross, D. I., & Osbon, J. N. (2006). Reflec- tions on investigating emotions among educational contexts. Educa- tional Psychology Review, 18, 343-360. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9030-3 Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analysis. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 152-171. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00359.x Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realise your potential for lasting fulfilment. New York: Free Press. Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 276
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. Skaalvik, E. M., & Bong, M. (2005). Self-concept and self-efficacy re- visited: A few notable differences and important similarities. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International ad- vances in self research Vol. I (pp. 67-89). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self- efficacy and relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 611-625. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.611 Smith, A., Kendal, L., & Hulin, C. (1969). The measurement of satis- faction in work and retirement: A strategy for the study of attitude. Chicago: Rand McNaily. Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2000). Understanding extra-role be- havior in schools: The relationships between job satisfaction, sense of efficacy, and teachers’ extra-role behavior. Teacher and Teacher Education, 16, 649-659. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00012-3 Stajkovic, A. D., & Lee, D. C. (2002). A meta-analysis of the relation- ship between collective efficacy and group performance. Unpub- lished manuscript. Stephanou, G. (2004). Effects of ability self-perception, perceived task- difficulty, performance expectations and importance of performance on performance and attributions in specific academic domains. In J. Baumert, H. W. Marsh, U. Trautwein, & G. E. Richards (Eds), Pro- ceedings of the 3rd International SELF Research Conference: Self- Concept, Motivation and Identity (CD form). Berlin: Max Planck In- stitute for Human Development. Stephanou, G. (2011). Students’ classroom emotions: Cognitive antece- dents and school performance. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9 , 5-48. Stephanou, G., Kariotoglou, P., & Ntinas, K. (2011). University stu- dents’ emotions in lectures: The effect of competence beliefs, value beliefs and perceived task-difficulty, and the impact on academic performance. International Journal of Learning, 18, 45-72. Stephanou, G., & Mastora, M. (in press). Teachers’ attributions and emotions for their teaching over a kindergarten year. International Journal of Advances in Psy ch ol ogy . Stephanou, G, & Sivropoulou, E. (2008). Kindergarten teachers’ self- efficacy and attributions for positive and negative classroom situa- tions. 10th International Congress of Balkan Society for Pedagogy and Education: Further Education in the Balkan Countries. Konya: Selcuk University. Stephanou, G., & Tsapakidou, Α. (2007a). Socio-cognitive antecedents of teacher motivation. In Y. Theodorakis, M. Goudas, & A. Papaio- annou (Eds.), Proceedings of the12th European Congress of Sport Psychology, Sport and Exercise Psychology. Bridges between Disci- plines and Culture. Halkidiki: University of Thessaly & European Federation of Sport Psychology, 248-252. Stephanou, G., & Tsapakidou, Α. (2007b). Teachers’ teaching styles and self-efficacy in physical education. International Journal of Learning, 14, 1-12. Summers, J. E., & Davis, H. A. (2006). Introduction: The interpersonal contexts of teaching, motivation, and learning. The Elementary School Journal: Special Issue on the Interpersonal Contexts of Moti- vation and Learning, 106, 189-192. doi:10.1086/501482 Sutton, R. E. (2000). The emotional experience of teachers. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA. Sutton, R. E. (2004). Emotion regulation goals and strategies. Social Psychology of Education, 7, 379-398. doi:10.1007/s11218-004-4229-y Sutton, R. E., & Mudrey-Camino, R. (2003). The relationship among teachers’ emotional intensity, emotional regulation and self-efficacy. The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associa- tion. New Orleans, LA. Sutton, R. E., & Wheatley, K. E. (2003). Teachers’ emotions and tea- ching: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychol ogy Review, 15, 327-358. doi:10.1023/A:1026131715856 Sy, T., Tram, S., & O'Hara, L. A. (2006). Relation of employee and ma- nager emotional intelligence to job satisfaction and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 6 8, 461-473. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2005.10.003 Taxer, J. L., & Frenzel, A. (2012). The influence of teachers’ emotions on students’ self-concepts and attributions. International Conference on Motivation. Frankfurt am Main, 28-30 August 2012. Thomas, J. A., & Montomery, P. (1998). On becoming good teacher: Reflective practice with regard to children’s voices. Journal of Tea- cher Education, 49, 372-380. doi:10.1177/0022487198049005007 Tschannen-Moran, M., & Barr, M. (2004). Fostering student learning: The relationship of collective efficacy and student achievement. Lea- dership and Policy in Schools, 3, 189-209. doi:10.1080/15700760490503706 Tschannen-Moran, M. & Johnson, D. (2011). Exploring literacy teach- ers’ self-efficacy beliefs: Potential sources at play. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 751-761. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.12.005 Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Cap- turing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1 Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Tea- cher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Re- search, 68, 202-248. Tucker, C. M., Porter, T., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., Ivery, P. D., Mack, C. E., & Jackson, E. S. (2005). Promoting teacher efficacy for working with culturally diverse students. Preventing School Failure, 50, 29-34. doi:10.3200/PSFL.50.1.29-34 Turner, J. C., Midgey, C., Meyer, D. K., Gheen, M., Anderman, E. M., & Kang, Y. (2002). The classroom environment and students’ reports of avoidance strategies in mathematics: A multi-method study. Jour- nal of Educational Psycho logy, 94, 88-106. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.88 Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Midgley, C. & Patrick. H. (2003). Tea- cher discourse and sixth graders’ reported affect and achievement behaviors in two mastery/high performance mathematics classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 103, 537-582. doi:10.1086/499731 Turner, J. C., & Schallert, D. L. (2001). Expectancy-value relationships of shame reactions and shame resiliency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 320-329. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.320 Vauras, M., Salonen, Lehtinen, P., & Kinnunen, R. (2009). Motivation in school from contextual and longitudinal perspectives. In M. Wos- nitza, S. A. Karabenick, A. Efklides, & P. Nenniger (Eds.), Contem- porary motivation research: From global to local perspectives (pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Hogrefe & Huber. Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories and re- search. London: Sage. Weiner, B. (2001). Intrapersonal and interpersonal theories of motive- tion from an attributional perspective. Educational Psychology Re- view, 12, 1-14. doi:10.1023/A:1009017532121 Weiner, B. (2005). Motivation from an attributional perspective and the social psychology of perceived competence. In A. J. Elliot, & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 73-84). New York: Guilford. Wentzel, K. R. (1996). Social goals and social relationships as motiva- tors of school adjustment. In J. Juvonen and K. R. Wentzel (Eds.), Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment (pp. 226-247). Cambridge: University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511571190.012 Wheatley, K. F. (2005). The case for reconceptualizing teacher efficacy research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 747-766. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.009 Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Davis, H. (2005). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and adolescent achievement. In T. Urdan, & F. Pajares (Eds.), Adoles- cence and education: Vol. 5: Self-efficacy beliefs during adolescence (pp. 117-137). Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Wolters, C. A., & Daugherty, S. G. (2007). Goal structures and teach- ers’ sense of efficacy: Their relation and association to teaching ex- perience and academic level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 181-193. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.181 Wong, C. A., & Dornbusch, S. M. (2000). Adolescent engagement in school and problems behaviors: The role of perceived teacher caring. The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associa- Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 277
G. STEPHANOU ET AL. Copyright © 2013 SciRes. 278 tion. New Orleans, LA. Yoon, J. S. (2002). Teacher characteristics as predictors of teacher- student relationships: Stress, negative affect, and self-efficacy. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 485-493. doi:10.2224/sbp.2002.30.5.485 Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 241-250. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.241
|