Unveiling the Role of Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Improving Job Happiness: Insights from Student and Parent Perspectives

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3395028/v1

Download PDF

Article

Unveiling the Role of Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Improving Job Happiness: Insights from Student and Parent Perspectives

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3395028/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Teachers' self-efficacy is closely associated with student and parent satisfaction, and the quality of school education directly affects parental satisfaction. This study aims to investigate the interplay between teachers’ self-efficacy, student satisfaction, and parental satisfaction in a specific city in China. Online questionnaires were utilized to gather data for analysis, aiming to enhance the quality of regional basic education through a comprehensive understanding of this tripartite relationship. The findings highlight the pivotal role of self-efficacy in improving teachers' job happiness, which is influenced by students' satisfaction and parental satisfaction. Factors such as teachers' academic level, learning background, and job satisfaction contribute to the development and augmentation of self-efficacy.

Biological sciences/Psychology

Biological sciences/Psychology/Human behaviour

Students satisfaction

parents satisfaction

teacher self-efficacy

online questionnaires

Chinese teacher

Over the past century, education policies have underscored the central importance of teachers. As foundational pillars of education, catalysts for progress, and instrumental facilitators in fostering talent, teachers are universally acknowledged by scholars, practitioners, and policymakers. The self-efficacy of teachers, an intrinsic characteristic, significantly determines their instructional methods and teaching effectiveness. High self-efficacy amongst teachers is linked with enhanced job satisfaction, commitment to the organization, and resilience against job burnout, all crucial aspects for their welfare and professional evolution. Employing the Talis 2018 international teacher evaluation project, the present study developed a survey instrument to assess and augment a triennial action plan for basic education within a Chinese province. The study aimed to examine if the combined efforts of educational authorities, schools, and teachers, since the inception of the education improvement plan three years prior, have manifested in school practices and the perceptions of students and parents.

Teachers’ Self-efficacy

The concept of self-efficacy was first presented by Bandura in his seminal work Self-efficacy: A Comprehensive Theory of Behavioral Change, a notion that profoundly influenced psychology and expanded into the fields of organizational behavior and education. This prompted researchers to recognize the importance of examining self-efficacy within distinct domains. In education, the theory of self-efficacy found its practical application in the form of teacher self-efficacy. Scholars have provided varied definitions for teacher self-efficacy. Hoover's definition of teacher self-efficacy concerns the belief in teachers' competency and professional knowledge to positively impact and support students [2]. Tschanen-Moran characterized it as the confidence teachers hold in orchestrating and executing specific instructional tasks in particular scenarios [3]. Both definitions frame teacher self-efficacy within the affective domain. Zhang (2010) perceived self-efficacy as an individual's subjective assessment of their capability and job performance in a specific profession [4]. In the realm of education, Yu et al. (2000) depicted teaching efficacy as teachers' acknowledgement and belief in their capacity to effectively execute teaching duties and accomplish instructional goals [5]. Zhan (2005) considers it as a perception and belief involving teachers' confidence in fostering students' learning [6]. Despite variations in terminologies, these definitions converge on the fundamental idea of teachers' self-evaluation of their abilities, which is subject to modification based on personal growth and external conditions.

The Utility of Teachers' Self-efficacy

Teachers' self-efficacy has a significant influence on students' academic attitudes and their scholastic achievements. Findings from a study utilizing the teaching efficacy scale by Gibson and Dembo indicate a noteworthy positive correlation between teachers' self-efficacy and students' academic progress. Woolfolk and Hoy discovered that teachers' self-efficacy directly impacts students' perception of their school and various subjects, ultimately affecting their overall academic performance [7]. Furthermore, the sense of self-efficacy in teachers determines their mindset when encountering hurdles. A study conducted by Guskey reveals that teachers with heightened self-efficacy exhibit greater openness to reforms, enhanced work zeal, improved self-assurance, and increased productivity [8]. Teachers' self-efficacy also governs their resolve to continue in the teaching profession, as shown by Peter's research on 1,065 educators from the United States and Canada which established a correlation between variations in teacher efficacy across multiple dimensions and teacher turnover rates [9].

In the sphere of Chinese research on teacher self-efficacy, various viewpoints have been presented by scholars. Firstly, teachers' self-efficacy has a significant bearing on their pedagogical capabilities and behaviours. Su Lin's research, targeting rural middle school educators, concluded that teaching beliefs and perceptions of teachers positively affect their verbal communication, interpretation of teaching materials, interaction with students, and stress management abilities [10]. Secondly, the self-efficacy of teachers has implications for their job satisfaction and happiness. A study by Zhang Ping revealed a meaningful positive association between teacher efficacy and job contentment, and Cui Rongbao's research found that personal teaching efficacy has a positive effect on teacher happiness [11]. Thirdly, enhancing teachers' self-efficacy is a critical avenue for their professional advancement. Cai Yonghong proposed that teachers' self-efficacy fuels their enthusiasm for work, with those possessing high self-efficacy being more actively involved in educational reforms and more focused on personal professional growth. In contrast, teachers with diminished self-efficacy find it challenging to adapt to various reforms, thus hampering their professional progress [12]. Wang Jing and Zhang Mingkai's viewpoint accentuated the symbiotic relationship between teachers' teaching efficacy and professional development, asserting that teaching efficacy propels professional growth, which in turn reciprocally influences teaching efficacy [13].

The Influencing Factors of Teachers' Self-efficacy

The impact of various factors on teachers' self-efficacy has been thoroughly investigated by researchers, considering elements such as school environment, personal attributes of teachers, professional development factors, and demographic characteristics. When it comes to school-related factors, a correlation between an encouraging school organization climate and increased teachers' self-efficacy is evident, as demonstrated in a survey conducted by Susan and Siobhan [14]. Li Jiajia discovered that the establishment of a positive school spirit can foster self-efficacy [15]. Ramazan and Hanifi noted a substantial effect of leadership behavior, particularly exhibited by school principals, on both individual and collective efficacy of teachers [16]. Work conducted by Zheng Xin and others underscores the beneficial influence of principals' leadership in teaching on the self-efficacy related to teaching strategies, classroom management, and student participation [17].

Turning to professional development factors, Julia's research highlights the crucial role of such experiences in enhancing self-efficacy [18]. The association between thorough teacher training programs and amplified teacher efficacy has been consistently echoed in scholarly work (for example, Kazempour & Sadler, 2015; Tuchmen & Isaacs, 2011). The interplay between gender and self-efficacy has also been explored, with Rana's study suggesting higher efficacy in teaching strategies and student engagement for female teachers in Attok, Pakistan [19]. On the contrary, Lysinge's investigation into trainee teachers found no notable differences in self-efficacy across genders [20]. Hongbiao's research, framed within Grandey's model of emotional labor, highlighted the positive impact of authentic emotional expressions on self-efficacy, thus advocating for judicious handling of emotional labor among teachers [21].

Research conducted by Yin Chengwei indicated disparities in teaching efficacy related to age among rural teachers, while educational background did not exhibit a significant influence [22]. Qi Xueping and Zhu Lijia discovered that emotional intelligence has a direct impact on teaching efficacy, with emotional labor serving as a mediator [23]. Liu Xiaoxian's study in rural primary and secondary schools observed no significant differences in teaching efficacy between genders, although both teaching experience and teacher personality were identified as significant predictors of efficacy [24].

Educational Satisfaction

American scholar Dardozo first introduced the concept of "satisfaction", sparking a multitude of investigations concerning customer satisfaction within the marketing realm [25]. Since the 1960s, an extensive exploration of the theory of customer satisfaction has been undertaken by researchers, broadening its reach to various fields, inclusive of education. There exist two classifications of educational satisfaction evaluation indices: developmental and institutional. Developmental educational satisfaction pertains to scales developed by organizations, such as the NSSE assessment initiative by Indiana University's Institute of Education [26]. Conversely, institutional educational satisfaction involves evaluation systems primarily led by governmental bodies. This includes in-house satisfaction assessments, as demonstrated by the executive president of the UK's Limerick University, and external satisfaction evaluations that encapsulate diverse aspects of student life, study, and interaction, as seen in the National Student Survey (NSS) [27].

Chinese researchers have designed educational satisfaction evaluation index systems by drawing upon foreign research findings and a variety of theoretical frameworks. Zhao Xueqin, for example, devised an evaluation index system that incorporates governmental responsibility, school administration, teaching personnel, and educational outcomes [28]. Zhao Lijuan performed reliability, validity, and correlation analysis on initial indicators sourced from preliminary surveys, yielding four primary indicators (governmental responsibility, school administration, teacher cohort, and educational outcomes) and 33 secondary detailed indicators [29]. Scholars such as Li Shuohao, Geng Lele, Fu Yangli, and Sun Yan endorse evaluation indices covering education policy and structure, educational quality, educational process, educational equity, educational expenses, and the overall education system [16]. The segmentation of the evaluation index system signifies a horizontal proliferation, abstracting educational indices from facets of educational praxis and incorporating dominant societal concerns, thereby mirroring contemporary traits [30].

Influencing Factors of Educational Satisfaction

The impact of various elements on educational contentment has been the focus of academic investigations. Preliminary studies have explored factors such as family registration, parental academic achievement, profession, and income. For instance, Hu Ping and Qin Huimin have underscored the parents' educational attainment and social class as pivotal influencers on educational contentment [31]. Employing latent category analysis, Zhang Na, Wang Yue, and Xu Zhixing have studied the implications of familial socioeconomic status on parents' satisfaction with education [32]. In addition to the above, the role of school-oriented factors in molding educational satisfaction has been emphasized by scholars. He Yong and Wang Xiuqin have identified myriad aspects, including the moral character of teachers, the ethical framework of the educational establishment, the institution's culture, government-handled education's capricious fee structure, school selection, educational policies, solutions for migrant children's education, the entrance selection mechanism, and the transition from rural junior high schools, which considerably influence parental satisfaction [33]. The government's assessment criteria for educational quality were also revealed to affect educational satisfaction [34].

Several studies have centered on parental contentment with educational institutions. Both Leblanc-Considine and Rosemary (1995) and Hausman and Goldring (2000) have accentuated the impact of parental satisfaction on school selection. In China, investigations into parental satisfaction began in 2003, evolving into a prominent subject within the educational domain. Heiserman and Roberta Jean (1994) earmarked a child's academic performance as a key influencer of parental satisfaction. According to Wartenburg (2005), parents' perceptions of educational importance, their evaluations of their child's success, their educational background, and the extent of home-school interaction all play a significant role in shaping parental satisfaction with schools. In the Chinese context, parental satisfaction was found to be influenced by factors such as school environment, amenities, daily administration, academic performance, and academic pressure, as well as demographic variables like gender, income, education, and profession. Zhang Zhongshan's exploration of the impact of various demographic parameters on school satisfaction unveiled the significant influence of parental education and age. Furthermore, the competence of teachers, the quality of facilities, day-to-day management, students' academic achievements, and academic pressure were identified as pivotal to parental contentment. Gao Bing and Hu Yongmei's differentiated assessment of parental satisfaction, based on socioeconomic backgrounds, determined parental education to be a significant contributor to school contentment.

Academics have also proposed an array of strategies aimed at enhancing parental contentment with schools. These strategies encompass the clarification of the school's mission, the development of exemplary teachers, the cultivation of a diverse campus culture, and the promotion of quality education. Zeng Guangqing, for instance, has stressed the necessity of clearly defined objectives for school administration, the enhancement of educational and teaching quality, the development of a varied campus culture, and the effective use of cultural education. Similarly, Wang Xinqiang has enhanced parental satisfaction through the formulation of a progressive school philosophy, the creation of a superior school environment, the encouragement of a healthy and harmonious campus culture, the facilitation of joyful student growth, the development of excellent teachers, and the assurance of the institution's sustainable growth. Based on these findings, the following hypotheses have been proposed:

A direct correlation exists between student satisfaction and teacher self-efficacy.

Student satisfaction affects parent satisfaction.

Parent satisfaction is directly linked to teachers' self-efficacy.

Data Sources

The survey instrument of this study is derived from data collected over a three-year action plan in X City (2019–2021) and addresses teachers, students, and parents from compulsory education institutions in X City in China. Data collection began on January 15, 2022, and ended on September 15, 2022. All participants and their guardians were given thorough information about the research for this study. Before the online poll started, each party's informed consent was electronically collected. No data that could be used to identify respondents to this anonymous survey will be accessible, either during or after it is completed. The institutional ethics committee affirmed and approved the digital consent method as well as other ethical components of the approach.

Following the exclusion of invalid responses, the valid survey counts for teachers, students, and parents amount to 36,871, 103,997, and 83,513 respectively, demonstrating a validity rate surpassing 90%. Pertinent entries related to "teacher efficacy" in the teacher survey, "students' acknowledgment of teachers' pedagogy" in the student survey, and "parents' contentment with teachers' pedagogy" in the parents' survey were chosen. The reliability and validity of the data were assessed. The teachers' survey data displayed a reliability of 0.961 and a validity of 0.908, the students' survey data evidenced a reliability of 0.975 and a validity of 0.933, and the parents' survey data showed a reliability of 0.959 and a validity of 0.951, substantiating the strong reliability of the data.

Table 1 provides a breakdown of the teachers' demographic composition. The study included 36,871 educators, with a noticeable gender imbalance: 6,141 males (16.65%) versus 30,730 females (83.35%). The age distribution of teachers varied, with the under-20 age group accounting for only 0.07% (246 teachers). The largest age groups were 21–30 and 31–40, constituting 34.15% (12,392 teachers) and 33.63% (12,401 teachers) respectively. Teachers aged 41–50 made up 22.99% (8,478 teachers), those aged 51–60 comprised 8.46% (3,122 teachers), and those over 60 constituted a minor segment of 0.08% (32 teachers). Regarding their professional background, the majority of teachers, 34.57% (12,744), had five or fewer years of teaching experience. Those with 6–10 years, 11–15 years, and 16–20 years of experience constituted 18.49% (6,812 teachers), 11.04% (4,069 teachers), and 11.45% (4,222 teachers) respectively. Those with 21–25 years of experience represented 11.85% (4,371 teachers), whereas those with 26–30 years and over 31 years of experience accounted for 7% (2,572 teachers) and 5.6% (2,081 teachers) respectively. Concerning academic qualifications, 1,077 teachers (2.92%) possessed technical secondary school degrees or lower. Those with college degrees represented 13.16% (4,854 teachers) of the total. A significant proportion, 72.33% (26,668 teachers), held undergraduate degrees, while the remaining 11.59% (4,272 teachers) had achieved graduate degrees.

Table 1

Demographic Characteristics of Teacher Participants
Variables		N	%
Gender	Male Female	6,141	16.65
Gender	Male Female	30,730	83.35
Age	Under 20	246	0.07
	21–30	12,592	34.15
	31–40	12,401	33.63
	41–50	8,478	22.99
	51–60	3,122	8.46
	Over 60	32	0.08
Teaching Age	Under 5	12,744	34.57
	6–10	6,812	18.49
	11–15	4,069	11.04
	16–20	4,222	11.45
	21–25	4,371	11.85
	26–30	2,572	7.0
	Over 31	2,081	5.6
Educational Background	High school/Technical Secondary school or below	1,077	2.92
	Junior college	4,854	13.16
	Bachelor	26,668	72.33
	Master	4,272	11.59

Table 2 delineates the demographic profile of the participating students. The study incorporated 103,997 students, comprising 52,539 males (50.52%) and 51,458 females (49.48%). In terms of ethnicity, 101,958 (98.04%) identified as Han, and 2,039 (1.96%) identified as minority students. Concerning the type of institution, 78,964 (75.93%) were enrolled in public schools, and 25,033 (24.07%) attended private schools.

Table 2

Demographic Characteristics of Students Participants
Variables		N	%
Gender	Male Female	52539	50.52
Gender	Male Female	51458	49.48
Nation	Han	101958	98.04
Nation	Ethnic Minority	2039	1.96
Nature of School	Public	78964	75.93
Nature of School	Private	25033	24.07
Live on Campus	Yes	16046	15.43
Live on Campus	No	87951	84.57

Table 3 outlines the demographic distribution of the involved parents. The survey encompassed 83,513 parents, of whom 217 (0.26%) had received no formal education, 3,048 (3.65%) had completed primary schooling, 20,035 (23.99%) had accomplished junior high school, 9,095 (10.89%) were graduates of technical secondary schools or technical schools, 10,414 (12.47%) had achieved high school diplomas, 16,118 (19.30%) had completed higher vocational education, 20,343 (24.36%) were holders of undergraduate degrees, and 4,243 (5.08%) had postgraduate degrees. Concerning household income, 13.25% had a per capita monthly income less than 2,000 RMB, 28.07% reported a monthly income between 2,000–4,000 RMB, 24.09% declared a monthly income in the range of 4,000–6,000 RMB, 14.87% disclosed a monthly income of 6,000–8,000 RMB, and 18.92% indicated a monthly income exceeding 8,000 RMB.

Table 3

Demographic Characteristics of Parents Participants
Variables		N	%
Educational Background	Uneducated	217	0.26
	Primary school	3,048	3.65
	Junior high school	20,035	23.99
	Technical Secondary school or Technical school	9,095	10.89
	High school	10,414	12.47
	Junior college	16,118	19.30
	Bachelor	20,343	24.36
	Master	4,243	5.08
Per capita monthly income	Under 2,000 RMB	11,065	13.25
	2,000–4,000 RMB	23,442	28.07
	4,000–6,000 RMB	20,794	24.90
	6,000–8,000 RMB	12,418	14.87
	Over 8,000 RMB	15,794	18.92

Variables and Measurement

The Student Identification Scale includes students' identification with the school, identification with the classroom, and identification with the teachers; the Parent Satisfaction Scale includes parents' satisfaction with the neatness of the school, the school classroom, and the school teachers; and the Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale includes the teachers' approval of themselves as a whole, their approval of teaching, their approval of the students, and their approval of the school's working environment.

Student Satisfaction

Student satisfaction is not just a critical metric of the quality of institutional education and pedagogy, but it also stands as a significant measure of a teacher's educational proficiency and instructional competence. In this study, student satisfaction primarily emanates from their evaluation of teaching quality as delineated in the 'Three-Year Action Plan' questionnaire. More specifically, it encompasses students' acknowledgement of teachers' instructional competencies, such as content knowledge and pedagogical methods, their appraisal of teachers' efforts in reviewing student work, their views on the quantum of homework assigned by teachers, and their stance on the organisation of extracurricular activities. Further, it includes student attitudes towards after-school guidance provided by teachers and their overall satisfaction with teachers' performance.

Parental Satisfaction

In the realm of psychological research, 'satisfaction' typically pertains to the emotional state triggered when an individual's physiological or psychological motivation attains the aspired goal. It originates from the comparative relationship between actual fulfilment and expectations. Broadly, when an individual's anticipations align with their perceived outcome, or the latter surpasses the former, satisfaction is experienced. Hence, satisfaction embodies the emotional state when a desire or need is met. In this research, parental satisfaction derives from the parents' contentment with the instructional quality provided by school teachers as expressed in the 'Three-Year Action Plan' questionnaire data. It specifically entails parental satisfaction concerning the school's teaching personnel, their children's class teachers' academic prowess, pedagogical skills, and ability to integrate technology into teaching. It also extends to parents' contentment with teachers' professional ethics, instructional style, character development, work attitudes, and the quality of after-school guidance offered by teachers.

Teachers' Self-efficacy

The notion of self-efficacy was initially proposed by Bandura, implying an individual's judgement of their ability to achieve a specific goal. Self-efficacy represents an individual's conviction in their capacity to accomplish behavioural objectives within a distinct domain. The Talis 2018 characterizes teacher self-efficacy as teachers' belief in their capacity to influence student learning outcomes (such as academic achievement, interest, and motivation) via instructional behaviour. The self-efficacy of teachers in this study originates from the teachers' satisfaction, as reported in the 'Three-Year Action Plan', with their personal improvement in education and instruction over the past three years. It also emanates from the satisfaction of schools and educational bureaus with the enhancement of teachers' educational and instructional level, particularly regarding the provision of research support for teachers.

Descriptive Statistics

An analytical assessment was conducted on the main variables of the study, yielding results which are outlined in Table 4. The arithmetic mean for student satisfaction, parental satisfaction, and teachers' self-efficacy were 4.33, 4.09, and 4.47, respectively, with standard deviations of 0.775, 0.882, and 0.727.

Table 4

Descriptive Statistics
	Min	Max	M	SD
Student Satisfaction	1.00	5.00	4.33	0.775
Parent Satisfaction	1.00	5.00	4.09	0.882
Teacher Self-efficacy	1.00	5.00	4.47	0.727

Further specifics are delineated in Table 5. For student satisfaction, the highest rating was accorded to teachers' work ethic (M = 4.43). This was followed by teachers' thoroughness in correcting homework (M = 4.41), pedagogical expertise comprising of content and methodology (M = 4.40), after-school tutelage provided by teachers (M = 4.37), and the school's organisation of extracurricular activities (M = 4.35). The rating for the quantum of homework assigned by teachers exhibited a minor deviation (M = 4.34). With regard to parental satisfaction, the maximum scores were conferred upon teachers' ethical conduct and character development (M = 4.16), alongside their professional dedication (M = 4.16). Teachers' academic standing (M = 4.10) and instructional prowess (M = 4.10) also received noteworthy scores. Parents expressed comparable satisfaction concerning the school's teaching personnel, teachers' competence (M = 4.05), their aptitude in integrating technology in teaching (M = 4.08), and the quality of after-school guidance provided by them (M = 4.04). Regarding teachers' self-efficacy, the leading scores were accorded to teachers' contentment with their enhanced understanding of the subject matter over the past three years (M = 4.53), progression in pedagogy through participation in instructional activities such as lesson planning and assessment (M = 4.51), and satisfaction with their level of teaching competence (M = 4.49).

Table 5

The Descriptive Statistics of Students' Satisfaction, Parents' Satisfaction and Teachers' Self-efficacy
Items	M	SD
A1 my recognition of teachers' teaching abilities such as teaching content and teaching methods	4.40	0.755
A2 my recognition of the teacher's seriousness in correcting my homework	4.41	0.750
A3 my recognition of my current attitude towards the amount of homework after class	4.34	0.813
A4 my recognition of the after-school service organized by the school	4.35	0.804
A5 my recognition of teachers' after-school guidance	4.37	0.789
A6 my recognition of teachers' working attitude	4.43	0.740
B1 your understanding of the school's teaching staff and faculty	4.05	0.889
B2 your educational level of teachers in your child's class	4.10	0.874
B3 your teaching level and teaching ability of teachers in your child's class	4.10	0.892
B4 your information-based teaching ability to teachers in your child's class	4.08	0.872
B5 your cultivation of teachers' ethics and personality in your child's class	4.16	0.855
B6 your working attitude towards the teacher in your child's class	4.16	0.875
B7 the quality of after-school guidance you provide to teachers in your child's class	4.04	0.924
C1 I often participate in teaching and research activities such as teachers' collective lesson preparation, class suspension, class speaking, class evaluation, class discussion, etc	4.51	0.709
C2 I actively participate in the subject competition of teachers' teaching type held by the school	4.42	0.787
C3 I have improved my teaching ability through the subject competition in my school	4.44	0.761
C4 my self-development and promotion have been actively supported by the school	4.43	0.769
C5 in the past three years, my teaching skills have been continuously improved	4.49	0.685
C6 In the past three years, my understanding of the subject knowledge of the teaching subject has been deepened	4.53	0.653

Correlation Analysis

Analysis of the Correlation between Student Acknowledgement and Parental Satisfaction. Table 6 portrays a robust interrelation, denoted by a Pearson correlation coefficient surpassing 0.8, between students' critique of teachers' pedagogical skills, implicating a significant tie between students' assessment of pedagogical prowess, homework guidance, and holistic teacher performance. Parental contentment with each dimension of school education and instruction similarly remains high, with a Pearson correlation coefficient exceeding 0.7. Nonetheless, a negative correlation persists between students' critique of educational instruction and parents' acknowledgement thereof, suggesting a negligible association between students' evaluation of education, instruction, and parents' satisfaction with school education.

Table 6

Correlation Matrix between Student Satisfaction and Parental Satisfaction
	A1	A2	A3	A4	A5	A6	B1	B2	B3	B4	B5	B6	B7
A1	1
A2	0.901^**	1
A3	0.850^**	0.845^**	1
A4	0.868^**	0.863^**	0.881^**	1
A5	0.873^**	0.871^**	0.847^**	0.883^**	1
A6	0.878^**	0.880^**	0.820^**	0.850^**	0.900^**	1
B1	-0.007^*	-0.006	-0.009^*	-0.010^**	-0.007^*	-0.006	1
B2	-0.004	-0.003	-0.005	-0.008^*	-0.005	-0.005	0.814^**	1
B3	-0.007^*	-0.005	-0.008^*	-0.010^**	-0.008^*	-0.006	0.782^**	0.797^**	1
B4	-0.005	-0.004	-0.007^*	-0.009^**	-0.006	-0.005	0.797^**	0.803^**	0.787^**	1
B5	-0.006	-0.006	-0.008^*	-0.010^**	-0.009^*	-0.006	0.766^**	0.780^**	0.771^**	0.804^**	1
B6	-0.006	-0.006	-0.006	-0.007^*	-0.008^*	-0.007	0.741^**	0.754^**	0.748^**	0.773^**	0.822^**	1
B7	-0.004	-0.004	-0.008^*	-0.008^*	-0.006	-0.005	0.737^**	0.732^**	0.734^**	0.761^**	0.755^**	0.746^**	1
Note: ** indicates p < 0. 01; * indicates p < 0. 05.

Analysis of the Correlation between Parental Satisfaction and Teachers' Self-Efficacy. The Pearson correlation coefficient between dimensions of parental contentment with school education and those of teacher self-efficacy surpasses 0.7, indicating a potent correlation between parental satisfaction and the internal dimensions of teacher self-efficacy (refer to Table 7). However, the relation between parental satisfaction and teacher self-efficacy is statistically insignificant.

Table 7

Correlation Matrix between Parents' Satisfaction and Teachers' Self-efficacy
	B1	B2	B3	B4	B5	B6	B7	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6
B1	1
B2	0.814^**	1
B3	0.782^**	0.797^**	1
B4	0.797^**	0.803^**	0.787^**	1
B5	0.766^**	0.780^**	0.771^**	0.804^**	1
B6	0.741^**	0.754^**	0.748^**	0.773^**	0.822^**	1
B7	0.737^**	0.732^**	0.734^**	0.761^**	0.755^**	0.746^**	1
C1	-0.001	0.001	0.002	-0.003	0.000	0.001	0.003	1
C2	0.003	0.003	0.003	-0.002	0.001	0.002	0.004	0.792^**	1
C3	-0.002	0.000	0.000	-0.004	-0.002	-0.001	0.000	0.789^**	0.872^**	1
C4	0.002	0.002	0.003	-0.002	0.001	0.003	0.000	0.762^**	0.784^**	0.825^**	1
C5	-0.006	-0.006	-0.006	-0.007^*	-0.008^*	-0.007	0.741^**	0.754^**	0.748^**	0.773^**	0.822^**	1
C7	-0.004	-0.004	-0.008^*	-0.008^*	-0.006	-0.005	0.737^**	0.732^**	0.734^**	0.761^**	0.755^**	0.746^**	1
Note: ** indicates p < 0. 01; * indicates p < 0. 05.

Analysis of the Correlation between Student Acknowledgement and Teacher Self-Efficacy. The dynamics of the teacher-student relationship significantly shape teachers' sense of efficacy. The role teachers adopt in the classroom largely relies on students' in-class engagements and post-class feedback. This reciprocal teacher-student interaction contributes to the fostering of teacher self-efficacy. Enhanced teacher efficacy, reciprocally, functions as a behavioural exemplar for students, considerably influencing the development of their self-efficacy. The Pearson correlation coefficient surpassing 0.8 in the correlation between student recognition and teacher self-efficacy items suggests a robust correlation between student acknowledgement and teacher self-efficacy (refer to Table 8). Hence, bolstering or amplification of teacher self-efficacy is intimately linked to students' acknowledgement.

Table 8

Correlation Matrix between Student Satisfaction and Teacher Self-efficacy
	A1	A2	A3	A4	A5	A6
C1	1
C2	0.914^**	1
C3	0.892^**	0.898^**	1
C4	0.898^**	0.903^**	0.898^**	1
C5	0.866^**	0.890^**	0.881^**	0.904^**	1
C6	0.841^**	0.854^**	0.849^**	0.883^**	0.922^**	1
Note: ** indicates p < 0. 01; * indicates p < 0. 05.

Model Construct and Hypothesis Testing

This research applies multiple regression analysis to discern the relationship between student satisfaction and teacher self-efficacy. If the arithmetic mean value of student satisfaction is designated as 4.33, any score beyond this value implies a robust teacher-student rapport, conducive for the fostering of teacher self-efficacy. Conversely, scores beneath 4.33 denote that student satisfaction with teachers’ teaching does not cultivate a healthier teacher-student rapport, thereby obstructing the improvement of teacher self-efficacy. Student satisfaction is therefore considered a variable, and multiple regression analysis is executed using students' gender, grade, type of school, and residential status as control variables. The results are catalogued in Table 9. Concerning the teacher-student relationship, the student satisfaction β = 0.177, with a significance P of 0.000. The positive regression coefficient indicates that an increase in student satisfaction correlates with the enhancement and development of teacher self-efficacy.

Table 9

The Multiple Regression Analysis Results
Predictor variable	Teacher-student relationship
	β	SE	t
(Constant)	3.108^**	0. 07	42. 65
Gender	-0.020	0.005	-4.474
Grade	-0.055	0.009	-5.916
Nature of School	-0.043	0.001	-6.758
Living on campus	-0.011	0.001	-8.582
Student satisfaction	0.177^**	0.005	34.850
R²	0.012
F	325.15^***
Note: * indicates p < 0. 001; indicates p < 0. 01; * indicates p < 0. 05.

The pivotal role of teachers' self-efficacy serves as a cornerstone in augmenting their job happiness index. It is largely influenced by the commendation from students and the satisfaction of parents. In the teacher's viewpoint, factors such as academic attainment, educational background, and job contentment consistently contribute to the evolution and enhancement of self-efficacy.

In the realm of the school environment, the affirmation garnered from students and parents operates as a catalyst, compelling teachers to persistently amplify their intrinsic drive for education and teaching. The impact of parental satisfaction on teachers' self-efficacy, as revealed in this study, may not be overt. Yet, within China's ethos of venerating teachers and extolling education, parents typically determine a school's merit through their assessment of its teaching staff.

In a parallel vein, students' passion for learning and their sense of self-fulfillment originate from their appreciation for their teachers. Despite the teachers appearing as the driving force of education and learning, their approach is fundamentally student-centric. They promptly adapt their teaching strategies based on in-class feedback and post-class acknowledgment, aspiring for a higher echelon of teaching standards.

Consequently, fostering a robust teacher-student relationship serves as a significant conduit for the development of teachers' self-efficacy and the augmentation of student satisfaction. This entails the establishment of mutual respect between teachers and students in the classroom, thereby facilitating a quantum leap in the quality of education. Simultaneously, parents should assess the quality of education at their children's schools through students' recognition of teachers, thereby acting as an "important voice" advocating their children's school. Amid this progressively harmonious teacher-student relationship, students develop a keen interest in school life and academics. The satisfaction from parents and students enhances the happiness index of teachers in their professional endeavors.

Limitations and Implications

Firstly, it is crucial to cultivate a school environment that fosters amicable teacher-student relationships. The relationship between teachers and students, classroom discipline, and job satisfaction significantly influence teachers' self-efficacy. Given that teachers interact mainly with students during school hours, schools, while emphasizing the fundamental task of moral education, should strive to create a conducive environment for harmonious teacher-student relationships. Teachers, transitioning from their authoritative podium, need to integrate seamlessly into the student community. Particularly, in the internet age with its profound impact on adolescents' mental and physical health, teachers should be fully cognizant of the environment their students inhabit. They should empathize with students, adapt their classroom management and educational strategies to best serve students, thereby facilitating a conducive learning environment. Schools should also acknowledge and publicize classes or groups that exemplify healthy teacher-student relationships, reinforcing the significance of such relationships in enhancing the quality of education and thereby establishing a favorable school atmosphere.

Secondly, it is imperative for teachers to navigate the intricate relationship dynamics among students, parents, and schools. Varied age groups and distinct familial backgrounds necessitate diverse educational strategies. The development of a student's character and learning disposition reflects their family environment. Hence, teachers should maintain active communication with parents and students, fostering an effective feedback loop that improves the quality of education and elevates students' learning outcomes, ultimately resulting in synergistic home-school education.

Lastly, to further boost teachers' self-efficacy, it is essential for teachers to continually self-reflect. They should critically evaluate the challenges and obstacles encountered during home-school communication, issues in student interactions both within and outside the classroom, and adjust their strategies for interacting with parents and students. It's crucial for teachers to view themselves as the "spokesperson" of the school, consistently reflecting on their teaching practices, understanding their strengths and weaknesses, and relentlessly striving for personal growth and development.

Ethical approval

The Ethics Committee of Shaanxi Normal University Shaanxi Basic Education and Quality Monitoring and Evaluation Research Center granted approval for this research on January 15, 2022 (Reference Number: 2022J26). We affirm that all methodologies employed in this research adhered to the applicable guidelines and regulations.

Informed consent

We ensured to provide comprehensive details about the study to all participants and their guardians, securing informed electronic consent from both parties before commencing the online survey. The ethicality of this procedure, inclusive of the digital consent process, was confirmed and approved by our institutional ethics committee.

Disclosure statement

The author(s) declare no competing interests.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Social Science Fund of China, “Research on the promotion strategy of social identity of vocational education in the perspective of international comparison” [grant numbers AJA220023].

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Mu, H. daughter. Research on the relationship between College Public English teachers' self-efficacy, identity and subjective well-being. Henan Univ. 2016.
Yu, G.; Luo, X. Research on Teachers' teaching efficacy and its related factors. J. Beijing Norm. Univ. (HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES) 2000, (01), 72–79.
Zhao, F.; Huang, X. Research on the characteristics of middle school teachers' teaching efficacy and its correlation with self-concept. Psychol. Sci. 2002, (04), 472–473.
Zhan, M. Research and development of teachers' teaching efficacy. Lanzhou Acad. J. 2005, (06), 332–333 + 253.
Su, L.; Cheng, L.; Dai, W. Research on the impact of teaching efficacy on rural junior middle school teachers' teaching ability. Teach. Manag. 2015, (06), 73–76.
Cai, Y.; Shen, X.; Li, Y. Basic psychological needs satisfaction, self-efficacy and teachers' teaching expertise development. Educ. Res. 2018, 39, (02), 103–111.
Wang, J.; Zhang, M. On the logic of teaching efficacy in Teachers' professional development. Educ. Theory Pract. 2016, 36, (23), 21–23.
Cui, R.; Guo, X.; Liu, Y. The relationship between teaching efficacy and happiness of primary and secondary school teachers. Chin. J. Health Psychol. 2018, 26, (09), 1363–1367.
Zheng, X.; Gong, S. How principals' teaching leadership behavior affects teachers' sense of efficacy. Mod. Prim. Sec. Educ. 2018, 34, (11), 68–73.
Ma, Q. Visionary leadership and teaching efficacy of primary and secondary school teachers. Hunan Norm. Univ. 2019.
Li, J.; Li, Y. The relationship between the current situation of rural teachers' teaching efficacy and school organizational atmosphere. Chin. J. Health Psychol. 2014, 22, (07), 1009–1011.
Yin, C.; Li, W.; Zhang, S.; Guo, Y. Empirical Study on Rural Teachers' teaching efficacy and its influencing factors. Mod. Prim. Sec. Educ. 2020, 36, (02), 47–52.
Jia, X.; Zhu, L. The relationship between emotional intelligence and teaching efficacy of primary and secondary school teachers. Teach. Manag. 2014, (18), 69–72.
He X.X. Research on evaluation indicators of education to the satisfaction of the people. Educ. Sci. Res. 2009, (01), 5–12.
Zhao, X. Theoretical research and framework design of Beijing district and county education job satisfaction survey. Educ. Sci. Res. 2012, (04), 5–10.
Li, S.; Geng, L.; Li, F. Empirical research on public satisfaction with a basic education - based on the data of the 2015 Gansu Provincial online survey. Basic Educ. Res. 2016, (11), 10–15.
Sun, Y. Satisfaction survey: questionnaire analysis and suggestions for improvement based on the perspective of Education -- a survey report on the satisfaction of basic education in L City, Jiangsu Province. Jiangsu Educ. Res. 2015, (Z4), 40–44.
Hu, P.; Qin, H. Research on the impact of registered residence, education level and social vocational level on parents' satisfaction with compulsory education -- Taking Beijing as an example. Soft Sci. 2011, 25, (10), 32–36.
Zhang, N.; Wang, Y.; Xu, Z. Research on the impact of family socio-economic status on parents' education satisfaction. J. Educ. 2013, 9, (03), 81–91.
Wu, H.; Feng, M. The impact of the inter school gap in compulsory education on parents' education satisfaction -- An Empirical Survey Based on the Pearl River Delta. Mod. Educ. Treatise. 2015, (02), 20–26.
Zang, Z.; Wang, X. Empirical Study on basic education satisfaction in Xihaigu region of Ningxia Based on the perspective of students' parents. Asia Pac. Educ. 2015, (21), 282–283.
Li, W.; AI, J.; Shen, H. Research on the influencing factors of public satisfaction with basic education in China -- from the perspective of hierarchical model. Educ. Guide. 2019, (10), 20–25.
Zhang, Z. A study on the satisfaction of primary school students' parents with schools. Shanghai Educ. Res. 2003, (03), 8–11.
Zhang, X. Investigation and analysis of primary school students' parents' satisfaction with the school. Northeast Norm. Univ. 2010.
Li, M. Research on parents' satisfaction with schools from the perspective of people's satisfaction education. Northeast Norm. Univ. 2014.
Zhang, Z. A study on the satisfaction of primary school students' parents with schools. Shanghai Educ. Res. 2003, (03), 8–11.
Gao, B.; Hu, Y. Empirical research on the satisfaction of primary and secondary school students and parents. J. Inner Mongolia Norm. Univ. (EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE EDITION) 2006, (10), 73–76.
Zeng, G. Scientific school management is based on the development of teachers and students, and quality is built to run people's satisfactory schools. Basic Educ. Ref. 2012, (10), 33–34.
Wang, X. Putting people first and running schools that satisfy the people. Liaoning Educ. 2013, (08), 5–7.
Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman, 1997.
King, D.K.; Glasgow, R.E.; Toobert, D.J.; Strycker, L.A.; Estabrooks, P.A.; Osuna, D.; Faber, A.J. Self-efficacy, problem solving, and social-environmental support are associated with diabetes self-management behaviors. Diabetes Care 2010, 33, (4), 751–3.
Hoover-Dempsey, K.V.; Bassler, O.C.; Brissie, J.S. Parent Involvement: Contributions of Teacher Efficacy, School Socioeconomic Status, and Other School Characteristics. Am. Educ. Res. J. 1987, 24, (3), 417–435.
Tschannen-Moran, M.; Woolfolk Hoy, A.; Hoy, W.K. Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning and Measure. Rev. Educ. Res. 1998, 68, (2), 202–248.
Newmann, F.M.; Rutter, R.A.; Smith, M.S. Organizational factors that affect school sense of efficacy, community, and expectations. Sociol. Educ. 1989, 62, (4), 221–238.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Unveiling the Role of Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Improving Job Happiness: Insights from Student and Parent Perspectives

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Introduction

Literature Review

Teachers’ Self-efficacy

Research Method

Data Sources

Variables and Measurement

Student Satisfaction

Parental Satisfaction

Teachers' Self-efficacy

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Correlation Analysis

Model Construct and Hypothesis Testing

Conclusion and Discussion

Limitations and Implications

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1