Adapting the science teaching efficacy beliefs instrument to assess engineering teaching efficacy beliefs of pre-service elementary teachers: Rasch model and confirmatory factor analysis

• Published in: Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education Science and Technology Education, 2024-08, Vol.20 (8), p.em2487
• Main Authors: Yesilyurt, Ezgi, Kaya, Erdogan, Deniz, Hasan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Discriminant analysis; Elementary school teachers; Engineering; Rasch model; Science education; Teaching
• ISSN: 1305-8215; 1305-8223
• DOI: 10.29333/ejmste/14882

Background: The next generation science standards (NGSS) (NGSS Lead States, 2013) place a particular emphasis on the integration of engineering into the science curriculum. Consequently, the NGSS calls on teachers to engage students in engineering practices to facilitate their experience with the engineering design process similar to engineers and develop a more contemporary view of engineering as a discipline. Since engineering education research in K-12 is still in its infancy, there is limited empirical evidence related to how teachers integrate engineering concepts into their classrooms. To assess the quality of teachers’ engineering teaching practices, teaching self-efficacy can be used as an indicator of their instructional practices because teaching efficacy beliefs are often associated with greater use of student-oriented instructional practices, increased teacher effort, and other positive instructional behaviors. Purpose: The main aim of this study was to validate an engineering teaching efficacy beliefs instrument (ETEBI) to measure pre-service elementary teachers’ engineering teaching efficacy beliefs. Design/method: The science teaching efficacy beliefs instrument version B was modified to develop the ETEBI. The instrument was administered to 561 pre-service elementary teachers. A Rasch model analysis and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted on the data obtained from 561 pre-service elementary teachers to provide evidence supporting the validity of the instrument. Results: The Rasch model and CFA suggested a two-factor solution: personal engineering teaching efficacy and engineering teaching outcome expectancy. Also, Cronbach’s coefficient alphas for each subscale were measured to assess the internal consistency of the subscales. Based on the analyses, the study provided evidence supporting the reliability and validity of the ETEBI to assess pre-service elementary teachers’ engineering teaching efficacy. Conclusions: The ETEBI can be confidently utilized to assess pre-service elementary teachers’ engineering teaching efficacy beliefs. It is effective in gauging the current status of their beliefs and/or determining changes in their beliefs as a result of any teacher training and professional development effort.