1. Lindsay K. Lightner and Judith A. Morrison Washington State University
What Are the Science Teaching Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Paraprofessionals Enrolled In an Alternate Route Teacher Certification Program?
Lindsay K. Lightner and Judith A. Morrison
Washington State University

2. The Problem
Current teacher shortages in Washington and elsewhere make alternate routes to teaching an attractive source of teacher candidates.
Washington’s Route 1 program assumes that paraprofessionals can become excellent teachers quickly and will be more likely to be retained as teachers because of their prior work-based experiences.
However, there is little relevant research on this particular population to support this assumption.

3. The Problem
Paraprofessionals were recruited for Washington’s Route 1 because of their prior experiences in and desire to teach special education, English language learners and bilingual education—not science or mathematics education.
Elementary level teachers often have lower levels of self-efficacy about teaching math and science than other subjects and experience more anxiety around teaching them (e.g., Bleicher, 2004; Hechter, 2011).
Research question: Do paraprofessionals’ prior work experiences, academic experiences, or overall teaching self-efficacy predict their science teaching self-efficacy?

4. Study Participants
28 paraprofessionals in 5 SE WA districts; 20 in study
Category
Participants
Gender
Language
Female 17
Monolingual English 14
Male 3
Bilingual English/Spanish 6
Ethnicity
Years Worked in Classroom
Caucasian 10
1-2
Hispanic 7
3-4 5
Multiethnic
5-6 1
Educational Background
7-9
No bachelor’s degree
10 or more
Bachelor’s or higher
Endorsement Sought (in addition to elementary education)
First Generation College Student
ELL 4
Yes
Bilingual and ELL
No or no data available
Special Education 11

5. Study Design Explanatory sequential mixed methods design:
Pretests of science teaching self-efficacy (STEBI-B; Enochs & Riggs, 1990; modified by Bleicher, 2004) and general teaching self-efficacy (TSES short form; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001)
STEBI-B uses two subscales: Personal Science Teaching Efficacy (PSTE) and Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy (STOE)
TSES has subscales, but general scale was used for this study
Subsequent interviews regarding teaching beliefs and relationship of prior experiences to self-efficacy
Posttests of STEBI-B and TSES at end of education program
Subsequent interviews regarding teaching beliefs and changes over the course of the program

6. Methods
Surveys were administered at start of teacher education program and start of science methods course.
Mean PSTE and STOE pretest scores align with post-treatment posttest scores of PSTs in two recent studies.
What factors might predict such an outcome for this particular population of PSTs?
STEBI-B Subscale
Pre-test
Mean (SD)
(Bautista, 2011)
Post-test
(Bergman & Morphew, 2015)
PSTE
52.26 (6.22)
43.00 (4.91)
52.52 (5.48)
48.70 (5.51)
52.40 (6.86)
STOE
36.85 (4.17)
34.45 (3.59)
37.82 (4.33)
35.29 (4.14)
37.47 (4.71)

7. Methods Multiple linear regression analyses
DV1: Personal science teaching self-efficacy (PSTE)
DV2: Science teaching outcome expectancy (STOE)
IVs: years of classroom experience; prior academic experiences (college GPA and number of science courses); general teaching self-efficacy
IVs followed hierarchical regression, based on situated learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991):
Block 1: years of classroom experience
Block 2: academic experiences (college GPA and number of science courses passed)
Block 3: general teaching self-efficacy

8. Results
Assumptions required for a regression (independence, linearity, homogeneity of variance, normality, and noncollinearity) were met.
One outlier data point was excluded due to high leverage; final n = 19
A significant proportion of the total variation in PSTE was predicted by general teaching self-efficacy, F(2, 15) = 7.276, p = .017.
Multiple R2 indicates that approximately 56% of the variation in PSTE is predicted by the model. Interpreted according to Cohen (1988), this suggests a large effect.
Variations in STOE were not predicted by any independent variable to a statistically significant extent.

9. Results: Correlations
Correlations between prior experiences and teaching self-efficacies

10. Results: Multiple Regression Model
Hierarchical Regression Model Results with Personal Science
Teaching Efficacy (PSTE) as the Outcome
For every one-point increase in TSES scores, PSTE scores will increase by approximately 3.6 points when controlling for academic and work experience variables.
There were no statistically significant results from the model using STOE as the outcome.

11. Implications for Teacher Education
Increasing general teaching self-efficacy may increase subject-specific teaching self-efficacy.
Years of experience in the classroom alone do not predict these paraprofessionals’ science teaching self-efficacy.
However, further research could focus on the types and qualities of experiences preservice teachers have had, and whether these might predict self-efficacy.
Particular focus on mastery experiences versus vicarious teaching experiences as a paraprofessional (Bandura, 1977)

12. Next Steps
Consider the relationship between general teaching self-efficacy and years of classroom experience (p = .084)
While this relationship was not statistically significant for this study, it may bear further investigation with a larger sample size or through other research methods.
Consider controlling for response-shift bias (Hechter, 2011)
Conduct interviews with a range sample of participants:
Types and qualities of classroom experiences (vicarious vs. mastery experiences)
Funds of knowledge about teaching and science
Positive and negative effects of prior work-based learning

13. Questions?
Lindsay Lightner ResearchGate: