Self-efficacy for inquiry-based instruction: surviving the leap from student-teacher to an inquiry-oriented novice teacher
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Inquiry-based teaching and learning are rooted in social constructivism and focus on the different roles that students and teachers adopt compared to those adopted in traditional settings. Challenges associated with implementing inquiry as a pedagogical approach have often been associated with teachers’ motivation, especially their self-efficacy, to their previous research experience, as well as to teacher-education programs that expose future teachers to learning about and teaching using an inquiry approach. Induction into the teaching profession, therefore, is a critical period of time for novice teachers’ self-efficacy for implementing inquiry as a pedagogical approach. This longitudinal study examined senior preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for inquiry instruction and followed a sample of six new teachers during their first year of professional practice. We began by administering a survey to 244 senior preservice teachers to determine if self-efficacy for inquiry enactment differed between elementary and secondary preservice teachers and in what ways. Whereas they differed in their self-efficacy regarding engaging students in problem finding, differences were less evident in inquiry tasks describing linking knowledge. We also conducted focus groups to determine what elements from teacher-education and field experiences might explain their understanding of inquiry instruction. These interviews revealed that preservice teachers were learning more of what seemed to be a procedural introduction to inquiry. In the second phase of this study, we followed six first-year teachers as they struggled to implement inquiry in their classrooms. At the end of the first year, we administered the same survey as in phase 1 to monitor changes, if any, in self-efficacy during the transition from student-teacher to novice teacher. We conducted individual interviews at the beginning and at the end of the academic year to examine for changes in participants’ responses regarding their conceptualizations of inquiry and challenges they identified as obstacles to implementing inquiry. To triangulate our data, we also observed the six teachers in their classrooms five times over the course of one year. We used these data sources to explore first-year teachers’ alignment among self-efficacy, conceptualizations, and actual enactment of inquiry. At the end of the first year of professional practice, self-efficacy for teaching using inquiry underwent a general decline as well as the number of concepts teachers used to describe inquiry enactment during the interviews. The number of observed inquiry tasks increased and most progress was observed in tasks describing student engagement and question asking and the least in linking knowledge. Strong alignment was observed between changes in self-efficacy and enactment of inquiry as well as changes between self-efficacy and conceptualizations of inquiry enactment. Implications for teacher-education and research about self-efficacy are discussed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».