The Correlation between Professional Development and Teacher's Self-Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the correlation between professional development of the teaching staff in schools using training courses, and teacher self-efficacy. This study was conducted using the qualitative method, with 144 questionnaires given to teachers in training courses in the Pisgah Centers (Development of Teaching Staff Centers) in Israel, where the questionnaires examined the length of the training, the teacher's self-efficacy, and their standpoint regarding the professional development program. Results of the research show a distinct positive correlation between most of the teacher's standpoints and most of their feelings of self-efficacy. Thus the standpoint of the teachers on the subject of effective teaching methods of the organization predicted the feeling of self-efficacy in the objective, relationships and organizational factors. In addition, the teacher's standpoint on the subject of environment predicted the feeling of self-efficacy in the objective factor and the teacher's standpoint on the subject of ICT predicted the feeling of self-efficacy in both the objective and relationship factors. Furthermore, a definitive correlation was found between the length of the training course and the feeling of self-efficacy amongst the teachers in both the objective and organizational factors.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".