Reflective Teaching And Self-Efficacy Beliefs: Exploring Relationships In The Context Of Teaching EFL In Iran
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reports on a study that explored the relationship between reflective teaching and teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. Two questionnaires, the English Language Teaching Reflection Inventory (Akbari, Behzadpoor, & Dadvand, 2010) and Teachers’ Efficacy Beliefs System-Self (TEBS-Self) (Dellinger, Bobbett, Olivier, & Ellett, 2008), were distributed among 225 Iranian EFL (English as a Foreign Language) teachers. Pearson product-moment correlation analysis showed a significant positive relationship between the general factors of teacher reflectiveness and self-efficacy. Standard multiple regression identified Efficacy for Learner Engagement as the only predictor of teacher reflectiveness and Meta-Cognitive Reflection as the only predictor of teacher self-efficacy. Finally, the interconnections between the components of the two constructs were investigated using Structural Equation Modelling. While most of the components of both variables were significantly interrelated, some were not, and Cognitive Reflection and Efficacy for Classroom Management had a negative relationship. The results are discussed in light of the literature, and suggestions for further research are presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it