Effects of Physical Education Student Teachers' Beliefs on Their Instructional Choices

Background/Purpose: Teacher beliefs (e.g., attitudes, values, beliefs) play an important role in implementation of choice (Flowerday & Schraw, 2000). For example, teachers' efficacy beliefs affect their philosophies of classroom management and instructional styles that, in turn, affect their use of instructional choice for students. Currently research focuses primarily on relations of teachers' efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancy to their teaching practices in academic domains. Such inquiries remain largely unexplored in physical education (PE). This study was designed to examine the influence of PE student teachers' efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancy on their use of instructional choices for children.

Method: Participants were 146 PE major students (58 males, 88 females; 87.5% Caucasian) enrolled in the student teaching courses at a southern university. They completed the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001; including efficacy beliefs of instructional strategies, class management, and student engagement) and the Outcome Expectancy Questionnaire (Huang et al., 2009) at the third week of their student teaching semesters. The participants then responded to questionnaires assessing their use of instructional choices at the end of the semesters. Three types of instructional choices were included: cognitive (e.g., allowing students to ask questions), organizational (e.g., letting students choose their partners), and procedural (e.g., providing students opportunities to choose what skills to be included). Correlation analysis and stepwise regression analyses were used to analyze the data.

Analysis/Results: The three efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancy were significantly associated with cognitive and procedural choices (rs = .17 to .48, ps < .05). However, only outcome expectancy was significantly related to organizational choices (r = .17, p < .05). Regression analyses revealed efficacy for class management (β = .39, p <.01) and outcome expectancy (β = .18, p <.05) were significant predictors of cognitive choices, and explained 23.7% of the variance. Similarly, outcome expectancy (β = .34, p <.01) and efficacy for class management (β = .34, p <.01) significantly predicted procedural choices, accounting for 32.2% of the variance. No variables emerged as the predictors for organizational choices.

Conclusions: PE student teachers' beliefs about their abilities to manage class effectively and how effective their teaching could have positive effects on student learning are critical contributors to their use of cognitive and procedural choices for children. Future studies might explore ways to enhance student teachers' efficacy for class management and outcome expectancy during this crucial early stage of their prospective teaching careers.