References in periodicals archive ?
In the case of the mathematics teachers (see Table 2), we observed that the MTOE (M = 2.72, SD = .70) is slightly greater than the PMTE (M = 2.53, SD = 1.16) scores.
In conducting this analysis, we first examined differences between mathematics teachers' MTOE and PMTE scores.
Table 2 Mathematics Teacher Entry and Exit Teaching Efficacy MTEBI (entry), M (SD) SEBEMT (exit), M (SD) PMTE 2.53 (1.16) 4.04 (0.76) * MTOE 2.72 (0.70) 4.27 (0.9l) * Note.
Based on this, Factor 1 was named as personal mathematics teaching efficacy (PMTE) and Factor 2 as mathematics teaching outcome expectancy (MTOE) (Enochs et al., 2000; Enochs & Riggs, 1990; Riggs & Enochs, 1989).
This means that Factor 1 (i.e., PMTE) was made up of 12 items, namely Item 2, Item 3, Item 5, Item 6, Item 8, Item 12, Item 17, Item 18, Item 19, Item 22, Item 23, and Item 24.
Moreover, Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the factors personal mathematics teaching efficacy (PMTE) and mathematics teaching outcome expectancy (MTOE) were .83 (n = 1158) and .70 (n = 1298), respectively.
Also, the Levene's test suggested heterogeneity of variances for both personal mathematics teaching efficacy (PMTE) and mathematics teaching outcome expectancy (MTOE) variables.
When the results for the dependent variables were considered separately, the only difference to reach statistical significance, using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of .025, was personal mathematics teaching efficacy (PMTE): F(1,1105) = 9.42, p = .002.
A two-factor solution was tested by PCA considering that it would be theoretically more relevant as the two factors empirically mirrored two self-efficacy dimensions for (mathematics) teachers: personal mathematics teaching efficacy (PMTE) and mathematics teaching outcome expectancy (MTOE).
Therefore, it was concluded that the items in the Turkish version of MTEBI for in-service teachers measure two latent dimensions: PMTE and MTOE.
Acronyms browser ?
Full browser ?
- PMT deficiency
- PMTC Administrative Info Retrieval System