INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
Research Article

Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science Through Engineering Design Processes

Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2022, 18(4), e2291, https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12121
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The school system in Oman faces a problem in educating students in integrated science, technology, engineering and mathematics activities. This statement, in part, stems from science teachers’ preparation programs. This study was aimed to close a research gap in Oman by investigating science pre-service (trainee/student) teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for teaching science by using engineering design processes. A self-efficacy beliefs for teaching as engineering design questionnaire was developed and utilized for measuring science trainee teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for teaching science by engineering design methods. A descriptive approach with quantitative data collection was used as a design of the study. A sample of 73 students at Sultan Qaboos University participated voluntarily. The results showed that student teachers believed themselves to be highly successful in teaching science. BSc program trainee teachers had higher perceptions of themselves as highly successful in teaching science with regard to personal self-efficacy beliefs and in two scales in outcome expectations for science teaching in the new manner than did trainee teachers with a teacher qualification diploma. Regarding gender and major, there was no statistically significant difference in trainee teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. Contributions to research and future perspectives of the study findings on improving science teaching and learning are discussed.

KEYWORDS

pre-service science teachers self-efficacy beliefs engineering design process Sultanate of Oman

CITATION (APA)

Shahat, M. A., Al-Balushi, S. M., & Al-Amri, M. (2022). Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science Through Engineering Design Processes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 18(4), e2291. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12121
Harvard
Shahat, M. A., Al-Balushi, S. M., and Al-Amri, M. (2022). Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science Through Engineering Design Processes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 18(4), e2291. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12121
Vancouver
Shahat MA, Al-Balushi SM, Al-Amri M. Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science Through Engineering Design Processes. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2022;18(4):e2291. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12121
AMA
Shahat MA, Al-Balushi SM, Al-Amri M. Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science Through Engineering Design Processes. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2022;18(4), e2291. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12121
Chicago
Shahat, Mohamed A., Sulaiman M. Al-Balushi, and Mohammed Al-Amri. "Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science Through Engineering Design Processes". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2022 18 no. 4 (2022): e2291. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12121
MLA
Shahat, Mohamed A. et al. "Investigating Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science Through Engineering Design Processes". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 18, no. 4, 2022, e2291. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12121

REFERENCES

  1. Abou-Assali, M. (2014). The link between teacher professional development and student achievement: A critical view. International Journal of Bilingual & Multilingual Teachers of English, 2(01), 39-49. https://doi.org/10.12785/ijbmte/​020104
  2. Aiken, L. (1997) Questionnaires and inventories: Surveying opinions and assessing personality. John Wiley.
  3. Al-Balushi, S. M., Ambusaidi, A. K., Al-Balushi, K. A., Al-Hajri, F. H., & Al-Sinani, M. S. (2020a). Student-centred and teacher-centred science classrooms as visualized by science teachers and their supervisors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 89, 103014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.103014
  4. Al-Balushi, S. M., Emam, M. M., & Al-Abri, K. M. (2020b). Leadership and teacher education in Oman. In R. Papa (Ed.), Oxford Encyclopedia of Educational Administration (pp. 1-24). Oxford University Press.
  5. Al Barwani, T., & Bailey, J. (2016). Local challenges, global solutions: Oman’s experience with accreditation: The case of Sultan Qaboos University. In N. Michelli, R. Dada, D. Eldridge, R. Tamim, & K. Karp (Eds.), Teacher quality and teacher education quality (pp. 151-166). Routledge.
  6. Al-Qamish, M., & Kharbasha, O. (2009). Evaluation of practicum training program for special education students in the Jordanian community colleges from their perspectives and their cooperative teachers. Journal of Educational and Psychological Sciences, 10(1), 39-66. https://doi.org/10.12785/JEPS/100102
  7. Ambusaidi, A., & Al-Balushi, S. (2015). Science education in the Sultanate of Oman: Status and reform. In N. Mansour & S. Al-Shamrani (Eds.), Cultural perspectives in science education. Science education in the Arab Gulf States: Visions, sociocultural contexts and challenges (pp. 189-204). Sense Publishers.
  8. Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.3102/001318​9X11428813
  9. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
  10. Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development: Six theories of child development. JAI Press.
  11. Bandura, A. (1997a). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press.
  12. Bandura, A. (1997b). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
  13. Banko, W. (2013). Science for the next generation: Preparing for the new standards. NSTA Press.
  14. Basith, A., Syahputra, A., & Aris Ichwanto, M. (2020). Academic self-efficacy as predictor of academic achievement. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia [Indonesian Journal of Education], 9(1), 163-170. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpi-undiksha.v9i1.24403
  15. Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self- efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 485-499. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20131
  16. Bursal, M. (2010). Turkish preservice elementary teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs regarding mathematics and science teaching. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(4), 649-666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9179-6
  17. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44(6), 473-490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.001
  18. Chen, Y.‑L., Huang, L.‑F., & Wu, P.‑C. (2021). Preservice preschool teachers’ self-efficacy in and need for STEM education professional development: STEM pedagogical belief as a mediator. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(2), 137-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-020-01055-3
  19. Christian, B. J. (2017). Primary pre-service teachers’ perceptions of course related factors that enhance instructional self-efficacy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(2), 14-24. https://doi.org/10.14221/​ajte.2017v42n2.2
  20. College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University. (2021). The internal quality of instruction.
  21. Cronin-Jones, L. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: Two case studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(3), 235-250. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280305
  22. Dumas, D., Schmidt, L. C., & Alexander, P. A. (2016). Predicting creative problem solving in engineering design. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 50-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.002
  23. English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x
  24. English, L. D., & King, D. T. (2015). STEM learning through engineering design: fourth-grade students’ investigations in aerospace. International Journal of STEM Education, 2, 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0027-7
  25. Felix, A., & Harris, J. (2010). A project-based, STEM-integrated alternative energy team challenge for teachers. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 69(5), 29.
  26. FIEI. (2012). Teacher efficacy and beliefs toward STEM survey. Friday Institute for Educational Innovation.
  27. Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. SAGE.
  28. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
  29. Geng, J., Jong, M. S.‑Y., & Chai, C. S. (2019). Hong Kong teachers’ self-efficacy and concerns about STEM Education. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0414-1
  30. Gero, A., & Danino, O. (2016). High-school course on engineering design: Enhancement of students’ motivation and development of systems thinking skills. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(1A), 100-110.
  31. Griethuijsen, R. A. L. F., Eijck, M. W., Haste, H., Brok, P. J., Skinner, N. C., Mansour, N., Gencer, A. S., & BouJaoude, S. (2014). Global patterns in students’ views of science and interest in science. Research in Science Education, 45(4), 581-603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9438-6
  32. Gurcay, D. (2015). Preservice physics teachers’ beliefs regarding their teacher efficacy and classroom management. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1101-1106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.353
  33. Guzey, S. S., Moore, T. J., Harwell, M., & Moreno, M. (2016). STEM integration in middle school life science: Student learning and attitudes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(4), 550-560. https://doi.org/10.1007/​s10956-016-9612-x
  34. Haatainen, O., Turkka, J., & Aksela, M. (2021). Science teachers’ perceptions and self-efficacy beliefs related to integrated science education. Education Sciences, 11(6), 272. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060272
  35. Hammack, R., & Ivey, T. (2017). Examining elementary teachers’ engineering self-efficacy and engineering teacher efficacy. School Science and Mathematics, 117(1-2), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12205
  36. Hoeg, D. G., & Bencze, J. L. (2017). Values underpinning STEM education in the USA: An analysis of the next generation science standards. Science Education, 101(2), 278-301. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21260
  37. Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2013). How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 774-786. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032198
  38. Hoy, A. W., Hoy, W. K., & Davis, H. A. (2009). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. In K. R. Wentzel, & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Educational psychology handbook series. Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 627-653). Routledge.
  39. Hudson, P., English, L., Dawes, L., King, D., & Baker, S. (2015). Exploring links between pedagogical knowledge practices and student outcomes in STEM education for primary schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(6), 134-151. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n6.8
  40. Jason, L., & Glenwick, D. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of methodological approaches to community-based research: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/​9780190243654.001.0001
  41. Kang, E. J. S., Donovan, C., & McCarthy, M. J. (2018). Exploring elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and confidence in implementing the NGSS science and engineering practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(1), 9-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.​1415616
  42. Kitsantas, A., & Baylor, A. (2001). The impact of the instructional planning self-reflective tool on preservice teacher performance, disposition, and self-efficacy beliefs regarding systematic instructional planning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 97-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504949
  43. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 21(3), 94-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/​10402454.2005.10784518
  44. Li, Y., Huang, Z., Jiang, M., & Chang, T.-W. (2016). The effect on pupils’ science performance and problem-solving ability through Lego: An engineering design-based modeling approach. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 143-156.
  45. Malkawi, A. R., & Rababah, E. Q. (2018). Jordanian twelfth-grade science teachers’ self-reported usage of science and engineering practices in the next generation science standards. International Journal of Science Education, 40(9), 961-976. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1460695
  46. Marulcu, I., & Barnett, M. (2013). Fifth graders’ learning about simple machines through engineering design-based instruction using LEGO™ materials. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 1825-1850. https://doi.org/10.1007/​s11165-012-9335-9
  47. MoE. (2020). Vision and mission. Ministry of Education-Oman. http://havasapps.com/test/moe/?page_id=2498
  48. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/​international-results/
  49. NRC. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Research Council.
  50. NSTA. (2020). 2020 NSTA/ASTE standards for science teacher preparation. National Science Teachers Association. http://static.nsta.org/pdfs/2020NSTAStandards.pdf
  51. Oman Educational Portal. (2019). STEM Oman programme. Ministry of Education. https://home.moe.gov.om/updates/​3/show/1057
  52. Oman-2040. (2020). Oman vision 2040. https://www.2040.om/​en/oman-vision-2040/about-the-vision/
  53. Penner, D. E., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanics: A design-based modeling approach. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 429-449. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.1998.9672060
  54. Public and Private Universities in Oman. (2021). National reference document for teacher preparation programmes in Oman: A project to improve and raise the efficiency of teacher preparation in public and private universities in Oman (preliminary draft). Ministry of Education.
  55. Roehrig, G. H., Dare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E. & Wieselmann, J.R. (2021). Understanding coherence and integration in integrated STEM curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00259-8
  56. Sezgin Selcuk, G., Sahin, M., & Acikgoz, K. U. (2011). The effects of learning strategy instruction on achievement, attitude, and achievement motivation in a physics course. Research in Science Education, 41(1), 39-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9145-x
  57. Shahat, M. A., Ohle, A., & Fischer, H. E. (2017). Evaluation of a teaching unit based on a problem-solving model for seventh-grade students. Zeitschrift Für Didaktik Der Naturwissenschaften, 23(1), 205-224. https://doi.org/​10.1007/s40573-017-0068-1
  58. Shahat, M. A., Ohle-Peters, A., & Ambusaidi, A. (2022a). Teaching with texts and pictures in science classes: Teachers' attitudes and motivational orientations at different school levels. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 33(1), 107-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.​1909231
  59. Shahat, M. A., Ambusaidi, A. Treagust, D. F (2022b). Omani teachers’ perceived self-efficacy beliefs for teaching science as inquiry: Influences of gender, teaching, experience and preparation programme [Submitted for publication].
  60. Smolleck, L. D., Zembal-Saul, C., & Yoder, E. P. (2006). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preservice teachers’ self-efficacy in regard to the teaching of science as inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(2), 137-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9015-6
  61. Srikoom, W., & Faikhamta, C. (2018). Assessing in-service teachers’ self-efficacy and beliefs about STEM education. Journal of Education, 12(4), 169-186.
  62. Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., Loof, H. de, Meester, J. de, Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Dehaene, W., Deprez, J., & Cock, M. de (2018). Integrated STEM education: A systematic review of instructional practices in secondary education. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 2-12. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/85525
  63. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
  64. Webb, D. (2015). Engineering professional development: Elementary teachers’ self-efficacy and sources of self-efficacy [Ed.D. dissertation, Portland State University]. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2334
  65. Yenice, N. (2009). Search of science teachers’ teacher efficacy and self-efficacy levels relating to science teaching for some variables. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 1062-1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.​01.191
  66. Yesilyurt, E., Deniz, H. & Kaya, E. (2021). Exploring sources of engineering teaching self-efficacy for pre-service elementary teachers. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00299-8
  67. Zaher, A. A., & Damaj, I. W. (2018). Extending STEM education to engineering programs at the undergraduate college level. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 8(3), 4. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v8i3.8402

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.