Impact Of Professional Partnership On Self-Efficacy Of Inclusive Teachers

Abstract

The paper presents the results of a study conducted in Russia and Kyrgyzstan to identify the relationship between the level of self-efficacy of an inclusive teacher and the degree of his/her inclusion in professional partnership. Partners in inclusion represent a social group that often consists of people with knowledge in the field of education for children with developmental disorders. It is “a complex network of experts with various experiences, status and authorities responsible for stimulating and filtering innovation”. It is concluded that the self-efficacy of an inclusive teacher is a new competence associated with the effective interaction of the teacher with the professional environment and with the personality characteristics of a person, guaranteeing the quality of work combined with high motivation; the teacher’s readiness to ensure inclusion and his self-efficacy directly depends on the level of professional partnership in the educational organization. The study revealed the conditions for developing the readiness to provide inclusion through the development of self-efficacy of inclusive teachers: development of professional and social competence (mastering new and special knowledge, taking responsibility for the results of pedagogical activities, relying on the resources of the school staff, building a professional future taking into account the needs of the school), communicative competence (information exchange, mentoring and tutoring, mutual education, support in solving problematic pedagogical tasks, conducting joint educational and outside educational, formal and informal projects with children, parents). This study showed that the specific features of inclusive education allow optimizing the essence and structure of the interaction between teachers.

Keywords: Inclusive education, professional partnership, self-efficacy

Introduction

Students with physical disabilities and complex educational needs set a unique aspect of teaching practice and pedagogy (Parks, 2021) and this requires teachers to be confident in their ability to make contact with students and their environment, to ensure progress in their development and training. However, numerous publications and studies show that teachers everywhere experience professional difficulties in inclusive education. At the same time, the practice shows effective teachers of both special and inclusive education, who, being successful in the development and education of children with disabilities, are able to achieve their career growth, financial well-being, to create non-profit organizations and communicate their experience to others. The educational market of inclusive education desperately needs teachers able to assess the level of their efficacy and manage it through the engagement into professional partnerships. Therefore, the study of the impact of professional partnership on the self-efficacy of inclusive teachers seems quite relevant. The study develops the following theoretical and methodological approaches: concept of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997), subject-activity approach to the study of human activity as the process owner (Rubinstein, 1989), activity approach (Galperin, 1957); competency-based approach (White, 1959); problem-based approach in inclusion (Mitchell, 2011); clarifies the understanding of the terms “self-efficacy of inclusive teachers”, “professional partnership” based on the idea of interaction between an individual who makes new and appropriate changes and carriers of a cultural and professional context (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).

Problem Statement

The paper addresses the problem of the impact of professional partnership on the self-efficacy of inclusive teachers.

Research Questions

The subject of the study is the impact of professional partnership on the self-efficacy of inclusive teachers.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose is to study the conditions for the impact of professional partnership on the self-efficacy of inclusive teachers.

Research Methods

The study utilized the following methods: analysis of theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the self-efficacy of inclusive teachers and the impact of professional partnership on its development; study of effective and unsuccessful inclusive educational practices of teachers; longitudinal study, comparative monitoring, surveys, diagnostics.

Findings

Global changes cause the need to reevaluate the value of education, which should be accessible to all. One of the key subjects undergoing changes in education is the teacher. In recent decades many studies considered the relationship between a teacher performance, academic achievement and performance of a student (Liu et al., 2022; Waytz & Cacioppo, 2007). The analysis of these works, as well as articles on the problem of work satisfaction, the development of self-efficacy – teachers’ confidence in their ability to perform actions that lead to high results in teaching students with developmental disabilities, the presence of self-discipline and emotional control (Bandura, 1997; Choi & Mao, 2021; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Maslow, 1970; Rokeach, 1968) did not answer the question: “What is the peculiarity of the development of the self-efficacy of inclusive teachers and how it is possible to influence the increase in the level of efficacy of inclusive teachers?”. The category “inclusive teacher” includes not only special teachers with specialized knowledge, specific competencies, but also educators, teachers, assistants, tutors who daily work with children with special educational needs. The requirements of school administrations, parents for these teachers are increasing, and their satisfaction with their work and self-satisfaction are decreasing, labor values are transformed, teachers are leaving school, thus causing staff shortage. The search for ways out of this situation led to the study of the level of self-efficacy of inclusive teachers, their readiness for inclusive interaction and professional partnership. The monitoring of satisfaction with the results of their work was carried out using various methods (Table 01).

A comparative study made it possible to identify similar problems among the inclusive teachers in Russia and Kyrgyzstan (64 people in the experimental group, 63 teachers in the control group).

Some of the most important include low satisfaction with the results of early care for children with developmental disabilities and psychological and pedagogical support for their parents; quality of tutoring of children with autism disorders; methodical assistance of teaching children with mental and sensory disabilities, low ability to influence the development of motivation for schoolchildren, inability to increase their self-esteem, poor knowledge of teaching children to self-manage their behavior, which would affect the more positive attitude of parents towards school.

The study revealed the following reasons for the dissatisfaction of teachers with the results of their work:

• features of self-actualization of a teacher working with children with special educational needs: incompetence in time (inability to diagnose the stages of development of a child with developmental disabilities, which often leads to ineffective interventions); non-systemic self-support (cognitive, emotional); inability to understand the value of self-actualization (expecting assessment from outside); insufficient flexibility of behavior (willingness to rebuild and adapt to the needs of a child); unreactive sensitivity (level of sensitivity to the feelings and needs of children and their parents); unwillingness to act spontaneously (to be guided by personal ideas about the problem); low level of self-respect and trust in personal competencies); incomplete self-acceptance and acceptance of the nature of a person capable of making mistakes; failure to accept personal aggression; uncooperativeness and reluctanceto be friendly with each child); unmet cognitive needs (lack of desire for personal growth and development); unrealized creativity (ability to respond to stimuli outside the box (Charyyarova, 2019; Gavora, 2010);
• features of subjective control of the teacher’s personality over various situations in the field of labor relations: more than 56 % of respondents have internal personality and consider themselves responsible for any consequences of their actions in the process of teaching children with disabilities and organizing personal labor activities, team relations, self-promotion (Arskieva, 2009);
• features of the choice of strategies for overcoming stress, coping behavior, behavior in the professional environment and attitude to professional activities (Mazurova et al., 2021);
• features of choosing cognitive-behavioral strategies for overcoming labor difficulties;
• features of the emotional burnout of the personality of the inclusive teacher;
• features of frustration tolerance due to the fact that barriers to achieving positive educational results, in the form of violations of child development, can interfere with the need for self-efficacy of the teacher and are experienced as tension, anxiety, despair, and sometimes anger.

The study identified the conditions for overcoming difficulties in developing the self-efficacy of inclusive teachers, the main of which is professional partnership and the readiness of teachers for it. The test of determining the level of self-efficacy of teachers, applicable to teachers of inclusive education both in Russia and in Kyrgyzstan, showed that respectively 46 and 68 % of teachers associate the level of their efficacy with professional interaction with colleagues at the level of partnership. The concept of “interaction” expresses the process in which subjects interact in the process of activity, achieve agreement and mutual responsibility for its results. They see this interaction as an equal exchange of experience and mutual addition to the general structure of competencies necessary for the education of children with developmental disabilities. The study made it possible to create a model to include inclusive teachers in professional partnership, which leads to the development of self-efficacy. The model includes personal, cognitive and activity components and involves the development of professional and social competence (mastering new and special knowledge, taking responsibility for the results of pedagogical activities, relying on the resources of the school staff, building a picture of the professional future taking into account the needs of the school); inclusion in professional partnership through the development of communicative competencies (information exchange, mentoring, tutoring and supervision, mutual training, support in solving problematic pedagogical situations, conducting joint projects with children, parents).

Conclusion

The study conducted in Russia and Kyrgyzstan made it possible to conclude the following: inclusive education as a special type of training requires consideration of the system of interdisciplinary interaction of participants in the educational process as a professional partnership. Professional partnership is defined as the process of implementing a combination of interdependent and mutually enriching relationships in the personal and professional aspects allowing increasing the level of self-efficacy of inclusive teachers and managing their development. The study showed that the specific nature of professional partnership allows optimizing the interaction of teachers and positively influencing the development of self-efficacy of inclusive teachers.

References

• Ager, A. (1990). Psychometric properties of the Coping Strategy Indicator (CSI) in a study of coping behaviour amongst malawian students, 13(3), 399–409. DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Arskieva, Z. A. (2009). Results of factor analysis of the structures of integral individuality of students with optimistic and pessimistic worldviews. Psychology and pedagogy: methodology and problems of practical application, 9, 37–42 https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/rezultaty-faktornogo-analiza-struktur-integralnoy-individualnosti-studentov-s-optimisticheskim-i-pessimisticheskim

• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

• Charyyarova, A. B. (2019). Teacher’s activity in inclusive education: problematic aspects. Gaudeamus, 2(40).

• Choi, S., & Mao, X. (2021). Teacher autonomy for improving teacher self-efficacy in multicultural classrooms: A cross-national study of professional development in multicultural education. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035520318176

• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224927532_Flow_The_Psychology_of_Optimal_Experience

• Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A Social Cognitive Approach to Motivation and Personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273.

• Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Ways of Coping Questionnaire: Research Edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

• Galperin, P. Ya. (1957). Formation of mental actions and concepts. Moscow.

• Gavora, P. (2010). Slovak Pre-Service Teacher Self-Efficacy: Theoretical and Research Considerations. The New Educational Review, 21(2), 17–30.

• Liu, Ch.-Yu, Lin, W.-W., & Wu, Ch.-J. (2022). Understanding the properties and processes of a creative teacher team. International Journal of Educational Research. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035521001786

• Maslach, T., & Jackson, S. (1986). Burnout Questionnaire MBI (adapted by N.E. Vodopyanova). http://testoteka.narod.ru/lichn/1/49.html

• Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.

• Mazurova, N. V., Kiseleva, T. G., Roshchina, G. O., Rusanova, L. S., & Usanina, N. S. (2021). The relationship between the type of attachment and coping behavior of adolescents. Review of pedagogical research, 3(7), 234–238.

• Mitchell, D. (2011). Effective pedagogical technologies of special and inclusive education. Chapters from the book. Transl. from English by I.S. Anikeev, & N.V. Borisova. Perspective. http://center-prof38.ru/sites/default/files/one_click/mitchel_tehnologii.pdf

• Parks, T. T. (2021). Self-efficacy of teachers and the use of additional and alternative communication technologies [Doct. Dissertations]. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/3239

• Ponikarova, V. N. P. (2018). Professional coping behavior of teachers of inclusive education v a model and technologies of support. Canada, Hamilton: Accent Graphics Communications & Publishing, Premier Publishing.

• Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes and values: a theory of organization and change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

• Rotter, J. (1966). Locus of Control Scale (LCS). https://www.b17.ru/tests/lsc/

• Rubinstein, S. L. (1989). Fundamentals of general psychology: in 2 volumes. Vol. 2. Works of full members and corresponding members of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of the USSR. http://elib.gnpbu.ru/text/rubinshteyn_osnovy-obschey-psihologii_t2_1989/

• Schaarschmidt, U., & Fischer, A. W. (1997). А diagnostic tool for the differentiation of types of health-related behavior and experience against the work. Journal for Differential and Diagnostic Psychologic, 18(3), 151–163.

• Sherer, M., Maddux, J. E., Mercadante, B., & Prentice-Dunn, S. (1982). Self-Efficacy Scale – SES. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270215826_Self-efficacy_Scale_-_scoring

• Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On Seeing Human: A Three-Factor Theory of Anthropomorphism. Nicholas Epley, Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886.

• White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. https://wellcomecollection.org/works/f538rybn