Elsevier

Teaching and Teacher Education

Volume 85, October 2019, Pages 45-57
Teaching and Teacher Education

How does learner-centered education affect teacher self-efficacy? The case of project-based learning in Korea

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.05.005Get rights and content

Highlights

  • A quasi-experimental research design was used to assess how teacher self-efficacy is affected by project-based learning.

  • The findings indicate that project-based learning has a positive effect on teacher self-efficacy.

  • The effects of project-based learning on teacher self-efficacy may be mediated by positive responses by students.

Abstract

Using data gathered from a project-based learning (PBL) intervention program, this study uses quasi-experimental methods to assess how PBL is associated with teacher self-efficacy. Generally, teacher self-efficacy has only been assumed to be a determinant of instructional practice, but we find that teacher self-efficacy can be positively affected by increased use of PBL. Among sub-scales of teacher self-efficacy, PBL is positively associated with student engagement and instruction. Analysis using student data indicate that positive responses by students to the instructional practice may mediate the association between PBL and teacher self-efficacy.

Introduction

Teacher self-efficacy, defined as teachers' beliefs in their own capabilities to be effective teachers (Morris, Usher, & Chen, 2017), has been found to be associated with a variety of teacher characteristics and behavior (Kleinsasser, 2014). In particular, it has been argued that teacher self-efficacy determines teachers’ attitude and approach pertaining to instructional practice (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, & Hoy, 1998).

However, the majority of studies examining the relationship between teacher self-efficacy and instructional practice have relied on cross-sectional data (Holzberger, Philipp, & Kunter, 2013). This means that the data used for analysis can allow for comparison across respondents, but cannot account for changes over time, severely limiting the empirical ability to identify causality. Furthermore, theoretical discussions on teacher self-efficacy imply that there exists a reciprocal or cyclical relationship with classroom experiences (Burton, Bamberry, & Harris-Boundy, 2005; Ross, Cousins, Gadalla, & Hannay, 1999; Tschannen-moran, Hoy, & Hoy, 1998). As such, teacher self-efficacy itself may be an outcome that is affected by changes in instructional practice.

In order to empirically explore the association between teacher self-efficacy and instructional practice, the present study used data from a project-based learning (PBL) program intervention that took place in Daegu Metropolitan City in South Korea.1 In 2016, the Daegu Metropolitan Office of Education provided six middle schools with a PBL program intervention to encourage middle school teachers to change instructional methods from teacher-centered lectures to learner-centered PBL. In the PBL program, treatment group teachers were provided training on how to implement PBL and were asked to use it in class during the semester, while the six control group teachers did not receive any inducements to change their instructional practice. With data gathered on teachers and students from the program, we used quasi-experimental research methods to assess how increase in PBL-use over a single semester is associated with changes in teacher self-efficacy.

PBL is a form of education that has theoretical roots in constructivism, which views learning as a natural process where meaning is made by student interactions and reflections of ideas and experiences (Dewey, 1938). In contrast to traditional teacher-centered teaching methods, PBL situates students’ personal interests and needs at the center of learning, and emphasizes student autonomy (Morgan, 1983; Thomas, 2000). Instead of using a single standard that is deemed applicable or necessary for all students, learner-centered practices like PBL recognize that each student has unique interests, learning styles and perspectives which need to be tended to in order to achieve optimal learning (Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Lambert & McCombs, 1998; McCombs & Whisler, 1997).

Advocates of PBL have called for its implementation in order to overcome the limitations of traditional teacher-centered rote-learning. It has been argued that learner-centered approaches like PBL are necessary in order for students to develop crucial skills needed in the 21st century, including cooperation, independent thinking, negotiation, collaboration, and communication (Bell, 2010). As such, educational reforms around the world have centered on shifting teaching practices away from those that are teacher-centered to those are more centered on the learner (Bümen, 2009; Nie, Tan, Liau, Lau, & Chua, 2013; Tsybulsky & Muchnik-Rozanov, 2019; UNESCO, 2000, 2008).

PBL is defined as learning that is focused on projects that engage students in investigation. More specifically, it allows students to learn by pursuing solutions through asking questions, debating ideas, designing plans, and communicating with others. The essential components of PBL are the “question” that drives student activities and the “final product” formed by students in response to the driving question. As students make choices on how to solve or answer the question, teachers provide the necessary guidance and supervision (Adderley, 1975; Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Also, PBL is not simply a set of classroom exercises that are peripheral to the curriculum, but is comprised of activities that fundamentally shape the learning experience (Thomas, 2000). Merely taking part in projects or group work does not fully constitute PBL, and the absence of a driving question runs the risk of leading students to simply “do” projects without gaining substantial “learning” in the process (Barron et al., 1998).

In a typical PBL class, the teacher initially hands out and explains the problem that the students need to address through the project. This consists of providing background information, explaining the main question of the project, and giving instructions on the specific tasks that students need to accomplish. Next, in groups, students develop a plan for the project, which includes brainstorming ideas, gathering facts, assigning different roles and tasks amongst one another, and organizing thoughts and ideas. The process culminates in an end product that is presented to other students (Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Helle, Tynjälä, & Olkinuora, 2006).

Empirical studies that assess the impact of PBL have been conducted for various outcomes at different levels of schooling (Kokotsaki, Menzies, & Wiggins, 2016). PBL has been found to be positively associated with improved content knowledge (Al-Balushi & Al-Aamri, 2014; Geier et al., 2008; Hernández-Ramos & De La Paz, 2009; Karaçalli & Korur, 2014). This is likely due to the positive influence that PBL can have on student motivation and attitudes toward learning (Al-Balushi & Al-Aamri, 2014; Barak & Asad, 2012; Mioduser & Betzer, 2008). In a longitudinal study of mathematics instruction, students that took part in PBL developed different forms of knowledge compared to students that took part in traditional teacher-centered instruction (Boaler, 1998). The former developed conceptual understandings that required deeper thinking, while those in the latter group tended to develop procedural knowledge based on information recall.

What has been less examined is how the use of PBL is associated with changes in teachers. Studies have assessed how principles of PBL can be used by pre-service teachers in their training (Ljung-Djärf, Magnusson, & Peterson, 2014; Mettas & Constantinou, 2008; Tsybulsky & Muchnik-Rozanov, 2019), but such studies have not looked at how actual teachers experience PBL in classrooms. This study aims to fill the gap in the literature by examining how teachers respond to the in-class implementation of PBL, with a focus on teacher self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy reflects an individual’s belief in their own ability to perform tasks effectively (Bandura, 1997). Rather than actual level of competency, it is a future-oriented perception about one’s own competency (Woolfolk Hoy & Burke Spero, 2005). Teacher self-efficacy can be defined as the teacher's beliefs about their capability to teach a subject matter effectively to students and bring about desired outcomes of student engagement and learning (Holzberger et al., 2013; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). It is deemed a critical factor that strongly influences a teacher's general orientation toward educational processes (Woolfolk & Hoy, 1990).

According to social cognitive theory, the development of teacher self-efficacy is rooted in how teachers perceive and interpret their own experiences and the social environment (Bandura, 1986, 1997). The four major sources of teacher self-efficacy development are mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological state. Mastery experience refers to how successful one has been on a given task, and vicarious experience refers to indirect experience of success through observing others. Verbal persuasion refers to evaluations and judgments by others and physiological state is the general mental and emotional condition of the teacher.

Studies have demonstrated that teacher self-efficacy is associated with various aspects of education, including teachers' job satisfaction (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Steca, & Malone, 2006), student achievement outcomes (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Caprara et al., 2006), students’ orderly behavior (Newmann, Rutter, & Smith, 1989), and teacher burnout and retention (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007). Existing studies have tended to treat teacher self-efficacy as a determinant of instructional behavior and practice, but not vice versa (Evers, Brouwers, & Tomic, 2002; Nie et al., 2013; Suprayogi, Valcke, and Godwin, 2017; Zee & Koomen, 2016). In particular, it has been argued that teacher self-efficacy determines the use of constructivist instructional practices (Nie et al., 2013). However, studies on teacher self-efficacy rarely use longitudinal or experimental data with viable control groups (Bümen, 2009; Holzberger et al., 2013). Studies using cross-sectional data can be used to assess correlation, but correlation does not necessarily imply causation. As such, while some studies claim or assume that improving teacher self-efficacy is the first step toward improving or changing instructional practices, the present study aims to see if the opposite may hold, as well. That is, whether changes in instructional practices might affect teacher self-efficacy.

Although few in number, existing studies provide evidence for how teacher self-efficacy can be an outcome affected by instructional experiences. Using longitudinal panel data, Holzberger et al. (2013) found stronger evidence for instructional quality to predict teacher self-efficacy, rather than vice-versa. Also, Stein and Wang (1988) found that previous success in the implementation of innovative teaching practices enhanced teacher self-efficacy but found limited evidence of the latter affecting the former. By examining how changes in PBL influence teacher self-efficacy, this study seeks to contribute to the literature on the development of teacher self-efficacy, particularly as it pertains to instructional practice.

Rather than simply a product or sum of experiences, the key to change in self-efficacy is how events are cognitively processed by individuals (Bandura, 1997). When teachers interpret teaching experiences to be educationally successful, their sense of self-efficacy can increase, while perceptions of failure can diminish it. Therefore, teacher self-efficacy may change in response to changes in classroom experiences. Shifting from traditional teaching methods to PBL encompasses a change in the fundamental approach to learning from one that is teacher-centered to learner-centered. As such, implementation of PBL can significantly change the classroom experience of both teachers and students. It can change the way teachers teach, how students learn, and how teachers and students interact, which can influence how teachers perceive their effectiveness as teachers.

In particular, PBL can alter how students respond to the general learning process. Learner-centered approaches like PBL can generate higher student interest by offering expanded views of subject areas, activities that are adaptable to different types of learners, opportunities to work with others, and a more active role in the overall learning process (Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Tschannen-Moran & McMaster, 2009). When teachers observe students to be more engaged and responsive to the materials learned, this can increase the degree to which teachers perceive their instruction to be successful (Mottet, Beebe, Raffeld, & Medlock, 2004). Also, through more communal teacher-student interactions, PBL can improve trust and cooperation between students and teachers (Algan, Cahuc, & Shleifer, 2013), which have been shown to lead to positive behavioral and academic outcomes (Crosnoe, Johnson, & Elder, 2004). Taken together, positive responses in students induced by PBL can positively influence teachers’ perceptions of their ability as teachers, and allow them to increase self-efficacy.

In addition, unlike lecture-based instruction, in PBL, teachers continuously observe how students learn and directly respond to any student need that arises. That is, in addition to providing information and knowledge, teachers also directly guide and supervise students throughout the learning process. Students are also asked to reflect on what they have learned in class, either verbally or in written form, which allow teachers to instantaneously assess how students are learning. Such increased involvement in the learning process and receiving instant information on how well students are learning can increase teachers’ self-efficacy by providing direct confirmation of how effective they are as teachers.

The wealth of empirical evidence on teacher self-efficacy reveal that the construct is strongly related with various aspects of education, including instructional practice. However, treating teacher self-efficacy only as the determinant of educational outcomes and processes have limitations both from a theoretical and practical perspective. Against this backdrop, the present study aims to explore the following research question:

How does the use of project-based learning affect teacher self-efficacy?

Section snippets

Participants

A total of twelve middles schools in Daegu Metropolitan City participated in this study, of which six comprise the treatment group and six the control group. The main targets of the program were teachers from these schools that teach one of the five core academic subjects, Korean, English, math, social studies, and science, to first-year middle school students (7th grade). A total of 139 teachers that meet these criteria participated in the PBL program. The response rate of treatment group

Teacher analysis

Table 5 reports the effect of the PBL program on teacher self-efficacy and its subscales, estimated through the difference-in-differences design expressed in Equation (1). The first column indicates that the PBL program was associated with an increase in teacher self-efficacy by 0.942 standard deviations (p < 0.01). Column 2 reports that the PBL program had a significant association with self-efficacy in instruction by 1.011 standard deviations (p < 0.01), and Column 4 reports that

Discussion and conclusion

In this study, we explored whether increased use of PBL by middle school teachers in Korea improved teacher self-efficacy. Estimates obtained using a difference-in-differences design and instrumental variable approach found that the PBL program had a positive effect on teacher self-efficacy. Also, analysis of student data using a difference-in-differences design found that the PBL program positively affected students’ perception of the level of effort teachers give for interest inducement.

Funding

This work was supported by Korea Development Institute and the Daegu Metropolitan Office of Education. Neither KDI nor the Daegu Metropolitan Office of Education was involved in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the paper; or in the decision to submit the article for publication.

References (55)

  • J.D. Angrist et al.

    Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist's companion

    (2008)
  • P. Ashton et al.

    Making a difference: Teachers' sense of self-efficacy and student achievement

    (1986)
  • A. Bandura

    Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory

    (1986)
  • A. Bandura

    Self-efficacy: The exercise of control

    (1997)
  • M. Barak et al.

    Teaching image-processing concepts in junior high schools: Boys' and girls' achievement and attitudes towards technology

    Research in Science & Technological Education

    (2012)
  • B.J. Barron et al.

    Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem-and project-based learning

    The Journal of the Learning Sciences

    (1998)
  • S. Bell

    Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future

    The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas

    (2010)
  • P. Blumenfeld et al.

    Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning

    Educational Psychologist

    (1991)
  • J. Boaler

    Open and closed mathematics: Student experiences and understandings

    Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

    (1998)
  • N.T. Bümen

    Possible effects of professional development on Turkish teachers' self-efficacy and classroom practice

    Professional Development in Education

    (2009)
  • J.P. Burton et al.

    Developing personal teaching efficacy in new teachers in university settings

    The Academy of Management Learning and Education

    (2005)
  • R. Crosnoe et al.

    Intergenerational bonding in school: The behavioral and contextual correlates of student-teacher relationships

    Sociology of Education

    (2004)
  • J. Dewey

    Experience and education

    (1938)
  • W.J. Evers et al.

    Burnout and self-efficacy: A study of teachers' beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in The Netherlands

    British Journal of Educational Psychology

    (2002)
  • R. Geier et al.

    Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform

    Journal of Research in Science Teaching

    (2008)
  • L. Helle et al.

    Project-based learning in post-secondary education – theory, practice and rubber sling shots

    Higher Education

    (2006)
  • P. Hernández-Ramos et al.

    Learning history in middle school by designing multimedia in a project-based learning experience

    Journal of Research on Technology in Education

    (2009)
  • Cited by (51)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    We would like to thank Joon-Kyung Kim, Yoonsoo Park, Keol Lim, Kyungwon Chang, Kang-Wook Jung, as well as the participants of seminars at Korea Development Institute (KDI), KDI School of Public Policy and Management, and Seoul National University for valuable discussions and suggestions. We also thank Associate Editor Lily Orland-Barak and three anonymous referees for helpful comments that substantially improved the paper. A brief introduction of the data, research design and preliminary results of this paper was reported in KDI report (2017–04) titled “Education Reform through Project-Based Learning (II)” in Korean. Any ethical aspects of the research in this paper has been approved by KDI School Research Ethics Review Committee (KDIS-IRB-2016-01).

    View full text