Printer Friendly

Investigating self-efficacy levels of physical education and sports teachers in terms of some variables.


Information is changing and evolving every day. The renewed and improved information must be transformed to the students through training programs. The most important driving force in transforming knowledge at educational programs is the teacher. The teachers should be responsible from a continuous self-renewal and development during transferring process of information that is necessary for sufficient and qualified education. In line with this responsibility, the self-efficacy of teachers is of great importance. Self-sufficiency is based on the theoretical basis of the socio-cognitive theory developed by Albert Bandura (Gencturk, Memic, 2010; Yecilyurt, 2013). Bandura (1993) defined the competence as an individual's belief in his/her abilities in realizing the related work in order to achieve his/her desired performance. Bandura (1993), stated that the self-efficacy affects people's feelings and thoughts. Healso indicated that people needs to put much effort in carrying out their goals, to continue despite difficulties, to resist the temporary obstacles and control the events affecting their lives and feelings, and a strong efficacy beliefs improves many people's success and health.

Self-efficacy level is an important factor in determining how individuals react toevents, situations, and difficult times (Yaman, Cansungu, Altuncekic, 2004). Self-sufficiency is related to the belief in an individual' capabilities rather than his/her abilities (Akkoyunlu, Orhan, Umay, 2005).

According to Ozdemir (Ozdemir, 2008), teachers' personal judgements, self efficacy beliefs, and perceptions related to personal skills and abilities play important roles on teachers' and candidate teachers' carrying out quality teaching processes and overcoming the problems they face during teaching process.

It can be said that teachers have self-efficacy beliefs for the teaching process and it would be a crucial factor fort he followings: To motivate their students' learning and success, to be able to solve the problems related to teachers' classroom management, to plan effectively, to carry out implementation and evaluation activities.

In the literature, there are a number of studies examining the self-efficacy level of many branch teachers available (Uysal, Kosemen, 2013; Tournaki, Podell, 2005; Gavora, 2010; Seckin, Bacbay, 2013; Pehlivan, 2010). However, there is no study found investigating self efficacy beliefs of the physical education and sports teachers. The aim of this study is to investigate self efficacy level of physical education and sports teachers in terms of some variables.


Establishment of Voluntary Groups:

Randomly selected 211 physical education and sport teacher working in Kayseri province were participated to this study voluntarily.

Data Collection Techniques:

Socio-Demographic Information Form:

In order to collect data about independent variables of the study, a questionnaire was developed by the researcher. The questionnaire was consisted of 5 questions including teachers' age, gender, years at work (seniority) to determine the level of education.

It can be seen from Figure 1 that; according to the gender, 63.5% of the volunteers participating in this study is men and 36.5% is female. According to age group, it was found that 5.2% of the volunteers is between 25-30 years of age, 43.1% is 31-35 years, 37.4% is 36-40 years, and 14.2% is in 41-45 years of age. When analyzed according to education level, it is observed that 96.3% of the participants has undergraduate degree and 13.7% has masters degree. When the retirement years is in consideration, it was found that 13.7% of the volunteers has been at work for 1-5 years, 17.1% 6-10 years, 39.8% 11-15 years, and 29.4% 16-20 years. When working institutions is in consideration, it was stated that 14.2% of the volunteers has worked at elementary schools and 85.8% has worked at high schools.

Developed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001); adopted to Turkish by Capa, Cakiroglu and Sarikaya (2005), the nine-point Likert-type scale consisted of 24 items includes some questions such as "how you can help your students' critical thinking?" and these questions should be answered like "never", "very few", "some", "quite" or "very" in the form of nine grading answers. The Scaleis consisted of three dimensions, including; student participation (1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 14, 22), teaching strategies (7, 10, 11, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24) and classroom management (3, 5, 8, 13, 15, 16, 19, 21). The announced varians values and factor loadings are given in Table 2. In connection with teachers' self-efficacy scale, when looked at Cronbach alpha reliability values forthis study, for the overall scale r = .87; for student participation subscale, r = .88; for teaching strategies subscale r = .88, and classroom management subscale is calculated as .89 (Ekici, Sert Cibik, Fettahlioglu, 2014).

Statistical Analysis:

The data obtained was recorded in a computer using IBM SPSS 20 program. Statistical analysis suggested that the data obtained does not show a normal distribution. Therefore, non-parametric statistical techniques were applied for data obtained.


In this study presented here suggests that the self efficacy total scores of the physical education and sports teachers was 174,000 [+ or -] 17,612. When self-efficacy subscales were examined from Table-1, it was detected that the classroom management score was 7.145 [+ or -] 0.737; teaching strategies was 7.053 [+ or -] 0.838, and Student Involvement was 7.245 [+ or -] 0.738

When physical education and sports teachers' self-efficacy level is examined, in terms of gender, significant differences were identified between classroom management and self-efficacy total scores (Table 2).

Considering the age groups, when the self-efficacy levels of the physical education and sports teachers were investigated, significant differences were detected regardingstudent involment, teaching strategies, and overall self-efficacy scores (Table 3).

Considering the retirement years, when the self-efficacy level of physical education and sports teachers was analyzed, significant differences were detected in student involment, teaching strategies, classroom management, and in overall self-efficacy scores (Table 3).


This study aimed and was conducted to determine the self-efficacy level of the physical education and sport teachers that will shape the future of the society.

The study suggested that the self-efficacy total scores of the physical education and sport teachers was 174,000 [+ or -] 17,612. When the self-efficacy subscales are examined, the classroom management score was found 7.145 [+ or -] 0.737, teaching strategies was 7.053 [+ or -] 0.838, and student participation was 7.245 [+ or -] 0.738 (Table 1).

In a study conducted on the candidate teachers, Yavuz and Memic, 2009, found that the candidate teachers were found quite adequate and draw attention in regard with; the general self-efficacy with a score of (X = 7.05), in student participation with a score of (X = 6.98), in competency in instructional strategies with a score of (X = 6.98), and inclassroom management proficiency with a score of (X = 7.18).

In a study conducted with 410 teachers, Tschannen-Moran ve Woolfolk Hoy (Tschannen-Moran, M, Woolfolk Hoy A) found that the teachers feel quite adequate in their subject areas in regard with; general self-efficacy with a score of (X = 7,1), in student participation with a score of (X = 7,3) in competency in instructional strategies with a score of (X = 7,3), and in classroom management proficiency with a score of (X = 6,7).

In regard with gender, whenself-efficacy levels of the physical education and sports teachers were investigated, statistically significant differences were detected in classroom management parameter. In a study on self-efficacy levels of the physical education and sport candidate teachers, Kafkas et al, 2010, found statistically significant differences in classroom management subscale. This findings in the literature supports the findings in our study.

When self-efficacy levels of the physical education and sport teachers were investigated in regard with their gender, statistically significant differences were observed in total self-efficacy scores (Table-2).

Some studies aimed at determining the level of self-efficacy of teachers (Kahyaoglu, Yangin, 2007; Ustuner, Demirtac, Comert, Ozer, 2009) that there was no difference detected in terms of gender; however, some research findings (Kafkas, Acak, Coban, Karademir, 2010; Korkut, Babaoglan, 2012) support this study. It is thought that this is because the traditional role of women in Turkish society improves the self-efficacy beliefs of the female teachers.

When the self-efficacy levels of the physical education and sports teachers are in consideration, in connection with the age groups, significant differences were detected in student participation, teaching strategies, and overall self-efficacy scores (Table 3).

In the literature, Celebi (Celep, 2002) suggested that as the age of teachers goes up, the self-efficacy beliefs increases, too. In another study, Aypay (Aypay, 2011) found a similar result that as the age of candidate teachers goes up, their general self-efficacy increases. In the literature there are some studies suggesting that there is no significant relationship between the variables of age and self-efficacy (Uysal, Kosemen, 2013; Brink, Alsen, Herlitz, Kjellgren, Cliffordson, 2012).

Hence, it is thought that as the age of physical education and sports teachers goes up, also their self-efficacy level increases. Considering the class management variable, it was an interesting result to find that the younger physical education teachers have higher self-efficacy level scores. In this case, it can be argued that this is because the younger teachers try to ensure the classroom order and discipline in their early years in profession. In addition, it is thought that the teachers are more sacrifying during their early years in profession, therefore they give higher importance to their profession in order to be more efficient, and want to improve themselves by working harder.

When self-efficacy level of physical education and sports teachers is investigated according to the retirement age groups, significant differences were detected in student involment, teaching strategies, classroom management, and in overall self-efficacy scores (Table 3).

Some studies in the literature suggest that the self-efficacy beliefs did not differ according to the teachers' retirement years (Korkut, Babaoglan, 2012; Yilmaz, Cokluk-Bokeoglu, 2008). In another study, Ustuner et al, 2009, suggested that self-efficacy of teachers did not differ according to years at service, but looking at the arithmetic averages, there is a tendency that teachers' self-sufficiency increases as their years in the profession goes up. It is thought that the reason behind this difference is because the more experienced teachers went to school some years ago from the young teachers and they followed different education programs.

In conclusion, professional self-efficacy of Physical Education and Sports Teachers varies according to their age and years in services. This change correlates with the increase of teachers' years in service so that the experiences the physical education and sports teachers gain have them improve their self-efficacye.


I thank all physical education and sport teachers for participating in this study. No funding was used for this study.


Akkoyunlu B, Orhan F, Umay A, 2005, A Study For Computer Teachers On "Computer Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale" Development Study. Hacettepe University College Of Education Journal, 29: 1-8.

Aypay A, 2010, Adaptation Of General Self-Efficacy Scale (GOYO) To Turkish. Inonu University, Journal Of Faculty Of Education. 11(2): 113-131.

Bandura A, 1977, Self-Efficacy: Toward A Unifying Theory Of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84, 194-215.

Bandura A, 1993, Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development And Functioning. Educational Pschologist, 28(2), 117-148.

Brink E, Alsen P, Herlitz J, Kjellgren K, Cliffordson C, 2012, General Self-Efficacy And Health-Related Quality Of Life After Myocardial Infarction. Psychology, Health & Medicine. 17(3): 346-355.

Celep C, 2002, The Correlation Of The Factors: The Prospective Teachers' Sense Of Efficacy And Beliefs And Attitudes About Student Control. National Forum. 1-10.

Ekici G, Sert Cibik A, Fettahlioglu P, 2014, The Predictive Power Of Biology Self-Efficacy Belief And Teaching Profession Self-Efficacy Belief On The Attitude Towards Teaching Profession GEFAD/GUJGEF 34(1): 23-41.

Gavora P, 2010, Slovak Pre-Service Teacher Self-Efficacy: Theoretical And Research Considerations. The New Educational Review, 21(3), 17-30.

Gencturk A, Memic A, 2010, An Investigation Of Primary School Teachers' Teacher Efficacy And Job Satisfaction in Terms Of Demographic Factors, Elementary Education Online, 9(3), Pp:1037-1054

Kafkas ME, Acak M, Coban B, Karademir T, 2010, Investigation Of The Relationship Between Preservice Physical Education Teachers'Sense Of Self Efficacy And Professional Concerns, Inonu University Journal Of The Faculty Of Education. Volume. 11, Issue. 2, Pp. 93-111.

Kahyaoglu M, Yangin S, 2007, The Opinions Of Candidate Teachers For Elementary Schools About Their Professional Self-Efficacy. Kastamonu Journal Of Education. 15 (1), 73-84.

Korkut K, Babaoglan E, 2012, Self Efficacy Of Primary School Teachers, International Journal Of Management Economics And Business, Vol. 8, No. 16, Pp:269-281

Ozdemir MS, 2008, Investigating Self-Efficacy Beliefs Of Class Teacher Candidates For Various Variables Regarding The Teaching Process. Theory And Practice in Educational Management, 54, 277-306.

Pehlivan Z, 2010, Analysis Of Physical Self-Perceptions Of Physical Education Teacher Candidates And Their Attitudes Toward Teaching Profession Education And Science, Vol. 35, No 156, Pp:126-141.

Seckin A, Bacbay M, 2013, Investigate Of Teacher's Self Efficacy Beliefs Of Physical Education And Sport Teacher Candidate's, International Periodical For The Languages, Literature And History Of Turkish Or Turkic Volume 8/8 Summer, Pp. 253-270.

Tournakin, Podell DM, 2005, The impact Of Student Characteristics And Teacher Efficacy On Teachers' Predictions Of Student Success. Teaching And Teacher Education, 21, 299-314.

Tschannen-Moran M, Woolfolk Hoy A, 2001, Teacher Efficacy: Capturing An Elusive Concept, Teaching And Teacher Education, 17, 785-805.

Uysal I, Kosemen S, 2013, Analysis Of The Pre-Service Teachers' General Self Esteem Beliefs, Journal Of Research in Education And Teaching, Cilt:2 Sayi:2 Pp:217-226

Uysal I, Kosemen S, 2013, Investigating General Self-Efficacy Beliefs Of Candidate Teachers. Journal Of Education And Teaching Research, 2(2):217-226.

Ustuner M, Demirtas H, Comert M, Ozer N, 2009, Self-Efficacy Perceptions Of Secondary School Teachers. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty Of Education Journal.

Yaman S, Cansungu O, Altuncekic A, 2004, A Study On The Analysis Of Levels Of Self-Efficacy Beliefs Of Science Teachers. Journal Of Turkish Educational Sciences, 2(3), 355-364.

Yavuz D, Memis A, 2009, Investigating The Self-Efficacy Perception Of The Teacher Candidates, And The impact Of Metacognitive Awareness As A Reason For Choosing The Teaching Profession. First International Congress Of Educational Research, 18 Mart University, Canakkale, Turkey, 9 (17), 1-16.

Yesilyurt E, 2013, Teacher Self-Efficacy Perceptions Of Teacher Candidates Electronic Journal Of Social Sciences, Volume: 12 Issue: 45 Pp: 88-104

Yilmaz K, Cokluk-Bokeoglu O, 2008, Efficacy Beliefs Of Elementary School Teachers, Ankara University, College Of Educational Sciences Journal, 41(2), 143-167.


(1) Physical Education and Sports Department, Erciyes University, Kayseri, TURKEY

E-mail address:

Received 08.02.2015/Accepted 12.03.2015
Table 2: Investigating Teachers'f Self-Efficacy
Level by Gender

Variables       Groups    N    Mean Rank    Sum Of

Student          Male    134    101,19     13559,00
Involvement     Female   77     114,38     8807,00
Teaching         Male    134    102,72     13764,00
Strategies      Female   77     111,71     8602,00
Classroom        Male    134     98,65     13218,50
Management      Female   77     118,80     9147,50
Self-Efficacy    Male    134     98,82     13242,00
Total Score     Female   77     118,49     9124,00

Variables       M.Withney U     Z        P

Student          4514,000     -1,517    ,129
Teaching         4719,000     -1,035    ,301
Classroom        4173,500     -2,337   ,019 *
Self-Efficacy    4197,000     -2,255   ,024 *
Total Score

Table 3: Investigating the self-efficacy level of teachers
by Age Groups

Variables       Ages    N    Mean Rank   Sd   Chi-square     P

Student         25-30   11    147,00     3      14,110     ,003 *
  Involvement   31-35   91    102,54
                36-40   79     94,12
                41-45   30    132,75
                25-30   11    101,45
                31-35   91     93,45
Teaching        36-40   79    107,49     3      14,418     ,002 *
  Strategies    41-45   30    141,83
                25-30   11    136,09
                31-35   91     99,05
Classroom       36-40   79    102,92     3      6,875       ,076
  Management    41-45   30    124,17
                25-30   11    128,91
Self-Efficacy   31-35   91     96,35     3      14,911     ,002 *
  Total Score   36-40   79    100,29
                41-45   30    141,90

Table 4: Investigating teachers' level of self-efficacy by
retirement years

Variables      Retriement    N     Mean    sd   Chi-Square      P
                  Years            Rank

                   1-5       29   90,21
                  6-10       36   136,53
Student           11-15      84            3      21,143     ,000 **
                  16-20      62   119,53
                   1-5       29   104,62
                  6-10       36   112,42   3      20,265     ,000 **
Teaching          11-15      84   85,47
  Strategies      16-20      62   130,73
                   1-5       29   124,29
Classroom         6-10       36   93,22
  Management      11-15      84   94,13    3      11,344     ,010 *
                  16-20      62   120,94
                   1-5       29   103,26
Self-             6-10       36   125,99   3      33,406     ,000 **
Score             11-15      84   78,37
                  16-20      62   133,11

Figure 1: Demographic characteristics
of the study group Self-Efficacy
Belief Scale for the Teaching Profession

                       N     %


  Male                134   63.5
  Female              77    36.5


  25-30               11    5.2
  31-35               91    43.1
  36-40               79    37.4
  41-45               30    14.2


  Bachelor's Degree   182   86.3
  Master Degree       29    13.7

Retirement Years

  1-5                 29    13.7
  6-10                36    17.1
  11-15               84    39.8
  16-20               62    29.4


  Secondary School    181   85.8
  High School         30    14.2

Note: Table made from bar graph.

Figure 2. Descriptive statistics for the
self-sufficiency level of teachers

                            N     X        SS

Classroom Management        211   7.1475   0.737
Teaching Strategies         211   7.0533   0.838
Student Involvement         211   7.2453   0.738
Self-Efficacy Total Score   211   174      17.612

Note: Table made from bar graph.
COPYRIGHT 2015 Ovidius University of Constanta
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Original article
Author:Turan, Mehmet Behzat; Pepe, Osman; Bahadir, Ziya
Publication:Ovidius University Annals, Series Physical Education and Sport/Science, Movement and Health
Article Type:Report
Date:Jun 1, 2015
Previous Article:The demand for pharmaceutical products used by athletes to treat muscular and articular afflictions--a farmacoeconomic study.
Next Article:Investigating the level of professional attitude of physical education and sports teachers in terms of some variables.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters