An Exploration of Thai ESP Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Sources Concerning Course Development and Instruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Challenges of English for specific purposes (ESP) course development and instruction have still been reported in a number of studies. They could affect ESP teachers’ belief and confidence in their ability to do such tasks. This qualitative case study explores the development of self-efficacy, along with source information concerning challenges in course development and instruction. The study case took place in a Thai university’s institution where eight ESP teachers participated in this exploration. Through multiple interview sessions, they revealed source information and different ways to develop self-efficacy. Findings included that cognitive and enactive mastery experience were the most influential sources derived from their educational background and success in implementing pedagogical elements in their actual practices. Vicarious experience and verbal persuasion appeared to be scant due to the underlying contextual factors related to the institutional policies explored in the case. Physiological and emotional states proved to be less influential and acted as supplementary sources of influence. The current study also highlights the influence of contextual factors’ shaping sources of self-efficacy and the development. Indeed, the lack of collaborative practices diminished vicarious experience and verbal persuasion so that individual teachers relied on their knowledge and experience as mastery experience to be efficacious. Research implications focus on policies where collaborative culture development is included. A suggested plan is to employ professional learning communities (PLC) to develop internal collaboration (e.g., sharing knowledge and practices to improve self-efficacy sources and development).  
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".