Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES)

Abstract

The Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) is a widely utilized psychometric instrument designed to measure a teacher’s belief in their capacity to successfully execute the necessary actions required to bring about desired student outcomes. Developed primarily by Megan Tschannen-Moran and Anita Woolfolk Hoy, the scale exists in both a 24-item Long Form and a 12-item Short Form. The TSES assesses self-efficacy across three core dimensions of professional teaching practice: Student Engagement, Instructional Strategies, and Classroom Management. The instrument provides a nuanced understanding of how teachers perceive their ability to influence students, manage challenging behaviors, and adapt instructional methods.

Keywords

Teacher Efficacy, Self-Efficacy, Instructional Strategies, Classroom Management, Student Engagement, Educational Psychology, Psychological Measurement.

Authors

Megan Tschannen-Moran, Anita Woolfolk Hoy, Wayne K. Hoy.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the TSES is to provide researchers and practitioners with a reliable and validated measure of teacher efficacy beliefs, moving beyond earlier, less nuanced instruments. It is specifically designed to assess how strongly teachers believe they can influence student learning and behavior, even when faced with challenging circumstances or difficult students.

This measurement is critical because a teacher’s sense of efficacy is highly correlated with essential professional outcomes, including greater persistence in the face of setbacks, higher levels of enthusiasm, willingness to adopt new teaching methods, and ultimately, improved student achievement and motivation.

Construct

The TSES measures Teacher Efficacy, which is defined as the teacher’s judgment of their capabilities to bring about desired outcomes of student engagement and learning. This construct is rooted in Albert Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory, specifically the concept of self-efficacy applied to the educational context.

The scale operationalizes teacher efficacy into three distinct, yet related, domains that capture the complexity of the teaching role:

• Efficacy in Student Engagement: Beliefs about the ability to motivate students and promote positive attitudes toward learning.
• Efficacy in Instructional Strategies: Beliefs about the ability to use effective teaching methods, adapt curricula, and assess comprehension.
• Efficacy in Classroom Management: Beliefs about the ability to maintain order, control disruptive behavior, and manage the classroom environment effectively.

Validity

The construct validity of the TSES is strongly supported by empirical evidence confirming its robust three-factor structure (Engagement, Instruction, and Management), which aligns theoretically with the major tasks of professional teaching. The items were developed through a systematic process involving extensive literature review and input from practicing educators, ensuring high content validity.

Furthermore, the scale has demonstrated strong criterion and predictive validity. Scores on the TSES typically predict teacher persistence, job satisfaction, and the likelihood of teachers implementing innovative pedagogical techniques. The instrument effectively captures the elusive nature of teacher efficacy as a context-specific, multi-dimensional belief.

Reliability

The TSES demonstrates strong internal consistency, confirming its reliability across both the Long and Short forms. High Cronbach’s alpha coefficients indicate that the items within the overall scale and its subscales are highly correlated and consistently measure the intended construct. The following table summarizes the reliability data:

	Long Form			Short Form
	Mean	SD	Alpha	Mean	SD	Alpha
OSTES (Overall)	7.1	0.94	0.94	7.1	0.98	0.90
Engagement	7.3	1.1	0.87	7.2	1.2	0.81
Instruction	7.3	1.1	0.91	7.3	1.2	0.86
Management	6.7	1.1	0.90	6.7	1.2	0.86

Factor Analysis

Empirical evidence derived from Factor Analysis consistently confirms the robust, three-factor structure of the TSES. Both the 24-item Long Form and the 12-item Short Form are designed to yield scores for the three correlated, but distinct, efficacy dimensions. This structure ensures that the scale does not just measure a general sense of competence but captures the specific areas where teachers feel more or less efficacious.

The factor structure guides the scoring process, where specific item groupings correspond to the defined subscales: Student Engagement, Instructional Strategies, and Classroom Management. This multi-dimensional approach offers greater diagnostic utility than unitary measures of teacher efficacy.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Psychometric Scale

Format: The scale uses a 9-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“nothing”) to 9 (“A great Deal”) to quantify the teacher’s level of perceived influence or capability regarding the specific task described in the item.

Language Available: Primarily English (widely translated and adapted for use in numerous international research studies).

Population Group: Teachers (In-service and prospective educators).

Age Group: Adult (Professionals).

Population Details: Educators working across various educational levels, predominantly K-12 settings.

Test Methodology: Quantitative survey methodology. Scoring involves calculating mean scores for the overall scale and the three subscales (Engagement, Instruction, Management).

Keywords

TSES, Teacher Beliefs, Educational Measurement, Cronbach’s Alpha, Psychometrics, Instructional Efficacy, Classroom Management Efficacy.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not provided in source material)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not provided in source material)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Information not provided in source material)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The foundational work leading to the refinement and validation of the 24-item TSES was published in 2001. The instrument is generally available for non-commercial research purposes without fee, often accessible directly from the authors’ academic websites.

The instrument is available at: http://anitawoolfolkhoy.com/instruments/ and http://u.osu.edu/hoy.17/research/instruments/

Reference’s

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

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

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.

Additional related publications are available at: http://u.osu.edu/hoy.17/publications/

Items of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES)

Long form

Directions: This questionnaire is designed to help us gain a better understanding of the kinds of things that cr‎eate difficulties for teachers in their school activities. Please indicate your opinion about each of the statements below. Your answers are confidential.

1. How much can you do to get through to the most difficult students?

2. How much can you do to help your students think critically?

3. How much can you do to control disruptive behavior in the classroom?

4. How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in school work?

5. To what extent can you make your expectations clear about student behavior?

6. How much can you do to get students to believe they can do well in school work?

7. How well can you respond to difficult questions from your students?

8. How well can you establish routines to keep activities running smoothly?

9. How much can you do to help your students’ value learning?

10. How much can you gauge student comprehension of what you have taught?

11. To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?

12. How much can you do to foster student creativity?

13. How much can you do to get children to follow classroom rules?

14. How much can you do to improve the understanding of a student who is failing?

15. How much can you do to calm a student who is disruptive or noisy?

16. How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of students?

17. How much can you do to adjust your lessons to the proper level for individual students?

18. How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies?

19. How well can you keep a few problem students form ruining an entire lesson?

20. To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused?

21. How well can you respond to defiant students?

22. How much can you assist families in helping their children do well in school?

23. How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?

24. How well can you provide appropriate challenges for very capable students?

Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (short form)

1. How much can you do to control disruptive behavior in the classroom?

2. How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in school work?

3. How much can you do to get students to believe they can do well in school work?

4. How much can you do to help your students value learning?

5. To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?

6. How much can you do to get children to follow classroom rules?

7. How much can you do to calm a student who is disruptive or noisy?

8. How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of students?

9. How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies?

10. To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused?

11. How much can you assist families in helping their children do well in school?

12. How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?

Scoring Key (9-point Likert Scale): 1=nothing, 3=very little, 5=some influence, 7= quite A bit, 9= A great Deal

Long Form Factor Groupings:

• Efficacy in Student Engagement: Items 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 14, 22
• Efficacy in Instructional Strategies: Items 7, 10, 11, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24
• Efficacy in Classroom Management: Items 3, 5, 8, 13, 15, 16, 19, 21

Short Form Factor Groupings:

• Efficacy in Student Engagement: Items 2, 3, 4, 11
• Efficacy in Instructional Strategies: Items 5, 9, 10, 12
• Efficacy in Classroom Management: Items 1, 6, 7, 8