Options
Pre-service elementary teachers’ science and engineering teaching self-efficacy and outcome expectancy: Exploring the impacts of efficacy source experiences through varying course modalities.
Citation
Hammack, R., Yeter, I., Pavlovich, C., & Boz, T. (2024). Pre-service elementary teachers’ science and engineering teaching self-efficacy and outcome expectancy: Exploring the impacts of efficacy source experiences through varying course modalities. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00464-9
Abstract
Background
Teacher efficacy is one of the most influential components for effective instruction, highlighting the importance of providing preservice teachers (PSTs) with opportunities to learn how to teach engineering during their college preparatory coursework. Making space for engineering instruction within science methods coursework could provide opportunities for PSTs to enhance their engineering teaching efficacy but also requires course instructors to give up some time previously devoted to science-focused instruction. The purpose of the current study was to explore how infusing engineering learning opportunities into a science methods course impacts PSTs’ engineering and science teaching efficacy and outcome expectancy.
Results
Pre/post-surveys were completed by PSTs enrolled in a Kindergarten-8th grade science methods course offered in four modalities (i.e., face-to-face, hybrid, online, rapid shift online). The course offered multiple engineering-focused learning activities and vicarious experiences. PSTs’ science teaching efficacy beliefs, engineering teaching efficacy beliefs, science teaching outcome expectancy, and engineering teaching outcome expectancy all significantly increased from pre- to post-test. There was no significant difference between efficacy gains based on course modality. The purposeful inclusion of multiple engineering activities and vicarious experiences allows for significant gains in science and engineering teaching efficacy and outcome expectancy regardless of the modality in which the course is taken.
Conclusions
This study shows that having varied efficacy source experiences while learning engineering design can result in increased efficacy, even in the absence of field experience and face-to-face coursework, and that the inclusion of these engineering experiences with science methods coursework does not detract from enhancing science teaching efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancy. Further research is needed to more closely examine individual components of science methods courses and the impacts each component has when implemented using different course modalities.
Publisher
Springer
Journal
International Journal of STEM Education
DOI
10.1186/s40594-024-00464-9