Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI)

Abstract

The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI) is a specialized psychological scale designed to measure the self-efficacy beliefs of educators regarding their competency and effectiveness in teaching science. Developed primarily by Riggs and Knochs (1990) for elementary teachers, the STEBI operationalizes core tenets of Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory within the specific context of science education. The instrument is crucial for research in teacher preparation and professional development, providing a metric for two correlated yet distinct dimensions of efficacy: Personal Science Teaching Efficacy (PSTE) and Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy (STOE).

The scale consists of 25 items rated on a five-point Likert scale, allowing researchers and teacher educators to assess how confident teachers feel in their ability to execute science instruction and their belief that their efforts will genuinely lead to positive student achievement outcomes.

Keywords

Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument, STEBI, Self-Efficacy, Outcome Expectancy, Teacher Beliefs, Science Education, Elementary Education, Psychometric Scale, Teacher Training

Authors

Iris M. Riggs, Larry M. Knochs, Larry G. Enochs, Toni Posnanski, Elizabeth A. Hagedorn

Purpose

The primary purpose of the STEBI is to quantitatively assess the psychological disposition of pre-service and in-service teachers toward teaching science. It aims to diagnose the strength of teachers’ beliefs about their own teaching capabilities and the extent to which they feel external factors or student characteristics limit the effectiveness of their instruction.

By distinguishing between the personal sense of efficacy and the belief in general teaching outcomes, the instrument allows teacher preparation programs to identify specific areas where intervention or targeted professional development is required. High scores on the PSTE factor indicate a teacher’s strong belief in their skills, while high scores on the STOE factor indicate a strong belief in the generalized impact of good science teaching on student learning.

Construct

The STEBI measures two distinct constructs rooted in Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy:

• Personal Science Teaching Efficacy (PSTE): This factor reflects the teacher’s conviction that they possess the necessary skills, knowledge, and abilities to successfully teach science concepts and manage science learning activities effectively. Items related to PSTE focus on the teacher’s personal competence (e.g., “I know the steps necessary to teach science concepts effectively”).
• Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy (STOE): This factor reflects the teacher’s belief that their instruction, regardless of their personal skill level, will lead to positive changes in student science achievement. STOE assesses the teacher’s perception of the link between effective teaching practices and measurable student outcomes, often related to external variables or the general nature of outcome expectancy (e.g., “When the science grades of students improve, it is most often due to their teacher having found a more effective teaching approach”).

Validity

The STEBI demonstrates strong evidence of construct validity, largely supported by consistent factor analytic results which confirm the theoretical separation of PSTE and STOE. Initial development procedures included rigorous content validation through expert review to ensure that the items accurately represented the domain of science teaching efficacy beliefs, particularly for the elementary level.

Furthermore, the instrument exhibits robust predictive validity, as PSTE scores are often positively correlated with instructional effort, persistence when facing student difficulties, and the adoption of innovative teaching methods, aligning with theoretical expectations regarding self-efficacy’s influence on behavior.

Reliability

The reliability of the STEBI has been extensively documented across various teacher populations. The scale typically shows high levels of internal consistency. Studies consistently report Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients well above the acceptable threshold of 0.70 for both subscales, often reaching into the 0.80s and 0.90s for PSTE, and generally remaining above 0.75 for STOE.

This high internal consistency suggests that the items within each factor measure the intended underlying construct reliably. Additionally, the instrument has demonstrated good test-retest reliability, indicating stability of the measured efficacy beliefs over short periods of time, which is essential for longitudinal studies of teacher development.

Factor Analysis

Initial and subsequent factor analyses of the STEBI consistently confirm its hypothesized two-factor structure. Utilizing techniques such as Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), researchers have verified that the 25 items load cleanly onto the two orthogonal factors: PSTE and STOE. The PSTE factor typically accounts for a larger proportion of the variance explained, reflecting the centrality of personal belief in the efficacy construct.

The clear separation of the factors—with 13 items typically loading onto PSTE and 12 items loading onto STOE—supports the theoretical distinction between a teacher’s personal sense of capability and their generalized belief in the efficacy of teaching outcomes. This factorial clarity is a primary strength of the Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument as a measurement tool.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report inventory/Psychometric Psychological Scale

Format: 5-point Likert scale (SA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, UN = Uncertain, D = Disagree, SD = Strongly Disagree). Scores are calculated by summing item responses after appropriate reverse scoring.

Language Available: Primarily English (with numerous translations available for research purposes globally).

Population Group: Pre-service and in-service teachers.

Age Group: Adult (typically college students through practicing professionals).

Population Details: Originally developed for elementary school teachers, though versions (such as STEBI-B) have been adapted for use with secondary and specialized science teachers.

Test Methodology: Quantitative assessment of domain-specific self-efficacy beliefs using established psychometric principles.

Keywords

Teacher Efficacy, Science Education, Riggs and Knochs, Instructional Beliefs, STOE, PSTE, Educational Measurement, Self-Assessment

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Information not provided in the original source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Information not provided in the original source content.

Correspondence Address: Information not provided in the original source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The initial version of the STEBI was developed in 1990 by Riggs and Knochs. The instrument is generally available for non-commercial academic research use, often requiring direct permission from the primary authors or copyright holders, such as Anita Woolfolk Hoy, whose website lists the instrument: http://anitawoolfolkhoy.com/instruments/. Specific fees for commercial use or large-scale administration are determined on a case-by-case basis by the rights holders.

Reference’s

• Riggs, I., & Knochs, L. (1990). Towards the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625-637.
• Enochs, L. G., Posnanski, T, & Hagedorn, E. (1999, March). Science teaching self-efficacy beliefs: Measurement, recent research, and directions for future research. Paper presented at the National Association of Research in Science Education, Boston, MA.
• Further research and related publications are often available via associated academic websites: http://u.osu.edu/hoy.17/research/instruments/ and http://u.osu.edu/hoy.17/publications/.

Items of the Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. When a student does better than usual in science‚ it is often because the teacher exerted a little extra effort.
2. I am continually finding better ways to teach science.
3. Even when I try very hard‚ I don’t teach science as well as I do most subjects.
4. When the science grades of students improve‚ it is most often due to their teacher ha‎ving found a more effective teaching approach.
5. I know the steps necessary to teach science concepts effectively.
6. I am not very effective in monitoring science experiments.
7. If students are underachieving in science‚ it is most likely due to ineffective science teaching.
8. I generally teach science ineffectively.
9. The inadequacy of a student’s science background can be overcome by good teaching.
10. The low science achievement of some students cannot generally be blamed on their teachers.
11. When a low achieving child progresses in science‚ it is usually due to extra attention given by the teacher.
12. I understand science concepts well enough to be effective in teaching elementary science.
13. Increased effort in science teaching produces little change in some students’ science achievement.
14. The teacher is generally responsible for the achievement of students in science.
15. Students’ achievement in science is directly related to their teacher’s effectiveness in science teaching.
16. If parents comment that their child is showing more interest in science at school‚ it is probably due to the performance of the child’s teacher.
17. I find it difficult to explain to students why science experiments work.
18. I am typically able to answer students’ science questions.
19. I wonder if I have the necessary skills to teach science.
20. Effectiveness in science teaching has little influence on the achievement of students with low motivation.
21. Given a choice‚ I would not invite the principal to evaluate my science teaching.
22. When a student has difficulty understanding a science concept‚ I am usually at a loss as to how to help the student understand it better.
23. When teaching science‚ I usually welcome student questions.
24. I don’t know what to do to turn students on to science.
25. Even teachers with good science teaching abilities cannot help some kids learn science.