Concurrent validity between teacher efficacy and perceptions of response to intervention outcomes.

This study examined concurrent validity between the Teacher Efficacy Beliefs and Behaviors Scale-TEBBS (Nunn, 1998) with the Indicators of RtI Effectiveness Scale-IRES (Nunn, 1999). A total of 429, K-12 educators participating in a statewide RtI initiative were respondents. Pearson Product-Moment correlations indicated significant relationships between TEBBS scales of Instructional Methods Efficacy (IME), Motivational Methods Efficacy (MME) and External Control Efficacy (ECE) with IRES scales of Effectiveness of Interventions (EI), Satisfaction with RtI Results (SRR), Collaborative Teaming and Intervention (CTI), and Data-Based Decision-Making (DBDM). Discussion of prior research and heuristic value of this research is provided.

**********

As Ashton (1986) has pointed out, the concept of "teacher efficacy" is the belief that teachers develop regarding their influence upon student learning and behavioral outcomes. Researchers have demonstrated the importance of this concept as related to several significant educational outcomes such as teacher persistence (Gibson & Dembo, 1984), enthusiasm (Guskey, 1984), behavioral management (Woolfolk, Rosoff, & Hoy, 1990), willingness to initiate and maintain educational innovations (Guskey, 1988), effectiveness in promoting student achievement (Ross, 1992), motivating students (Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989), and influencing the development of self-efficacy in students (Anderson, Greene, & Loewen, 1988).

As Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, and Hoy (1998) note, the importance of examining how teacher efficacy is associated with correlates in the educational environment has important implications for both teacher and student success. With this in mind, a particularly timely topic for educators is Response to Intervention or RtI. RtI has been stimulated by recent legislative mandates, e.g. IDEIA (2004), which encourage greater accountability for results of efforts in general education that support the learning needs of all children. Within these mandates is emphasis upon utilizing scientifically-based interventions and ongoing systematic progress monitoring to demonstrate improvements in outcomes (Brown-Chidsey & Steege, 2005).

As RtI is increasingly applied in our schools, research attention has turned to the impact that this process may have upon those at the front lines of its implementation, i.e., teachers and support personnel in schools. As Nunn (2007) has pointed out, effective interventions bring about effective teachers who are skilled and capable of dealing with the difficult academic and behavioral concerns presented in their classrooms. As such, there is a need to define and systematically examine correlates associated with RtI implementation, such as teacher beliefs and perception of results or outcomes of such efforts. The current study will examine concurrent validity between two measures developed by one of the authors which address the need to define elements of efficacy on the part of teachers, as well as associated outcomes expected from implementation of RtI.

Method

Participants

Data for this study was gathered from 429 teachers, administrators and support professionals trained in a RtI implementation initiative involving ongoing cohort training cycles over a four year period. Participants represented a continuum of small to large school districts in a western mountain state accepted as RtI implementation pilot sites. Teams received five days of training in RtI best practices which included school-based assignments and on-site follow-up implementation support for using RtI knowledge and skills.

Measures

Two measures developed by Nunn were utilized to examine the concurrent relationship of teacher efficacy, i.e. the Teacher Efficacy Belief and Behavior Scale-TEBB (Nunn, 1998) and RtI outcomes, i.e., Indicators of RtI Effectiveness Scale-IRES (Nunn, 1999). Previous research by Nunn has demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency of both measures ranging from .78 to .89 and test-retest reliabilities of .76 for the TEBB and .81 for the IRES (Nunn, 1998; Nunn, 1999).

Design and Procedure

Each participant completed instruments on the last training day following a year long implementation process for RtI. Over this training period, participants were involved in applying RtI concepts and methods to improve the learning and behavior of students in their schools. In all, their main focus was to collaborate, problem-solve, develop interventions, and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for students. Their ratings on the IRES were ratings of the perceived level of effectiveness of RtI implementation upon key outcomes. All responses were kept confidential and not discussed with others in the training or with administrators at their schools so as to avoid contamination and pressure to over or underestimate their ratings of outcomes.

Results

Analysis of educator responses consisted of applying the Pearson-Product Moment correlation to subscales of both the TEBBS and the IRES instruments as shown in Table 1 below.

Results revealed significant relationships between teacher belief in their efficacy along all dimensions of the TEBB S concurrent with each dimension of the IRES. The general finding was that these measured constructs shared commonality with each other and that the association of one variable with the other provides some support for the utility of using these instruments measuring processes associated with RtI implementation and outcomes.

Discussion

The present study examined the concurrent validity of employing the Teacher Efficacy Beliefs and Behavior Scale (TEBBS) and the Indicators of RtI Effectiveness Scale (IRES) as mutually related instruments possessing a moderate degree of concurrent validity when administered to educators implementing RtI in schools. These findings are complimentary of previous research which has established both conceptual domains addressed by these scales, i.e. teacher efficacy and response to intervention as being important considerations for educators.

A consistent finding of this study indicated that increases in teacher efficacy were associated with perceptions of improved outcomes of intervention, satisfaction with results, collaborative team process, and data-based decisions. This is relevant given the interest and expenditures of material and human resources in establishing this model in schools. More research is needed to further define and establish the breadth and depth of these relationships relative to variances in other school settings as well as pertaining to other possible mediating variables in the school setting. The heuristic value for extending this research is also significant by demonstrating an empirical association between foundational elements of RtI implementation efforts and important positive elements for teachers and students.

References

Anderson, R., Greene, M., & Loewen, P. (1988). Relationships among teachers' and students' thinking skills, sense of efficacy, and student achievement. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 34, 148-165.

Ashton, P., & Webb, R.B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.

Brown-Chidsey, R. & Steege, M.W. (2005). Response to intervention: Principles and strategies for effective practice. New York: The Guilford Press.

Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76,569-582.

Guskey, T., & Passaro, P. (1994). Teacher efficacy: A study of construct dimensions. American Educational Research Journal, 31,627-643.

Guskey, T.R.(1984).The influence of change in instructional effectiveness upon the affective characteristics of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 245-259.

Guskey, T.R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 63-69.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. [section] 1400 et seq. (1990).

Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. (1989). Change in teacher efficacy and student self-and task-related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to junior high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81,247-258.

Nunn, G.D. (2007). Implementing RtI in Schools: Implications for school success. Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho.

Nunn, G.D. (1999). Indicators of RtI effectiveness. Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho.

Nunn, G.D. (1998). Best practices survey for RtI problem-solving intervention. Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho.

Reschly, D. & Ysseldyke, J. (1995). School psychology paradigm shift. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.). Best practices in school psychology III. Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

Ross, J.A. (1992). Teacher efficacy and the effect of coaching on student achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 17, 51-65.

Steege, M.W. & Wacker, D.P. (1995). Evaluating the effectiveness of applied interventions. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes Best practices in school psychology III. Bethesda: National Association of School Psychologists.

Tilly, W.D., III. (2002). Best practices in school psychology as a problem-solving enterprise. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 21-36). Bethesda, M.D.: National Association of School Psychologists.

Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk-Hoy, A. & Hoy, W.K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202 - 248.

Woolfolk, A. E., Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Teachers' sense of efficacy and their beliefs about managing students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6, 137-148.

Gerald D. Nunn and Paul B. Jantz, Idaho State University. Cynthia Butikofer, Idaho State University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Gerald D. Nunn at [e-mail].

Table 1
Pearson Correlations Between Teacher Efficacy and RtI Outcome
Measures Rated by Teachers

Teacher Efficacy Variables           Intervention   Motivation
                                       Skills         Skills
                                      Efficacy       Efficacy

Response to      Intervention           .11 *         .12 *
Intervention     Outcomes               .03           .01
(RtI) Outcomes                          429           429

                 Satisfaction with      .48 *         .43 *
                 the Results            .000          .000
                                        429           429

                 Collaboration          .32 *         .34 *
                 in Teams               .000          .000
                                        429           429

                 Data-Based             .27 *         .26 *
                 Decision-Making        .000          .000
                                         429          429

Teacher Efficacy Variables            External       General
                                       Control       Teacher
                                      Efficacy       Efficacy

Response to      Intervention           .16 *         .15 *
Intervention     Outcomes               .001          .001
(RtI) Outcomes                          429           429

                 Satisfaction with      .34 *         .49 *
                 the Results            .000          .000
                                        429           429

                 Collaboration          .34 *         .39 *
                 in Teams               .000          .000
                                        429           429

                 Data-Based             .24 *         .31 *
                 Decision-Making        .000          .000
                                        429           429

* Signiticance 2-Tail Test Pearson Product-Moment Correlations