Validation of the Teaching Engineering Self‐Efficacy Scale for K‐12 Teachers: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach

Abstract

Background Teacher self‐efficacy has received attention because of its direct relationship with teachers' classroom behaviors. Since engineering has been increasingly introduced in K‐12 (precollege) education, development of an instrument to measure teachers' self‐efficacy in the context of teaching engineering has been needed. Purpose (Hypothesis) This study reports the development and validation of the Teaching Engineering Self‐Efficacy Scale (TESS) for K‐12 teachers. Design/Method The items for the TESS were constructed through a comprehensive review of the literature regarding K‐12 engineering education, the development of teachers' self‐efficacy instruments in STEM areas, and K‐12 teachers' reflections on integrating engineering into their classrooms. During the content and face validity process, we used structural equation modeling to identify and confirm the factor structure of the TESS, and used item‐analyses for reliability evidence. Results With data from 434 teachers in 19 states, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses using structural equation modeling resulted in the TESS consisting of 23 items loading across four factors: engineering pedagogical content knowledge, engineering engagement, engineering disciplinary self‐efficacy, and outcome expectancy. Cronbach's α ranged from 0.89 to 0.96 and exhibited high internal consistency reliability coefficients for the TESS. Conclusions Teacher self‐efficacy is a situation‐specific construct because teachers' efficacy beliefs depend on the content area and teaching environment. Use of the TESS, as an instrument tailored for the engineering teaching context, can contribute to the literature on K‐12 engineering education and improve the teaching of precollege engineering.

Lessons Learned in K-12 Engineering Outreach and Their Impact on Program Planning (Evaluation)

“…However, most teachers know very little about engineering [6] and have little to no exposure to the field at all [18]. Ironically and unknowing to themselves, math and science teachers bear the incredible responsibility of maintaining student interest in math and science, which has a major impact on the development of students and their future career decisions [3,6].…”

“…Ironically and unknowing to themselves, math and science teachers bear the incredible responsibility of maintaining student interest in math and science, which has a major impact on the development of students and their future career decisions [3,6]. Thus, there is a great need for teacher training to improve engineering awareness and readiness [6,18]. Researchers recommend introducing engineering in the context of math and science at earlier ages to increase interest and the most direct route to improve math and science achievement is undoubtedly better teaching [3,19].…”

“…Teachers need to learn what to teach and how to teach it [20]. As a result, there is a large movement to provide professional development opportunities for in-service teachers to help integrate engineering content [18]. Jeffers et al [3] states, "The key is to have informed and motivated teachers that can excite and instill confidence in their students."…”

“…Engineering self-efficacy is emerging as a useful theory in evaluating the confidence of students to pursue engineering related professions and the confidence of teachers to teach engineering related content. In particular, Faber et al [5] and Yoon et al [18] developed the Student Attitudes toward STEM (S-STEM) survey and Teaching Engineering Self-Efficacy Scale (TESS) survey, respectively. Such surveys used in conjunction with outreach activities may help allocate time and resources to more influential activities.…”

“…Teacher assessment will include a general questionnaire about their perceived needs, the TESS survey [18], and annual focus groups. The general questionnaire and TESS survey will be sent to all math teachers from participating schools and are solely to gauge teacher needs and evaluate the effect of the program on their self-efficacy to teach engineering.…”