Pre-service science teachers’ self-efficacy: The role of attitude,anxiety and locus of control

Abstract

This study examined the relationships between pre-service science teachers’ teaching self-efficacy, locus of control, attitude towards science teaching and teaching anxiety. A conceptual model of these relationships was examined using data collected from 356 pre-service elementary science teachers. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, zero-order correlations and path analysis. Results showed that attitude towards science teaching was linked positively and teaching anxiety negatively to pre-service science teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy. Additionally, pre-service science teachers’ locus of control was found to be related positively to attitude towards science teaching and related negatively to science teaching anxiety. Finally, pre-service science teachers’ attitude towards science teaching had a negative effect on science teaching anxiety. These results point to the importance of positive role modelling and increased teaching practice in pre-service science teacher education to emphasise the effect of teachers’ attitudes and efforts on student performance.

Keywords

Pre-service science teachers self-efficacy attitude anxiety locus of control teaching

Introduction

Science is an essential learning area in curriculum and instruction from early grades to high school worldwide. International student achievement tests such as PISA and TIMSS give rise to discussions about the quality of national education programs, as education stakeholders look for ways of improving their educational systems. In Turkey, for example students’ low scores on international achievement tests (e.g. PISA, 2006, 2009, 2012; TIMSS, 1999, 2007) prompted the Ministry of National Education (MONE) to comprehensively review the curriculum and develop a new science curriculum that places greater emphasis on scientific literacy in primary and middle school (MONE, 2013). Additionally, Turkey’s Higher Education Council (YÖK, 2007) restructured the teacher-education program, revising course contents and adding new courses in order to train qualified and effective science teachers. A similar situation occurred in Australia, where the Australian Ministry of Education conducted a review of teacher-education programs to ascertain whether or not they provided teachers with the practical skills needed for the classroom in order to ensure the development of a pool of effective science teachers (Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group, 2014).

Affective development is a necessary component of teacher development and one of the key features of teaching effectiveness. In order to monitor teacher development and teaching effectiveness, an understanding of teachers’ affective development is required. Self-efficacy of science teachers, locus of control, attitude towards science teaching and teaching anxiety are considered affective attributes of teachers that influence their teaching practice; therefore, investigating these attributes should begin as early as the pre-service years.

Teacher effectiveness has been shown to be one of the significant factors in student learning (Mendro, Jordan, Gomez, Anderson, & Bembry, 1998; Sanders & Rivers, 1996). Teacher characteristics such as teaching self-efficacy, attitudes toward teaching, teaching anxiety and locus of control affect teacher effectiveness in various ways. Below, each of these constructs is discussed separately first followed by considerations regarding the interrelationships among these constructs

Teaching self-efficacy

Self-efficacy is a key construct within the social cognitive theory and defined as ‘people’s judgments of their capabilities to organise and execute courses of action required to attain designed types of performances’ (Bandura, 1986, p. 391). Self-efficacy influences not only how individuals feel, think, motivate themselves, and behave (Pajares, 1997) but also the selection of activities, effort and persistence (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Since people select and participate in an activity based on their belief that they are able to accomplish the task, self-efficacy is an important mediator of all types of behaviour.

Given the important role of teachers’ self-efficacy on their practice, it is crucial in the teaching context. Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk-Hoy, and Hoy (1998) defined teacher self-efficacy as ‘a teacher’s belief in his or her own capability to organise and execute courses of action required to successfully accomplish a specific teaching task in a particular context’ (p. 233). According to their proposed model, self-efficacy is developed by the resultant consequences arising from the interaction between the evaluation of the factors that make teaching difficult – analysis of teaching task and its context – and the evaluation of self-perceptions of personal teaching capabilities – analysis of teaching competence. Research on teacher self-efficacy revealed that teacher self-efficacy is one of the teacher characteristics that has been significantly linked to teaching behaviour and performance (Riggs et al., 1994), as well as instructional strategies (Holzberger, Philipp, & Kunter, 2013; Morris-Rothschild & Brassard, 2006; Ross, 1998; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998; Wolters & Daugherty, 2007). Indeed, teachers with a high sense of efficacy implement various teaching methods (Weiner, 2003) and try different materials and approaches (Cousins & Walker, 2000; Weiner, 2003). They show greater commitment to teaching (Coladarci, 1992) and desire to improve their teaching (Weiner, 2003) than teachers with lower self-efficacy. In addition, teachers with a high sense of efficacy work with difficult students longer and are more tolerant of student errors (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Fuchs, Fuchs, & Bishop, 1992; Gibson & Dembo, 1984). On the other hand, teachers with a low sense of efficacy tend to feel disenchanted with teaching, show lower job satisfaction (Ashton, 1984; Caprara, Barbaranelli, Steca, & Malone, 2006; Klassen et al., 2009; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998), and get burned out sooner (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2014) than teachers with higher self-efficacy. Thus, teacher self-efficacy is significantly related to student achievement (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Bandura, 1993; Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk-Hoy, 2000; Hoy, Sweetland, & Smith, 2002), student motivation (Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989) as well as teacher motivation (Senler & Sungur-Vural, 2013), and teacher success (Ham, Duyar, & Gumus, 2015). Given the centrality of this concept warrants the examination of factors associated with teaching self-efficacy.

Teacher locus of control

The other characteristic of an effective teacher is locus of control, a concept developed by Rotter (1966) based on the social-cognitive theory. Similar to self-efficacy, locus of control is a cognitive-behavioural attribute that refers to what an individual believes with regard to control over life events. Locus of control is conceptualised on two dimensions, namely internal locus of control and external locus of control. Individuals with an internal locus of control believe that the outcomes of events are a result of their own actions. They take responsibility for and attribute results to their own efforts and abilities, and, thus, they believe they have the ability to change things. On the other hand, individuals with an external locus of control believe that the outcomes of events are the results of external factors such as luck, chance, fate and powerful others. As they believe they have no control over these factors, they tend to blame others and believe that personal effort is unlikely to make a difference to outcomes. While internal locus of control is associated with handling, external locus of control is associated with defending (Vickers, Conway, & Haight, 1983).

Teacher locus of control is defined as teachers’ perceptions of personal control over or responsibilities for student performance (Rose & Medway, 1981). As it determines teachers’ teaching practices and motivation in classroom, considerable research has been undertaken on teacher locus of control. Findings of this research suggest that teacher locus of control is related to student achievement (Murray & Stabler, 1974; Weiner, 1985), students’ perception of classroom (Sadowski, Blackwell, & Willard, 1986; Sadowski & Woodward, 1983) as well as their psychological empowerment (Wang, Zhang, & Jackson, 2013), motivation (Anderson, Hattie, & Hamilton, 2005; Czubaj, 1996), anxiety (Pigge & Marso, 1990; Smith, 1997), self-efficacy (Parkay, Grenwood, Olenjik, & Proller, 1988), self-concept (Thomson & Handley, 1990), job attitude (Bedel, 2008; Cheng, 1994; Smith, 1997), job satisfaction (Bein, Anderson, & Maes, 1990; Sünbül, 2003), tenure (Sadowski, 1993; Sherman & Giles, 1981), and teaching performance (Sadowski & Woodward, 1983; Sadowski et al., 1986). Smith (1997) stated that internal locus of control orientated pre-service teachers tend to be less anxious, more successful and more reflective. Additionally, external locus of control orientated pre-service teachers has more negative attitudes toward the teaching profession (Bedel, 2008). Thus, in the present study, it was proposed that teacher locus of control is directly as well as indirectly linked to teaching self-efficacy through its effect on attitude toward teaching and teaching anxiety.

Teaching anxiety

Teaching anxiety is defined as feelings which restrain teachers from being able to start, continue or finish a teaching task (Thomas, 2006) and can affect performances and effectiveness. Teachers with higher anxiety prefer teacher-directed instruction (Czerniak & Haney, 1998), tend to avoid trying new teaching methods (Thomas, 2006), and get burned out sooner (Byrne, 1994). Anxious teachers also make their students anxious (Doyal & Forsyth, 1973 as cited in Pigge & Marso, 1991) and perform poorly (Koran & Koran, 1981). Based on the Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory, anxiety is negatively linked to self-efficacy due to thoughts of possible failure. Indeed, this relationship was demonstrated in the studies on various subjects (Rezaei & Zamani-Miandashti, 2013; Schwarzer, Bäßler, Kwiatek, Schröder, & Zhang, 1997; Shelton & Mallinckrodt, 1991), especially in chemistry education (Kurbanoglu & Akin, 2010, 2012). In the light of this evidence, teaching anxiety was hypothesised to be associated with teaching self-efficacy directly in this study.

Attitudes towards science teaching

In general, an individual’s attitude towards his or her profession has an impact on his or her performance. In an educational context, a teacher’s attitude towards teaching a subject or course influences how s/he teaches (Turkmen, 2013). Moreover, a teacher’s attitude is related not only to his or her motivation and enthusiasm, but also to his or her students’ attitudes and achievements (Pigge & Marso, 1997). Whereas a number of studies have focussed on student attitudes towards science (e.g. George, 2000; Koballa & Crawley, 1985; Koksal & Berberoglu, 2014; Ornstein, 2006), pre-service teachers (e.g. Cartwright & Atwood, 2014; Chin, 2005; Minger & Simpson, 2006), teachers (Manning, Esler, & Baird, 1982; Van Aalderen-Smeets, Walma Van Der Molen, & Asma, 2012), and parents (e.g. George & Kaplan, 1998; Perera, 2014), fewer studies have been conducted on attitudes towards science teaching. It is also noteworthy that while some titles suggested that studies focussed on attitude towards science teaching they actually used scales which measured attitude towards science. Nevertheless, studies of teachers’ attitudes towards science teaching have shown that pre-service teachers have a positive attitude towards science teaching (Tekkaya, Çakıroğlu, & Özkan 2002; Türkmen, 2002, 2008) and that methodology courses contribute to improving this attitude (Bayraktar, 2009; Turkmen, 2007). Given that other studies have uncovered a relationship between attitude and anxiety (Hong & Koh, 2002; Kargar, Tarmizi, & Bayat, 2010; Kurbanoglu & Akin, 2010, 2012), a relationship between attitude towards science teaching and teaching anxiety was proposed in the study described in this article. Furthermore, although the literature is inconclusive regarding a relationship between attitude towards science teaching and teaching self-efficacy, this study hypothesised a positive relation between these two variables.

Taking into consideration this body of research, as the crucial factors influencing teachers’ practices, these affective constructs need to be examined holistically. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to examine the relationships among pre-service science teachers’ teaching self-efficacy, locus of control, attitude towards science teaching, and by proposing and testing a conceptual model. More specifically, the present study addresses the following research questions:

Does locus of control affect pre-service science teachers’ attitude towards science teaching, teaching anxiety, and teaching self-efficacy?

Does attitude towards science teaching affect pre-service science teachers’ teaching anxiety and teaching self-efficacy?

Does teaching anxiety affect pre-service science teachers’ teaching self-efficacy?

The conceptual model is displayed in Figure 1 in which arrows indicate paths which hypothesise direct effects – for example of locus of control on teaching anxiety – as well as indirect effects – for example of locus of control on self-efficacy through teaching anxiety. As suggested by the abovementioned studies (e.g. Bedel, 2008), a path was proposed from locus of control to attitude towards science teaching. Related literature (e.g. Smith, 1997) also suggested a negative relationship between locus of control and anxiety. Therefore, a path was proposed from locus of control to teaching anxiety. A path was also specified from locus of control to teaching self-efficacy based on the related studies (e.g. Parkay et al., 1988). Moreover, drawing on previous studies (e.g. Bandura, 1986), a path was proposed from teaching anxiety to teaching self-efficacy. Although the relationship between attitude towards science teaching and teaching self-efficacy remains inconclusive, a path was proposed between these two variables. Finally, a path was specified from attitude towards science teaching to teaching anxiety, given that a relationship between these two variables has been indicated by previous studies (e.g. Hong & Koh, 2002). It is hoped that the findings of this study will give insights to teacher preparation program planners about how to train pre-service science teachers to become effective teachers, and to improve science education in the future.

Figure 1.

Path diagram of the proposed model of factors related to science teacher self-efficacy. Loc: locus of control; att: attitude towards science teaching; anx: teaching anxiety; self.eff: science teaching self-efficacy.

Methodology

Participants

A total number of 356 (153 males and 203 females, mean age = 22.53 years) pre-service teaching students who were training to become primary school science teachers and who were in their last year of university participated in the study from five universities in Turkey. All of the universities involved in the study were public universities that followed the same teacher education program, offered by the Higher Education Council. During the four years, pre-service elementary science teachers are required to complete several courses including mathematics, earth science, physics, chemistry, and biology, as well as special subject training and pedagogy.

Instruments

The instruments used for data collection are described below. Table 1 presents the sample items for each instrument. Permission for the use of all instruments and scales was obtained from the relevant sources.

Table 1.

Sample items of the data collection instruments.

Instruments	Sample items
The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument Form B	I will not be very effective in monitoring science experiments.
The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument Form B	I will typically be able to answer students’ science questions.
The Locus of Control Scale for Teachers	Once a child gets headed in the wrong direction, it is not up to me to straighten him or her out.
The Locus of Control Scale for Teachers	I believe I can help each student in my classes to experience success and self worth in some area.
The Science Teaching Attitude Scale	I would be interested in working in an experimental science curriculum.
The Science Teaching Attitude Scale	Science would be one of my preferred subjects to teach if given a choice.
Teaching Anxiety Scale	I feel uncomfortable when talking about teaching some science subjects.
Teaching Anxiety Scale	I think I will feel helpless when teaching some science subjects.

The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument Form B. The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument Form B (STEBI-B) (Enochs & Riggs, 1990) was designed to measure self-efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers regarding science teaching. It consists of 23 items in three sub-scales, namely Personal Science Teaching Efficacy (PSTE) and Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy (STOE). It is a five-point Likert type scale and response categories range from 5 – strongly agree to 1 – strongly disagree. The STEBI-B was translated and adapted into Turkish by Tekkaya et al. (2002). The reliabilities in terms of Cronbach’s alpha of the PSTE and the STOE were 0.86 and 0.79, respectively (Tekkaya et al., 2002). Since the current study did not focus on STOE, the STOE subscale was omitted. The reliability in terms of Cronbach’s alpha of the PSTE was 0.82 in the present study.

The Locus of Control Scale for Teachers. The Locus of Control Scale for Teachers (LCST) (Sadowski, Taylor, Woodward, Peacher, & Martin, 1982) was used to assess pre-service science teachers’ locus of control. This 20-item scale is a self-report instrument based on Rotter’s theoretical foundations on locus of control to measure teachers’ beliefs that their own behaviours influence student performance and classroom events. Internal and external orientations consist of an equal number of items. For each item, the participants were asked to rate themselves on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 5 – completely agree to 1 – never agree. High scores on the scale indicate internal locus of control. The scale was translated and adapted into Turkish by Bulus (2011). The reliability of that scale was reported by Bulus (2011) as α = 0.82. The reliability for this scale in the current study was α = 0.72 for the present study.

The Science Teaching Attitude Scale. The Science Teaching Attitude Scale (Thompson & Shrigley, 1986) was designed to measure pre-service teachers’ attitude towards science teaching. It consists of 22 items in a five-point Likert scale format. Response categories were accomplished by assigning a score through 5 – strongly agree to 1 – strongly disagree. The science teaching attitude scale was translated and adapted into Turkish by Tekkaya et al. (2002). The reliability of the Turkish version of the scale in terms of Cronbach’s alpha was 0.83 (Tekkaya et al., 2002). The reliability for this scale in the current study was α = 0.82.

Teaching Anxiety Scale. The Teaching Anxiety Scale (Peker, 2006) was originally developed to measure pre-service teachers’ mathematics teaching anxiety. It is a 23-item-scale with five-point Likert type ranging from 5 – completely agree to 1 – never agree. The reliability of the scale in terms of Cronbach’s alpha was reported as 0.91 (Peker, 2006). Permission was granted by the researcher who developed the original scale to adapt it from the original focus on mathematics to science for the current study. The reliability for this scale in the current study was α = 0.94.

Data analysis

Path analysis is a form of structural equation modelling (SEM) that examines direct and indirect relationships between variables (Kline, 2011). Testing a proposed model with a set of specified relationships among variables by relying on ‘theoretical, empirical and common-sense knowledge of a problem’ is recommended (Cook & Campbell, 1979, p. 307). To examine the hypothesised model, AMOS 20 was used in this study to conduct path analysis and examine the relationships among pre-service science teachers’ teaching self-efficacy, locus of control, attitude towards science teaching and science teaching anxiety.

Results

Descriptive statistics

Descriptive statistics for the scores of PSTE Subscale, LCST, Science Teaching Attitude Scale, and Teaching Anxiety Scale in the Turkish context are displayed in Table 2. As can be seen, pre-service science teachers had high levels of science teaching self-efficacy (M = 3.89, SD = 0.49), implying that pre-service science teachers believed they were able to teach science effectively and can affect student achievement. The high mean score for attitudes toward science teaching (M = 3.69, SD = 0.56) indicated that pre-service science teachers had a positive attitude towards science teaching, whereas the relatively low mean score for science teaching anxiety (M = 2.04, SD = 0.56) suggested that pre-service science teachers did not worry much about teaching. Finally, the mean score for locus of control was relatively high (M = 4.01, SD = 0.41), implying that pre-service science teachers were likely to have an internal locus-of-control.

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics.

	M	SD
Science teaching self-efficacy	3.89	0.49
Locus of control	4.01	0.41
Attitude towards science teaching	3.69	0.36
Teaching anxiety about science	2.04	0.56

Zero-order correlations among pre-service science teacher science teaching self-efficacy, locus of control, attitude towards science teaching, and science teaching anxiety

A preliminary analysis was conducted that examined bivariate relationships among pre-service science teacher science self-efficacy (self), locus of control (loc), attitude towards science teaching (att), and science teaching anxiety (anx) (Table 3).

Table 3.

Zero-order correlations.

	Self-eff	Loc	Att	Anx
Self-eff	1
Loc	0.49**	1
Att	0.73**	0.57**	1
Anx	−0.77**	−0.53**	−0.73**	1

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

The highest positive correlation coefficient emerged between science teaching self-efficacy and attitude towards science teaching (r = 0.73) while the lowest correlation was observed between science teaching self-efficacy and locus of control (r = 0.49). The highest negative correlation was found between science teaching self-efficacy and science teaching anxiety (r = − 0.77) and the lowest negative between locus of control and science teaching anxiety (r = −0.53).

Path analysis

In order to examine the relationships among pre-service science teacher science teaching self-efficacy, locus of control, attitude towards science teaching, and science teaching anxiety, a conceptual model (Figure 1) was proposed containing all the variables as observed variables and analysed by path analysis utilising AMOS 20. The resulting fit indices did not indicate a perfect fit. Modification indexes suggested locus of control to be unrelated to teaching self-efficacy. This evidence supported those studies (e.g. Saracaloğlu, Certel, Varol, & Bahadır, 2012) that found no relationship between locus of control and self-efficacy rather than studies which reported a link between those concepts (e.g. Parkay et al., 1988). Hence, the path between these variables was removed. The goodness-of-fit measures (Hu & Bentler, 1999; Schumacker & Lomax, 1996) indicated a good fit of the data to the model (χ²/df = 0.33, RMSEA = 0.00, TLI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00, CFI = 1.00). The final model which shows the coefficients for the significant paths is presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Path diagram of the final model of factors related to science teaching self-efficacy. Loc: locus of control; att: attitude towards science teaching; anx: teaching anxiety; self.eff: science teaching self-efficacy.

As can be seen in Figure 2 and Table 4, locus of control (β = 0.57) had a significant direct effect on attitude towards science teaching resulting in explaining 33 per cent of variance in pre-service science teacher’s attitude towards science teaching. Together, locus of control and attitude towards science teaching explained 54 per cent of variance in pre-service teachers’ science teaching anxiety with attitude towards science teaching (β = −0.63) having a stronger direct effect on anxiety than locus of control (β = −0.17). Locus of control, in addition, had an indirect effect on science teaching anxiety through attitudes of β = −0.36 (=0.57*−0.63). Finally, attitude towards teaching, science teaching anxiety and locus of control together accounted for 65 per cent of variance in science teaching self-efficacy. Here, science teaching anxiety (β = −0.52) had a stronger direct effect than attitude towards science teaching (β = 0.35) on science teaching self-efficacy. Moreover, attitude towards science teaching had an indirect effect of β = 0.33 (−0.63 × −0.52) on teaching self-efficacy through teaching anxiety. Likewise, locus of control had an indirect effect on science teaching self-efficacy through attitude towards science teaching and science teaching anxiety β = 0.48 ((0.57 × 0.35) + (−0.17 × −0.52) + (0.57 × −0.63 × −0.52)).

Table 4.

Direct, indirect, and total effects.

Effect on	Effect of	Direct	Indirect	Total
Att (R²= 0.33)	Loc	0.57	—	0.57
Anx (R²= .54)	Loc	−0.17	−0.36	−0.53
Anx (R²= .54)	Att	−0.63	—	−0.63
Self-eff (R² = .65)	Loc	—	0.48	0.48
Self-eff (R² = .65)	Att	0.35	0.33	0.68
	Anx	−0.52	—	−0.52

Discussion

The main purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationships among the teaching self-efficacy, locus of control, attitude towards science teaching and science teaching anxiety of pre-service science teachers. It was predicted that both locus of control and attitude towards science teaching would be positively linked to teaching self-efficacy.

Although no direct association was found between locus of control and science teaching self-efficacy, attitude towards science teaching was found to be positively associated with science teaching self-efficacy. This finding that pre-service science teachers with a positive attitude towards science teaching also believe they have the ability to teach science effectively. Similarly, Ramey-Gassert, Shroyer, and Staver (1996) demonstrated that a belief in science teaching efficacy correlated positively with attitude towards science and choosing to teach science. Sarikaya (2004) and Velthuis (2014) also showed that attitude towards science teaching was a significant factor in the belief of science teaching efficacy.

The present study confirmed the hypothesised relationship that science teaching anxiety is negatively associated with science teaching self-efficacy. In other words, pre-service teachers who are anxious about teaching also have a lack of confidence in their ability to teach science effectively.

Likewise, the hypothesised positive effect of locus of control on attitude towards science teaching was confirmed. In other words, pre-service science teachers who believe they are responsible for student performance and that student-level outcomes are related to their own effort and ability are likely to have a positive attitude towards science teaching. This is consistent with the findings of Haury (1989).

Concerning the relationship between locus of control and science teaching anxiety, locus of control was found to be negatively associated with science teaching anxiety. This finding is in agreement with Marso and Pigge (1998), and suggests that pre-service science teachers with a greater internal locus of control experience less teaching anxiety. Indeed, pre-service science teachers who believe in their abilities to control student learning and their learning environment tend to be more comfortable with teaching.

The results of the present study also showed attitude towards science teaching to be negatively linked to science teaching anxiety. This is in line with the results of earlier studies (Kurbanoglu & Akin, 2010, 2012) and implies that pre-service science teachers with a negative attitude towards science teaching are likely to be more anxious about science teaching.

The findings of the present study have some practical implications for science teacher education programs. Educating pre-service science teachers with a high degree of self-efficacy requires developing their attitudes towards science teaching in a positive way. Since the related literature suggests that pre-service science teachers’ attitudes towards teaching are linked to their knowledge and skill levels (Merwin & DiVesta, 1959 as cited in Pigge & Marso, 1986), designing content-knowledge and pedagogy courses in a way that will assist pre-service science teachers in developing their knowledge and skills in pedagogy and content-knowledge of science teaching should also help to promote positive attitudes. When planning courses and instructional methods, teacher educators should also consider the relationship between science teaching methodology and the attitudes of pre-service teachers towards teaching (Turkmen, 2007). Additionally, research conducted in Australia by Hurst and Cooke (2014) found that professional learning and social constructivist teaching style are beneficial in developing pre-service teachers’ positive attitudes. Thus, the courses in teacher education programs should be directed in this way.

Given the effect of role models on attitudes (Taylor, Peplau, & Sears, 2006), pre-service science teachers’ attitudes towards science teaching may also be improved by observing peers, mentor-teachers, and teacher-educators who exhibit positive attitudes. In addition, considering that teaching experience has been found to improve attitudes towards teaching as well as decrease teaching anxiety (West, Watson, Thompson, & Parke, 1993), pre-service science teachers should be given more opportunities to teach in real classroom settings as part of teaching-practice courses. Indeed, Pigge and Marso (1991) revealed that increasing pre-service teachers’ knowledge and skills related to teaching through teaching practice led to a decrease in teaching anxiety. Such a decrease in teaching anxiety should, in turn, increase the self-efficacy of pre-service science teachers.

Regarding locus of control, teacher educators can develop the internal locus of control of pre-service teachers by designing their courses so that pre-service science teachers are able to realise the link between their own efforts and their future students’ accomplishments. This can also help to improve the teaching efficacy of pre-service science teachers. As suggested by Abaan, Duygulu, and Ugur (2012) peer mentoring can also be used to develop the internal locus of control of pre-service science teachers.

A few potential limitations of the current study should be noted while interpreting the results. One limitation is connected with the use of self-reported data as the sole source of information. In general, participants tend to respond in socially desirable ways, which can lead to bias. In order to verify the consistency and accuracy of findings, future studies may collect qualitative data to complement quantitative findings and provide a more in-depth understanding of the observed relationships. Another limitation relates to the type of sample from which data were analysed. Participants of this study were limited to pre-service science teachers in their last year at selected universities. In order to identify differences in variables across grade levels, this study may be replicated using pre-service science teachers in all four years of university. Moreover, longitudinal studies may provide further insights on this important topic.

Still, the findings of the current study in terms of locus of control, attitude towards science teaching and science teaching anxiety should go a long way to improving the teacher self-efficacy through strengthening locus of control and attitude towards science teaching as well as decreasing science teaching anxiety, and ultimate result in increases in students’ performance in science.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Abaan

Duygulu

Ugur

(2012) Peer mentoring: A way of developing internal locus of control to empower new nursing students. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Hemşirelik Dergisi 19: 24–35.

Anderson

Hattie

Hamilton

R. J.

(2005) Locus of control, self-efficacy, and motivation in different schools: Is moderation the key to success? Educational Psychology 25: 517.

Ashton

P. T.

(1984) Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education 35: 28–32.

Ashton

P. T.

Webb

R. B.

(1986) Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement, New York, NY: Longman.

Bandura

(1986) Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura

(1993) Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist 28: 117–148.

Bayraktar

(2009) Pre-service primary teachers’ science teaching efficacy beliefs and attitudes toward science: The effect of a science methods course. International Journal of Learning 16: 383–396.

Bedel

E. F.

(2008) Interactions among attitudes toward teaching and personality constructs in early childhood preservice teachers. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education 4: 31–48.

Bein

Anderson

D. E.

Maes

W. R.

(1990) Teacher locus of control and job satisfaction. Educational Research Quarterly 14: 7–10.

10.

Bulus

(2011) Goal orientations, locus of control and academic achievement in prospective teachers: An individual differences perspective. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 11: 540–546.

11.

Byrne

B. M.

(1994) Testing for the factorial validity, replication, and invariance of a measuring instrument: A paradigmatic application based on the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research 29: 289–311.

12.

Caprara

G. V.

Barbaranelli

P. S.

Steca

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: 473–490.

13.

Cartwright

T. J.

Atwood

(2014) Elementary pre-service teachers’ response-shift bias: Self-efficacy and attitudes toward science. International Journal of Science Education 36: 2421–2437.

14.

Cheng

Y. C.

(1994) Locus of control as an indicator of Hong Kong teachers’ job attitudes and perceptions of organizational characteristics. Journal of Educational Research 87: 180–188.

15.

Chin

(2005) First year Pre service Teachers in Taiwan—Do they enter the teacher program with satisfactory scientific literacy and attitudes toward science? International Journal of Science Education 27: 1549–1570.

16.

Coladarci

(1992) Teachers’ sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching. Journal of Experimental Education 60: 323–337.

17.

Cook

T. D.

Campbell

D. T.

(1979) Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

18.

Cousins

J. B.

Walker

C. A.

(2000) Predictors of educators’ valuing of systemic inquiry in schools. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. Special Issue, 25–53.

19.

Czerniak

C. M.

Haney

J. J.

(1998) The effect of collaborative concept mapping on elementary preservice teachers’ anxiety, efficacy, and achievement in physical science. Journal of Science Teacher Education 9: 303–320.

20.

Czubaj

(1996) Maintaining teacher motivation. Education 116: 372–378.

21.

Doyal

G. T.

Forsyth

R. A.

(1973) Relationship between teacher and student anxiety levels. Psychology in the Schools 12: 231–223.

22.

Enochs

L. G.

Riggs

I. M.

(1990) Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: A preservice elementary scale. School Science and Mathematics 90: 695–706.

23.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Bishop

(1992) Instructional adaptation for students at risk. Journal of Educational Research 86: 70–84.

24.

George

(2000) Measuring change in students’ attitudes toward science over time: An application of latent variable growth modeling. Journal of Science Education and Technology 9: 213–225.

25.

George

Kaplan

(1998) A structural model of parents and teacher influences on science attitudes of eight graders: Evidences from NELS: 88. Science Education 82: 93–109.

26.

Gibson

Dembo

M. H.

(1984) Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology 76: 569–582.

27.

Goddard

R. D.

Hoy

W. K.

Woolfolk Hoy

(2000) Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and effect on student achievement. American Education Research Journal 37: 479–507.

28.

Ham

Duyar

Gumus

(2015) Agreement of self-other perceptions matters: Analyzing the effectiveness of principal leadership through multi-source assessment. Australian Journal of Education 59: 225–246.

29.

Haury

(1989) The contribution of science locus of control orientation to expressions of attitude toward science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 26: 503–517.

30.

Holzberger

Philipp

Kunter

(2013) How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 105: 774–786.

31.

Hong

K. S.

Koh

C. K.

(2002) Computer anxiety and attitudes toward computers among rural secondary school teachers: A Malaysian perspective. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 35: 27–48.

32.

Hoy

W. K.

Sweetland

S. R.

Smith

P. A.

(2002) Toward an organizational model of achievement in high schools: The significance of collective efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly 38: 77–93.

33.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1995) Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle

R. H.

(ed.) Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 76–99.

34.

Hurst

Cooke

(2014) Seeking a balance: Helping pre-service teachers develop positive attitudes towards mathematics as they develop competency. Open Journal of Social Sciences 2: 210–216.

35.

Kargar

Tarmizi

R. A.

Bayat

(2010) Relationship between mathematical thinking, mathematics anxiety and mathematics attitudes among university students. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 8: 537–542.

36.

Klassen

R. M.

Bong

Usher

E. L.

Chong

W. H.

Huan

V. S.

Wong

I. Y. F.

Georgiou

(2009) Exploring the validity of the teachers’ self-efficacy scale in five countries. Contemporary Educational Psychology 34: 67–76.

37.

Kline

R. B.

(2011) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

38.

Koballa

R. T.

Crawley

E. F.

(1985) The influence of attitude on science teaching and learning. School Science and Mathematics 85: 222–232.

39.

Koksal

Berberoglu

(2014) The effect of guided-inquiry instruction on 6th grade Turkish students’ achievement, science process skills, and attitudes toward science. International Journal of Science Education 36: 66–78.

40.

Koran

Jr Koran

(1981) The effects of teacher anxiety and modeling on the acquisition of a science teaching skill and concomitant student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 18: 361–370.

41.

Kurbanoglu

N. İ.

Akın

(2010) The relationships between university students’ chemistry laboratory anxiety, attitudes, and self-efficacy beliefs. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 35: 48–59.

42.

Kurbanoglu

N. İ.

Akın

(2012) The relationships between university students’ organic chemistry anxiety, chemistry attitudes, and self-efficacy: A structural equation model. Journal of Baltic Science Education 11: 347–356.

43.

Manning

P. C.

Esler

W. K.

Baird

J. R.

(1982) How much elementary science is really being taught? Science and Children 19: 40–41.

44.

Marso, R. N., & Pigge, F. L. (1998). A longitudinal study of relationships between attitude toward teaching, anxiety about teaching, self-perceived effectiveness, and attrition from teaching. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators, Dallas, TX.

45.

Mendro, R., Jordan, H., Gomez, E., Anderson, M., & Bembry, K. (1998). An application of multiple linear regression in determining longitudinal teacher effectiveness. Paper presented at the 1998 Annual Meeting of the AERA, San Diego, CA.

46.

Merwin

J. C.

DiVesta

F. J.

(1959) The study of need theory and career choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology 6: 302–308.

47.

Midgley

Feldlaufer

Eccles

J. S.

(1989) Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child Development 60: 981–992.

48.

Minger

M. A.

Simpson

(2006) The impact of a standards-based science course for preservice elementary teachers on teacher attitudes toward science teaching. Journal of Elementary Science Education 18: 49–60.

49.

Ministry of National Education

[MONE]

(2013) İlköğretim kurumları fen bilimleri dersi (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) öğretim programı. [Elementary school science curriculum (grades 3–8)]. Ankara, Turkey: MONE.

50.

Morris-Rothschild

Brassard

M. R.

(2006) Teachers’ conflict management styles: The role of attachment styles and classroom management efficacy. Journal of School Psychology 44: 105–121.

51.

Murray

Staebler

(1974) Teachers’ locus of control and student achievement gains. Journal of School Psychology 12: 305–309.

52.

Ornstein

(2006) The Frequency of hands-on experimentation and student attitudes toward science: A statistically significant relation. Journal of Science Education and Technology 15(3–4): 285–297.

53.

Pajares

(1997) Current directions in self-efficacy research. In: Maehr

M. L.

Pintrich

P. R.

(eds) Advances in motivation and achievement Vol. 10, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 1–49.

54.

Parkay

F. W.

Greenwood

Olejnik

Proller

(1988) A study of the relationships among teacher efficacy, locus of control, and stress. Journal of Research and Development in Education 21: 13–22.

55.

Peker

(2006) Matematik ogretmeye yonelik kaygi olceginin gelistirilmesi. Egitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama 9: 73–92.

56.

Perera

L. H.

(2014) Parents’ attitudes towards science and their children’s science achievement. International Journal of Science Education 36: 3021–3041.

57.

Pigge, F. L., & Marso, R. N. (1986, April). Relationships between student characteristics and changes in attitudes, concerns, anxieties and confidence about teaching during teacher preparation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

58.

Pigge, F. L., & Marso, R. N. (1990, October). The influence of personality type, locus of control and personal attributes upon changes in anxiety, attitude, and confidence of prospective teachers during training. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

59.

Pigge, F. L., & Marso, R. N. (1991, February). Relationships between teachers’ academic and personality attributes and changes in teaching anxiety during training and early teaching. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators, New Orleans, LA.

60.

Pigge, F. L, & Marso, R. N. (1997, March). Development of attitude toward teaching career in a longitudinal sample of teacher candidates progressing through preparation and five years of teaching. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

61.

Pintrich

P. R.

Schunk

D. H.

(2002) Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications, Columbus, OH: Merrill.

62.

PISA Reports (2006). Retrieved from PISA Turkey. http://pisa.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/PISA2006-Ulusal-Nihai-Rapor.pdf.

63.

PISA Reports (2009). Retrieved from PISA Turkey. http://pisa.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/PISA-2009-Ulusal-On-Rapor.pdf.

64.

PISA Reports (2012). Retrieved from PISA Turkey. http://pisa.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/pisa2012-ulusal-on-raporu.pdf.

65.

Ramey-Gassert

Shroyer

M. G.

Staver

J. R.

(1996) A qualitative study of factors influencing science teaching self-efficacy of elementary level teachers. Science Teacher Education 80: 283–315.

66.

Rezaei

Zamani-Miandashti

(2013) The relationship between research self-efficacy, research anxiety and attitude toward research: A study of agricultural graduate students. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World 3: 69–78.

67.

Riggs, I., Diaz, E., Riggs, M., Jesunathadas, J., Brasch, K., Torner, J.,…Pelletier, A. (1994, April). Impacting elementary teachers’ beliefs and performance through teacher enhancement for science instruction in diverse settings. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Anaheim, CA.

68.

Rose

Medway

(1981) Measurement of teachers’ beliefs in their control over student outcome. Journal of Educational Research 74: 185–190.

69.

Ross

J. A.

(1998) The antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. In: Brophy

(ed.) Advances in research on teaching Vol. 7, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 49–74.

70.

Rotter

J. B.

(1966) Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs 80: 1–28.

71.

Sadowski

C. J.

(1993) Cumulative evidence of the relationship between work tenure and generalized locus of control among teachers. Education 114(1): 27–31.

72.

Sadowski

C. J.

Blackwell

M. W.

Willard

J. L.

(1986) Locus of control and student teacher performance. Education 105: 391–393.

73.

Sadowski

C. J.

Taylor

R. C.

Woodward

H. R.

Peacher

R. K.

Martin

B. J.

(1982) The reliability and validity of a Likert-type locus of control scale for teachers. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology 12: 32.

74.

Sadowski

C. J.

Woodward

H. R.

(1983) Teacher locus of control and classroom climate: A cross-lagged correlational study. Psychology in the Schools 20: 506–509.

75.

Sanders

Rivers

J. C.

(1996) Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement, Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research Center.

76.

Saracaloğlu

A. S.

Certel

Varol

S. R.

Bahadır

(2012) Beden eğitimi öğretmenlerinin özyeterlik inançlari ve denetim odaklarinin incelenmesi [The investigation of the physical education teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and focus of control levels]. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi 3: 54–65.

77.

Sarikaya, H. (2004). Preservice elementary teachers’ science knowledge, attitude toward science teaching and their efficacy beliefs regarding science teaching (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

78.

Schumacker

R. E.

Lomax

R. G.

(2004) A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling, (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

79.

Schwarzer

Bäßler

Kwiatek

Schröder

Zhang

J. X.

(1997) The assessment of optimistic self beliefs: Comparison of the German, Spanish, and Chinese versions of the general selfefficacy scale. Applied Psychology 46: 69–88.

80.

Senler

Sungur-Vural

(2013) Pre-service science teachers’ teaching self-efficacy in relation to personality traits and academic self-regulation. The Spanish Journal of Psychology 16: 1–20.

81.

Shelton

D. M.

Mallinckrodt

(1991) Test anxiety, locus of control, and self-efficacy as predictors of treatment preference. College Student Journal 25: 544–551.

82.

Sherman

T. S.

Giles

M. B.

(1981) The development and structure of personal control in teachers. Journal of Educational Research 74: 139–142.

83.

Skaalvik

E. M.

Skaalvik

(2014) Teacher self-efficacy and perceived autonomy: Relations with teacher engagement, job satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion. Psychological Reports 114: 68–77.

84.

Smith

K. E.

(1997) Student teachers’ beliefs about developmentally appropriate practice: Pattern, stability, and the influence of locus of control. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 12: 221–243.

85.

Sünbül

A. M.

(2003) An analysis of relations among locus of control, burnout and job satisfaction in Turkish high school teachers. Australian Journal of Education 47: 58–72.

86.

Taylor

S. E.

Peplau

A. L.

Sears

D. O.

(2006) Social Psychology, (12th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

87.

Education Ministerial Advisory Group

Teacher

(2014) Issues paper, Canberra: Australian Government.

88.

Tekkaya

Çakiroğlu

Özkan

Ö.

(2002) A case study on science teacher trainees. Education and Science 126: 15–21.

89.

Thomas, B. (2006). Composition studies and teaching anxiety: A pilot study of teaching groups and discipline- and program-specific triggers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Bowling Green University, Bowling Green.

90.

Thompson

C. L.

Shrigley

R. L.

(1986) What research says: Revising the Science Attitude Scale. School Science and Mathematics 86: 331–334.

91.

Thomson, J. R., & Handley, H. M. (1990, November). Relationship between teacher self-concept and teacher efficacy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

92.

TIMSS Reports (1999). Retrieved from TIMSS Turkey. http://timss.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/timss_1999_ulusal_raporu.pdf.

93.

TIMSS Reports (2007). Retrieved from TIMSS Turkey. http://timss.meb.gov.tr/?page_id=25.

94.

Tschannen-Moran

Woolfolk-Hoy

Hoy

W. K.

(1998) Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research 68: 202–248.

95.

Türkmen

(2002) Sınıf öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin fen bilimleri ve fen bilgisi öğretimine yönelik tutumları [Freshman elementary education major students’ attitudes toward science and science teaching]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 23: 218–228.

96.

Turkmen

(2007) The influences of elementary science teaching method courses on a Turkish teachers college elementary education major students’ attitudes towards science and science teaching. Journal of Baltic Science Education 6: 66–77.

97.

Türkmen

(2008) Sınıf öğretmenliği programında öğrenim gören birinci sınıf düzeyinden dördüncü sınıf düzeyine gelen öğretmen adaylarının fen bilimlerine ve öğretimine yönelik tutumları [Attitudes of elementary school teachers candidates toward science and science teaching from freshman level to senior level in elementary teacher education program]. Kastomonu Eğitim Dergisi 16: 91–106.

98.

Turkmen

(2013) In-service Turkish elementary and science teachers’ attitudes toward science and science teaching: A sample from Usak province. Science Education International 24: 437–459.

99.

Van Aalderen-Smeets

S. I.

Walma Van Der Molen

J. H.

Asma

L. F.

(2012) Primary teachers’ attitudes toward science: A new theoretical framework. Science Education 96: 152–182.

100.

Velthuis

(2014) Collaborative curriculum design to increase science teaching self-efficacy. (Unpublished dissertation). University of Twente, Dalfsen, the Netherlands.

101.

Vickers

R. R.

Conway

T. L.

Haight

M. A.

(1983) Association between Levenson’s dimensions of locus of control and measures of coping and defense mechanisms. Psychological Reports 52: 323–333.

102.

Wang

J.-L.

Zhang

D.-J.

Jackson

L. A.

(2013) Influence of self-esteem, locus of control, and organizational climate on psychological empowerment in a sample of Chinese teachers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 43: 1428–1435.

103.

Weiner

(1985) An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review 92: 548–573.

104.

Weiner

H. M.

(2003) Effective inclusion: Professional development in the context of the classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children 35: 12–18.

105.

West

Watson

S. B.

Thompson

W. S.

Parke

(1993) The effect of student teaching experience upon preservice elementary teachers’ attitude and anxiety involving science and science teaching, Greenville: School of Education East Carolina University.

106.

Wolters

Daugherty

(2007) Goal structures and teachers’ sense of efficacy: Their relation and association to teaching experience and academic level. Journal of Academic Psychology 99: 181–193.

107.

YÖK (2007) Eğitim fakültesi öğretmen yetiştirme lisans programları. [Undergraduate teacher education programs of the faculties of education]. Ankara, Turkey.