教師效能的研究者指出，高效能的老師不但可以改變學生的學習成效與動機，更能影響自身的教學策略、教室經營及學生參與。因此，一位高效能的老師往往被認為是一位有效的老師。然而在台灣，助教效能的實證研究仍相當缺乏，本研究旨在探討助教與學生對於一位有效的助教的效能程度是否有差異。進而探討助教本身的理想我與真實我。本研究共有26位助教與144位學生參與。研究方法為調查法與面訪法，使用三份改編自Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy (2001)的問卷與一份自編訪談題目。問卷的量性分析方法包括描述性統計、推論性統計和t考驗，而訪談的質量分析方法則是選用類別內容分析法。研究結果顯示助教與學生都認為一位有效的助教的效能，以重要排序，分別為教學策略、教室經營，最後則為學生參與。由t考驗證實，前兩項有達到顯著性差異，最後一者則無。而結論更證實，比起理想我之效能，助教們的現實效能低落許多。而助教們更表示學生人數是最主要影響他們效能的主要因素之一。

Researchers of teacher efficacy have often suggested that teachers with high self efficacy can influence not only student outcomes and motivation, but also their own instructional strategies, classroom management, and student engagement. Therefore, a high efficacious teacher is usually referred to as an effective teacher. However, research which has empirically documented the efficacy of an effective assistant teacher (TA) in Taiwan is scant. Hence, present study revealed the TAs’ and the students’ perspectives on the extent of efficacy an effective TA should have, and then compared the perspectives of the TAs and the students. Further, this study also investigated the TAs’ real self and ideal self. A total of 26 TAs and 144 students participated in the study. This research involved a survey, comprised of three modified versions of Teacher’s Sense of Efficacy Scale with three dimensions, instructional strategies, classroom engagement and student engagement (Tschannen-Moran &Woolfolk Hoy, 2001), and an in-depth interview with interview protocols. The quantitative analysis of the questionnaires was conducted through descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, and t-Test. The qualitative data was analyzed with categorical – content analysis. Results of this study showed that both the TA’s and the students’ perspectives on an effective TA should be most efficacious in instructional strategies, then classroom management, and followed by student engagement. Moreover, the TAs’ and the students’ perspectives on the first two dimensions were significantly different, while there was no significant difference in student engagement between the two groups. The results also proved that the TAs have low real self comparing with their ideal self and revealed that the class size is one of the crucial factors affecting their efficacy.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION	1

Background	          1
Statement of the Problem	4
Purpose of the Study	5
Research Questions         	6
Significance of the Study	6

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 	          9

Definitions of Teacher Efficacy	          9
Theories of Teacher Efficacy	                   10
    Locus Control Theory 	                   10
    Self-Efficacy	                             13
        Self-Efficacy vs. Self Concept   	15
Development of Teacher Efficacy	          20
    Teacher Efficacy	                    20
    Measurements of Teacher Efficacy	          22
        Rand Measures	                    22
        Teacher Efficacy Scale                  	23
        Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale	24
Studies on Teacher Efficacy in Teaching Field	25
    Efficacy for Instructional Strategies	26
    Efficacy for Classroom Management	          31
    Efficacy for Student Engagement	          38

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY	                  43
Research Design	                            43
Participants	                            44
    Teacher Assistants	                   45
    Students        	                   45
    Interviewee	                             46
Instruments	                             47
    Questionnaires for TAs and Students	47
        Expert Validity                     	49
            The First Revision	          50
            The Second Revision	          51
            The Third Revision	          52
    Interview Protocol	                    53
Procedures                                      	54
Data Collection and Analysis	                    55
    Phase1	                             55
    Phase2	                             57

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 	                   59
    
    TAs’ Perspectives	                             59
    Students’ Perspectives	                             63
    Comparison of TAs’ and Students’ Perspectives	69
    Comparison of TAs’ Perspectives and TAs’ Self Efficacy	                                                75

CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION	                          95

Conclusion	                                    95
Pedagogical Implications 	                           97
Limitations of the Study and Recommendations for Future Research	                                              99

REFERENCES	103

Appendix A Evaluation for TAs 	113
Appendix B Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs 	114
Appendix C TA Efficacy Scale 	117
Appendix D Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for Students	120
Appendix E The First Revision	123
Appendix F The Second Revision	124
Appendix G The Third Revision	125
Appendix H Interview Protocol	126



List of Tables

Table 1 Name of the Three Questionnaires and the Items in Questionnaires	48
Table 2 Explanation of the Coding System 	58
Table 3 Mean Scores for the TAs’ Perspectives in Various Dimensions on Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs	60
Table 4 Mean Scores for TAs in Each Item on Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs	61
Table 5 Mean Scores for the Students’ Perspectives in Various Dimensions on Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for Students 	64
Table 6 Mean Scores for Students in Each Item on Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for Students	66
Table 7 The Suggestions for Effective TA Efficacy on Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for Students	67
Table 8 The t-Test of An Effective TA between All TAs and Students	70
Table 9 The t-Test of An Effective TA for Instructional Strategies between All TAs and Students	71
Table 10 The t-Test of An Effective TA for Class Management between All TAs and Students	71
Table 11 The t-Test of An Effective TA for Student Engagement between All TAs and Students	71
Table 12 Comparison of Mean Scores and SD for TAs and Students in Each Item on Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs and Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for Students	72
Table 13 Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs vs. TA Efficacy Scale	76
Table 14 Instructional Strategies-Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs vs. TA Efficacy Scale	77
Table 15 Classroom Management- Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs vs. Self Efficacy Scale	77
Table 16 Student Engagement- Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs vs. TA Efficacy Scale	77
Table 17 Comparison of Mean Scores and SD for TAs in Each Item on Effective TA Efficacy Questionnaire for TAs vs. TA Efficacy Scale 	81

REFERENCES

Abu-Tineh, A. M.; Khasawneh, S. A.; & Khalaileh, H. A. (2011) Teacher self-efficacy and classroom management styles in Jordanian schools. Management in Education, 25(4), 175-181.

Allinder, R. M. (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the instructional practices ofspecial education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education & Special Education, 17, 86-95.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Anthony, T., & Kritsonis, W. (2007) A mixed methods assessment of the effectiveness of strategic e-mentoring in improving the self-efficacy and persistence (or retention) of alternatively certified novice teachers within an inner city school. District Doctoral Forum National Journal for Publishing and Monitoring Doctoral Student Research, 4(1), 1-8.

Armor, D., Conroy-Oseguera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L., Pascal, A., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading programs in selected Los Angeles minority schools. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 130 243).

Ashton, P. T. (1985). Motivation and the teacher's sense of efficacy. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education, Vol. 2 (pp. 141-171). 

Ashton, P. T., Olejnik, S., Crocker, L., & McAuliffe, M. (1982). Measurement problems in the study of teachers’ sense of efficacy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1982). Teachers' sense of efficacy: Toward an ecological model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy
and student achievement. New York: Longman.

Aspy, D. N., & Buhler, J. H. (1975). The effect of teachers' inferred self concept upon student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 68, 386-389.

Atay, D. (2007). Beginning teacher efficacy and the practicum in an EFL context. Teacher Development 11 (2), 203-219.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.

Bandura, A. (1994). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp. 1-45). New York: Cambridge UP.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bandura, A. (1999). A social cognitive theory of personality. In L.Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality (2nd ed., pp. 154-196). New York: Guilford Publications.

Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change. Vol. VII: Factors affecting implementation and continuation (Report No. R-1589/7-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.140 432).

Bolshakova, V., Johnson, C., & Czerniak, C. (2011). It depends on what science teacher you got”: urban science self-efficacy from teacher and student voices. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(4), 961-997.

Bong, M., & Skaalvik E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology, 15(1), 1-40.

Brophy, J. (1988). Educating teachers about managing classrooms and students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(1), 1-18.

Brosh, H. (1996). Perceived characteristic of the effective language teacher. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 125-138.

Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2000). A longitudinal study of teacher burnout and perceived self-efficacy in classroom management. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 239-254.

Brown, A.V. (2009). Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Effective Foreign Language Teaching: A Comparison of Ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 46-60

Bruce, C. D., & Ross, J. A. (2008). A model for increasing reform implementation and teacher efficacy: teacher peer coaching in grade 3 and 6 mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(2), 346-370.

Combs, A. (1965). The professional education of teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Cohen, G., Miller, C., Stonehill, R., Geddes, C., & Department of Education, W. C. (2000). The Class-Size Reduction Program: Boosting Student Achievement in Schools across the Nation. A First-Year Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. ERIC Digests, ED 446349.

Coladarci, T., & Fink, D. R. (1995). Correlations among measures of teacher efficacy: Are they measuring the same thing? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Cothran, D. J., & Ennis, C. D. (2000). Building bridges to engagement: Communicating respect and care for students in urban high schools. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 33, 106-118.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W., Plano, C. V., Gutmann, M., & Hanson, W. (2003). Advances in mixed method design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddie (Eds.), Hankbook of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Czerniak, C., & Schriver-Waldon, M. (1991). A study of science teaching efficacy using qualitative and quantitative research methods. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Service Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.

Demarte, P. J., & Sorgman, M. I. (1973). A pilot study to investigate the effects of courses in humanistics education on the self-perceptions of preservice teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council for the Social Studies, San Francisco, California.

Emmer, E. (1990). A scale for measuring teacher efficacy in classroom management and discipline. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.

Emmer, E. T., & Hickman, J. (1991). Teacher efficacy in classroom management and discipline. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51(3), 755-66. 

Eslami, Z., & Fatahi, A. (2008). Teachers' Sense of Self-Efficacy, English Proficiency, and Instructional Strategies: A Study of Nonnative EFL Teachers in Iran. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 11(4), 1-19.

Gencer, A. S., & Cakiroglu, J. (2007). Turkish preservice science teachers efficacy beliefs regarding science teaching and their beliefs about classroom management. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 664-675.
Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, H. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 451-458.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: a construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569-582.

Glickman, C., & Tamashiro, R. (1980). Classifying teachers’ beliefs about discipline. Educational Leadership, 37(6), 459-464.

Goddard, R., Hoy, W., & Woolfolk, A. (2004) Collective efficacy beliefs: theoretical developments, empirical evidence, and future directions. Researcher, 3(33), 3-13.

Gusky, T. R. (1981). Measurement of responsibility teachers assume for academic successes and failures in the classroom. Journal of Teacher Education, 81 (1), 41-47.

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

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

Henson, K. (2001). Relationships between pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy, task analysis, and classroom management beliefs. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

Henson, R. K., Bennett, D. T., Sienty, S. F., & Chambers, S. M. (2000). The relationship between means-end task analysis and content specific and global self-efficacy in emergency certification teachers: Exploring a new model of self-efficacy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

Hilton, J. L. (1999). Teaching large classes. In B. Perlman, L. I. McCann, & S. H. McFadden (Eds.), Lessons learned: Practical advice for the teaching of psychology, 115-120.

Horner, S. L., & Shwery, C. S. (2002). Becoming an engaged, self-regulated reader. Theory into Practice, 41, 102-109.

Hudley, C., Daoud, A., & Hershberg, R. (2002). Factors supporting school engagement and 	achievement among adolescents. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED465774)

Jenkins, J. J. (1991). Teaching psychology in large classes: Research and personal experience. Teaching of Psychology, 18(2), 74-80.

Keiffer, K. M., & Henson, R. K. (2000). Development and validity of the sources of self-efficacy Inventory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Mesurment in Educstion, New Orleans: LA.

Kususanto, P., Nizam, H., & Jamil, H. (2010). Students’ self-esteem and their perception of teacher behavior: a study of between-class ability grouping. Electronic journal of research in educational psychology, 8(2), 707-724.

Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lincoln, Y. A., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Malikow, M. (2005). Effective teacher study. National Forum of Teacher Education-journal electronic, 16, 3. http://www.nationalforum.com/ Archives.html.

Martin, A. J. (2006) The relationship between teachers’ perceptions of student motivation and engagement and teachers’ enjoyment of and confidence in teaching. Asia-Pacofoc Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 73-93.

Martin, K., Yin, Z., & Baldwin, B. (1998). Construct validation of the attitudes and beliefs classroom control inventory. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 33(2), 6-15.

Meece, J. I., Herman, P., & McCombs, B. (2003). Relations of learner-centered teaching practices to adolescents’ achievement goals. Instructional Journal of Educational Research, 39, 457-475.

Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., & Pratt, J. (1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5-7.

Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child Development, 60, 981-992.

Miller-Whitehead, M. (2002). Class Size and Student Science Achievement: Not as Easy as It Sounds. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Chattanooga, TN.

Montgomery, A. F., & Rossi, R. J. (1994). Becoming at risk of failure in America's schools. In R.J. Rossi (Ed.), Schools and students at risk: context and framework for positive change (pp. 3-22). New York: Teachers College Press.

Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research, 40(1), 120-123.

Newmann, F. M., Wehlage, G. G., & Lamborn, S. D. (1992). The significant and source of student engagement. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in secondary schools, 11-39. New York: Teacher College Press.

Norton, J. L. (1996). The Effective Practitioner: Images from First Year Teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Tuscaloosa, AL.

Park, G. P., & Lee, H. W. (2006). The characteristics of effective English teachers as perceived by high school teachers and students in Korea. Asia Pacific Education Review 7(2), 236-248.

Riggs, I., & Enochs, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625-638.

Roberts, J. K., & Henson, R. K. (2001). A confirm factor analysis of a new measure of teacher efficacy: Ohio State Efficacy Scale. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, Washington.

Rogers, C. (1959). A Theory of Therapy. Personality and Interpresonal Relationships as Developed in the Client-centered Framework. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A Study of a Science. Vol.3: Formulations of the Person and the Social Context. New York: McGraw Hill. 

Rose, J. S., & Medway, F. J. (1981). Measurement of teachers’ beliefs in their control over student outcome. Journal of Educational Research, 74, 185-190.
Ross, J. A. (1992). Teacher efficacy and the effect of coaching on student achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 17(1), 51-65.

Ross, J. A. (1994). The impact of an inservice to promote cooperative learning on the stability of teacher-efficacy. Teaching & Teacher Education, 10, 381-394.

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1-28.

Saricoban, A. (2010). Views of EFL teachers and students on teachers' self-efficacy. Ekev Academic Review, 42, 321-330.

Soodak, L. C., & Podell, D. M. (1993). Teacher efficacy and student problems as factors in special education referral. Journal of Special Education, 27, 66-81.

Soodak, L. C., & Podell, D. M. (1994). Teachers’ thinking about difficult-to-teach students. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 44–51.

Strage, A. (2008). Traditional and non-traditional college students’ descriptions of the “ideal” professor and the “ideal” course and perceived strengths limitations. College Student, 42, 225-231

Swars, S. (2005). Examining perceptions of mathematics teaching effectiveness among elementary preservice teachers with differing levels of mathematics teacher efficacy. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(2).

Tauber, R. T. (1999) Classroom management: Sound theory and effective practice, 3rd edn. London: Bergin & Garvey.

Thompson, J. J., & Windschitl, M. A. (2002). Engagement in Science Learning among Academically At-Risk Girls: Sense of Self and Motivation To Learn across Learning Contexts. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans.

Tschannen-Moran, M., & McMaster, P. (2009). Sources of self‐efficacy: Four professional development formats and their relationship to self‐efficacy and implementation of a new teaching strategy. The Elementary School Journal, 110(2), 228-245.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202-248.

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.

Vogt, W. (1984). Developing a teacher evaluation system. Spectrum, 2(1), 41-46.

Vreven, D., & McFadden, S. (2007). An Empirical Assessment of Cooperative Groups in Large, Time-Compressed, Introductory Courses. Innovative Higher Education, 32(2), 85-92.

Weiner, B., Frieze, I., Kukla, A., Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum, R. M. (1971). Perceiving the causes of success and failure. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H.
Kelly, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.) Attributions perceiving the
causes of behavior. Morristown, N. J: General Learning Press.

William, M. & Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. A social constructivist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Woolfolk, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 81-91.

Wolfgang, C. H. (1995). Solving education problems: Strategies for classroom teacher (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 

Wong M. S. (2005). Language learning strategies and language self-efficacy. RELC, 36 (3), 245-269.

Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability of self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journey of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 407-415.

Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989b). Social cognitive theory of organization of management. Academy of Management Review. 14, 361-384.

Yilmaz, H., & Cavas, P. (2008). The effect of the teaching practice on pre-service elementary teachers’ science teaching efficacy and classroom management beliefs. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(1), 45-54.

孫志麟（民88）。教師自我效能：有效教學的關鍵。教育研究資訊。10 (2)。頁35-45。