Predictors of Self-Efficacy for Inclusive Education: A Comparison of Canada and Germany
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated group and individual differences in beginning secondary school teachers’ self-efficacy for the inclusive classroom in Canada and Germany. This research complements previous Canadian and German research that compared the self-efficacy of pre-service teachers in each country, as well as those experiences that contributed to their self-efficacy. In the current study, 110 Canadian and 90 German beginning teachers completed the Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practice scale and the Beliefs About Learning and Teaching Questionnaire and described their experience with diverse populations. As a group, Canadian teachers were higher in their self-efficacy for implementing inclusive instruction and for engaging in collaboration with families and colleagues. The groups did not differ on self-efficacy for managing behaviour, though males felt more efficacious than females. Overall, country accounted for 18% and 11% of the variance in self-efficacy for inclusive instruction and for collaboration, respectively. Additional individual differences in self-efficacy for instruction and for managing behaviour were accounted for by participants’ experiences with diverse populations. Finally, participants’ beliefs that aligned with student-centred approaches accounted for unique variance in self-efficacy for inclusive instruction and collaboration. Results are discussed in the context of prior research and possible considerations for teacher education programs.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".