ISSN 0798 1015

Vol. 39 (# 20) Year 2018. Page 31

Psychological predictors of self-efficacy of the teacher of higher education

Predictores psicológicos de la autoeficacia del profesor de educación superior

Isaeva Nadezhda IVANOVNA 1; Mamatova Svetlana ILINICHNA 2; Beletskaya Elena ALEKSANDROVNA 3; Kovalenko Viktor IVANOVICH 4; Olga Aleksandrovna SOKOLOVA 5

Received: 20/01/2018 • Approved: 15/02/2018

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Review of literature

3. Method

4. Results

5. Discussion, conclusion, and implication

References

1. Introduction

Self-efficacy is a person's belief in his ability to successfully cope with activities. This term is widely used by researchers from different countries (Bandura A., 1977, 1982, 1992; Jerusalem M., & Schwarzer, R. 1992; Zimmerman BJ; Bandura A., & Martinez-Pons, M. 1992; Kola AJ & Sunday O.S., 2015; Mojavezi A. & Tamiz M., 2012; Krichevsky R.L., 2001; Selezneva E.V., 2016; Gordeeva T.O., Shepeleva E.A., 2006). Self-efficacy is studied in various areas of human activity: in management, health, education, sports.

Persuasion of self-efficacy has an important role in the learning and teaching process. Studies of the impact of self-efficacy on the success of the activity are conducted in two ways: the impact of the teacher's self-efficacy on student performance (Rockoff J., 2004; Mojavezi A. & Tamiz M., 2012) and the impact of self-efficacy of students and teachers on the success of their own activities (Hebert, E., Lee, A., & Williamson, L., 1998; Holden, ME, Groulx, J., Bloom, MA, & Weinburgh, MH, 2011; Huitt, W., 2000; Zimmerman BJ, Bandura A., & Martinez-Pons M., 1992; Shepeleva E.A., 2008; Graur M.V., 2017, Kobets V.N., 2013;). The teacher's self-efficacy is explored relating to such significant educational variables as the motivation of students, the adoption of innovations by teachers, management strategies, the time spent studying certain disciplines (Bandura 1997, Skaalvick & Skaalvick, 2010, Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A.W., 2002; Mintzes, J., Marcum B., Messerschmidt-Yates, C., & Andrew Mark, 2013; Abu-Tineh, A.M., Khasawneh, S.A., & Khalaileh, H.A., 2011).

Self-efficacy is a key factor in pedagogical activity (Percy, B., 2012). Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the conditions and mechanisms for the professional success of teachers in higher education, especially the development of self-efficacy of students and teachers. Although many studies (Arendachuk I. V., 2007, 2010; Burtovaya N. B., 2015; Gaydar M.I., 2007; Dinther, M., Dochy. F., & Segersc, M., 2011; Chaplin A.V., Shatskaya S.S., 2015; Carson, J. A., Gilham, M. B., Kirk, L. M., Reddy, S. T., & Battles, J. B., 2002; Ghanizadeh, A, & Moafian, F., 2014; Kola A.J., Sunday O.S., 2015; Bray-Clark, N., & Bates R., 2003; Nielsen, Tine, Makransky, Guido, Vang, Maria Louison  & Dammeyer, Jesper, 2017) disclose this subject, however, psychological factors in the development of self-efficacy of university teachers not studied deeply and comprehensively. It is important to investigate not only the role of the teacher's self-efficacy in developing motivation, and the successful teaching of students, but also the process of self-efficacy in teachers and factors that ensure high self-efficacy.

2. Review of literature.

The study of the determinants of effective human functioning is one of the topical problems of modern psychology. Personality variables that influence the effectiveness of human behavior and activity are self-efficacy and personalization. The study of self-efficacy and the mechanisms of its influence on the success of activities in the Russian sociocultural context in recent years is one of the promising directions in scientific and practical psychology. There is a process of theoretical comprehension of this phenomenon and its theoretical development (Gaydar M.I., 2008; Selezneva E.V., 2016; Vasil'eva T.I., 2008; Shepeleva E.V., 2008; Kobets V.N., 2013). Self-efficacy is the belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations (Bandura, A. 1997. p.2). It is known that self-efficacy influences learning and success in three ways (Bandura A., 1994): human goals, efforts made to achieve goals and perseverance to solve new and complex tasks.

Self-efficacy of the teacher is the central concept of social cognitive theory. The teacher's self-efficacy is a variable that influences the motivation and performance of students in numerous studies (Boyd, D., Landford, H., Loeb, S., Rockoff, J., & Wyckoff, J., 2008; Pajares, F., 1996, Pajares, F., & Schunk, DH, 2001; Rockoff, J., 2004; Schunk, 1995; Schunk, DH, & Pajares, F., 2005). It is proved that self-efficacy plays a huge role in the effectiveness of pedagogical activity. Self-efficacy is the attribute of effective teachers who are characterized by positive behaviors and high learning outcomes (Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K., 1998). Effective teachers bravely experiment with teaching methods and choose methods that are more conducive to meeting the needs of students (Guskey, T.R., 1988; Stein, M.K., & Wang, M.C., 1988).

  The problem of self-efficacy as a personal cognitive construct has been thoroughly understood and practically developed. In this context, self-efficacy is a belief that positively influences cognitive, motivational, affective and physiological processes that affect the behavior and effectiveness of human activity (Lowe R., Cockshott Z., Greenwood R., Kirwan J. R., Almeida C., Richards P., Hewlett S., 2008; Vodopyanova N.E., Gusteleva A.N., 2013). The main resources (factors) of self-efficacy are recognized as personal experience, social experience, social conviction and emotional recovery (A. Bandura, 1977).    Psychological conditions of high self-efficacy are an optimistic style of thinking, mastery of skills, cognitive skills to build behavior, a desire for dominance, a willingness to take risks, subjective activity (Caprara, G. V., Vecchione, M., Alessandri, G., Gerbino, M., & Barbaranelli, C., 2011; Dinther M. V., Dochy F. & Segers M.R., 2011; Gonchar S.N., 2012; Graur M.V., 2017; Jex S. M., Bliese P. D., Buzzell S., Primeau J., 2001;   Chaplin A.V., Shatskaya S.S., 2015; Seligman M., 2013). It is proven that high communicative self-efficacy is provided by a high level of psychodynamic activity and adaptability, personal self-regulation, flexibility and a decrease in the level of emotionality, tolerance to uncertain situations in the interpersonal sphere (Belykh T.V., Mayramyan A.M., 2016).

The consideration of self-efficacy affects the relationship between the subject and the professional environment (system). Two processes are analyzed in the studies on the regulation of human and world relations: the process of privacy (Altman I., 1975; Goffman E., 1984; Westin A., 1970; Wolfe M., 1978;) and the process of personalization (Petrovskiy A.V., Petrovskiy V.A.,  1982; Petrovskiy V.A., 1996, 2010; Petrovskiy A.V., 2007; Kheydmets M., 1988;  Etko E.A., 2015). Privacy meets adaptation goals and growth needs, personalization responds to existential needs. Personalization is the basic form of structuring the environment around a person and it includes subjective relation and identification with the environment (Kheydmets M., 1988). The main sense of personalization is the "expansion" of the subject into the environment, the transformation of the elements of the environment into the organs of the functioning of the personality. There is an identification of a person with objects of the environment, which is ranked into different zones and spheres depending on the relevance to the needs of the person. However, expansion is not the goal of human existence. It also serves to expand the domain of subjectivity and represents the form of its social self-exposure "(Nartova-Bochaver S.K., 2008, p. 92).

 The basis for the development of the author's questionnaire, the formulation of the hypothesis of research and the interpretation of the results, comprised three basic concepts of Petrovsky A.V. and Petrovsky V.A.: 1) the essence of personalization lies in the effective transformation of the intellectual and affective needs of the personality of the other person, 2) the person through his activities translates his individuality to others and 3) personalization occurs under the condition of a person's importance for another, referentiality and attraction .

3. Method

108 teachers from four universities of Belgorod in the Russian Federation took part in the study. The average age of participants is 37.34 years (mean deviation is 9.17). The average work experience in the university is 11.46 years. 15 teachers were excluded from the 108 teachers participating in the first phase of the self-efficacy study, since 15 teachers did not answer questions in the questionnaires. At the stage of studying the features of personalization, another 10 teachers were excluded, who did not give answers to individual elements or gave two answers instead of one. 83 questionnaires were subjected to statistical processing. Based on the results of the questionnaire, the teachers were divided into three groups according to the level of self-efficacy: the first group consisted of teachers with a high level of self-efficacy (26.23%), the second group included teachers with a low level of self-efficacy (21.86%) and the third group - with an average level of self-efficacy (51.91%).

The study used two questionnaires:

Self-efficacy. It was measured using the Self-Efficiency Scale, developed by Schwarzer, R. & Jerusalem, M. (1996). A 10-point psychometric scale was used to assess the strength of teachers' belief that their professional actions will lead to successful results. The answer for each item was assessed on a 4-point scale: 1 - absolutely wrong, 2 - hardly true, 3 - most likely true, and 4 - quite right. Currently, the questionnaire is available in 32 languages. The Russian version of the scale of general self-efficacy was used in this study, which according to the basic psychometric indicators corresponds to the original German version.

The statistical characteristics of individual statements and the Scales of self-efficacy indicate the reliability of the results obtained. In particular, the Cronbach alpha coefficient for each individual item is greater than .823 and in general the questionnaire is equal to .847, which is an acceptable indicator of its reliability. Elements were averaged, higher indicators indicated a higher level of self-efficacy.

Personalization by a professional system. The authors developed a 10-point scale for measuring this design. Samples of the elements are "My goals coincide with the goals of students and colleagues," "My decisions affect the activities of the department and students," "I feel its importance," "I do not feel autonomous and independent." The Likert type of response with four categories was used: from "completely disagree" - 1 to "completely agree - 4. The Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated to measure the internal consistency of characteristics describing personalization, and to exclude a system error in developing the questionnaire. The questionnaire indicates the objectivity of the data obtained and the elimination of ambiguity in their interpretation (alpha Cronbach .866, based on standardized elements 0.871). The elements were averaged. High points indicate more predictors. It characterizes personalization as a professional competence, as a teacher's willingness to show his personality in teaching and communication.

Initially, the sample was tested for the suitability of applying factor analysis to it. The value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin criterion (KMO), Bartlett's sphericity criterion, Chi-square indicates that the data are perfectly acceptable for carrying out factor analysis. Table 3.1 presents the results of a preliminary tests of factorability of data.

TABLE 3.1.
TESTS OF FACTORABILITY OF DATA

According to the data given in the table, the value of the Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin criterion, equal to .823 and exceeding the recommended value .6, indicates a sufficiently high adequacy of the analysis. The Bartlett sphericity criterion, the p-level value of which is less than .005, indicates that the data are perfectly acceptable for factor analysis.

The principal component method was used to reduce the dimension of the personalization model. This method makes it possible to divide the investigated variables into main and secondary (random) ones. The main variables predict the level of personalization of the teacher. Random variables determine the specific and individual characteristics of each teacher. The authors believe that the main predictors are necessary, typical, determining the regularity of increasing the level of personalization of the university teacher, while random ones, characterizing the deviations from the revealed regularity, accompany self-efficacy. The result of applying the principal component method and varimax rotation method indicates that 10 input variables can be replaced by three variables (main components). Table 3.2 shows the elements of personalization, which formed the three main components.

TABLE 3.2
VARIMAX ROTATION OF  THREE  FACTOR SOLUTION

The first component is marked by high loads on variables related to the desire to independently solve professional problems. The second component is related to the need to be included in the professional system. The third component is related to the need to be meaningful to others as a semantic component of one's own decisions and actions. The collection of empirical data was carried out in April-May 2017. Data was analyzed using the SPSS program.

4. Results

Statistical study of the сorrelation between self-efficacy and personalization of the university teacher was carried out using the parametric method of Pearson's correlation criterion (Table 4.1). The same method was also used to study the relationship between the variable self-efficacy with each personalization component.

TABLE 4.1
CORRELATION BETWEEN THE SELF-EFFICIENCY AND PERSONALIZATION OF THE UNIVERSITY TEACHER

** Correlation at 0.01 (bilateral)

As can be seen from the table, a statistically significant correlation coefficient emphasizes the connection between self-efficacy and personalization of the university teacher. The authors concluded that a higher level of self-efficacy corresponds to a higher level of personalization.

Table 4.2 presents the statistical relationship between self-efficacy and certain aspects of the personalization of the teacher as a need to be a person.

TABLE 4.1.
CORRELATION BETWEEN THE SELF-EFFICIENCY AND VARIOUS ASPECTS
OF PERSONALIZATION OF THE TEACHER OF HIGHER EDUCATION

* Correlation at 0.05    ** Correlation at 0.01

There is a statistically significant positive correlation between self-efficacy and the investigated aspects of personalization. The results of the relationship of self-efficacy with behavioral patterns suggest that when the ability of teachers to engage in activity and to study professional situations is higher, then the level of their assessment of behavioral competence is higher. At the same time, the inability to predict its results during the search activity confirms the essential characteristic of self-efficacy as a person's confidence in the ability and ability to carry out certain concrete actions (Bandura, 1978).

 An analysis of variance was conducted to study the impact of personalization on the level of self-efficacy (Table 4.3).

TABLE 4.3
RESULTS OF SINGLE-FACTOR DISPERSION ANALYSIS

*p < .05…

A statistically significant indicator F was detected. It indicates a varying degree of need to be a person in the conditions of a professional system in separate groups of teachers allocated at the level of self-efficacy.

After obtaining a statistically reliable result of the variance analysis, the procedure of pairwise multiple comparisons of the mean values ​​of the variable personalization in groups of teachers with different levels of self-efficacy was carried out. To obtain a more accurate result, a posteriori Scheffe test was used, which allowed to determine in which groups of teachers the differences in personalization are the most significant (Table 4.4).

TABLE 4.4.
RESULTS OF INTER-GROUP DIFFERENCES IN AVERAGE VALUES OF VARIABLE PERSONALIZATION

 * The average difference is significant at 0.05

Group A significantly differs from B (.000) and C (.038), and group C differs from group B (.002).

Univariate analysis of variance and retrospective analysis (Post-hoc) was also used to establish intergroup differences in mean values ​​of variables subjective activity, resource attitude to the professional system and personal significance for others as the main components of personalization. The single-factor ANOVA established the significance of the differences in the level of all variables in the compared groups (by subjectivity - F = 20.583 for p≤0.05, with respect to the professional system F = 14.956 for p≤0.05 and for importance for others F = 27.746 p≤0.05). As a result of multiple pairwise comparisons using the Scheffe criterion, the authors found that there are statistically significant differences between the following groups of teachers (Table 4.5).

TABLE 4.5.
RESULTS OF MULTIPLE PAIRWISE COMPARISONS OF GROUPS ON THE AVERAGE DIFFERENCE OF VARIABLES

* The average difference is significant at 0.05

As can be seen from the table, group A significantly differs in level of development of the three personalization variables from group B (.000) and in the level of one variable from group C (.002), group C differs in level of two variables of group B (.001; 000).

5.  Discussion, conclusion, and implication

This study examined the relationship between personal variables such as self-efficacy and personalization. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to identify the existence of a significant relationship between self-efficacy and personalization, as well as between self-efficacy and individual personalization components. The analysis showed that there is a statistically significant positive relationship between the self-efficacy and personalization of the university teacher (.554 at 0.01% significance level). Thus, it can be argued that when the level of development of self-efficacy is higher, then the level of personalization is higher and the need to be a person in the conditions of a professional system is stronger. Correlation analysis also showed a statistically significant positive relationship of self-efficacy with individual components of personalization: with the realization of the need to be a subject (.359 for p <0.01), with the ability to act actively and to study professional situations in an objectively available professional system (environment) (.521 at p <0.01) and with a sense of self-importance for colleagues and students (.301 for p <.05).

Subjective activity, the ability to search activity, the desire to be meaningful in the conditions of a professional system are the psychological predictors of the self-efficacy of university teachers. The verification of this assumption was carried out using the unidirectional analysis of variance and a posteriori tests. The results of single-factor analysis showed the presence of statistically significant differences (F = 21.416, 000) in the level of personalization in the groups of teachers identified by the level of self-efficacy. This indicates a significant difference between groups of teachers in terms of personalization. A posteriori Scheffe test showed that the personalization of teachers of a group with high self-efficacy (group A) is much higher quantitatively and qualitatively than teachers with a low (group B) and an average (group C) self-efficacy. Thus, uit can be concluded that the level of personalization affects the level of self-efficacy. Predictor of the teacher's assessment of behavioral competence is his ability to apply adaptive strategies for coping with the depersonalizing influence of the professional system.

As a result of the use of single-factor ANOVA it was found that the average value of such indicators as subjective activity, resource attitude to the professional system and personal significance for others in groups of teachers of different self-efficacy differ statistically. At the same time, the most significant were the differences in the group with high self-efficacy. Thus, teachers with different levels of self-efficacy have statistically significantly different levels of development of the need for subjectivity, different degrees of involvement in the professional system as a resource environment and different strengths of experiencing their own importance in solving professional problems. All three highlighted main components of personalization are psychological factors for the development of self-efficacy. This emphasizes the possibility of developing self-efficacy in the course of professional activities and communication by accumulating own experience of successful actions, monitoring the successful actions of colleagues and students, or by specially organized psychological training. The study showed that each teacher has internal resources to develop a belief in his effectiveness. The results of multiple pair comparisons of groups of teachers on the average difference of variables indicate that the resource relationship to the professional system plays the most important role in the development of self-efficacy and the sense of own importance plays a lesser role. At the same time, factor analysis has shown that the attitude of the teacher to the professional system as a resource of energy for activities, self-development, overcoming difficulties in solving professional problems is determined by the strength of the desire to be significant for others (students, colleagues, university).

The results of studying the possibilities of predicting the success and improving the effectiveness of the pedagogical activity of the university teacher are professionally and socially significant. The authors distinguish the following topics as subjects of interest for further research:

1. Study of the influence of individual and personal characteristics of university teachers on the development of their self-efficacy.

2. Study the relationship of self-efficacy with the effectiveness of various types of professional activity of university teachers (scientific, pedagogical, methodical).

3. Study the relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction.

4. Study of the influence of the corporate culture of the university on the development of teacher self-efficacy.

5. Study of the relationship between the self-efficacy of the university teacher and the development of students' self-efficacy in the conditions of professional training.

6. Studying the scientific self-efficacy of teachers in higher education.

The study was conducted with the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project number 16-16-31009.

References

Abu-Tineh, A. M., Khasawneh, S. A., &Khalaileh, H. A. (2011). Teacher self efficacy and classroom management styles in jordanianschools.Management in Education, 25 (4), 175–181. doi:10.1177/0892020611420597 *  

Аltman I. The environment and social behavior. Privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, 1975, 256 p. 

Arendachuk I.V. Subject conditions of professionalism and success of the university teacher in the context of leading theories of personality. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Seriya: Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Pedagogika. [Proceedings of the Saratov University. New episode. Series: Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy]. 2010. T. 10. No 3. P. 61-67.

Arendachuk, I.V. Professional success of teachers of higher education: psychological analysis of individual and personal characteristics. Obrazovanie v sovremennom mire [Education in the modern world]. Saratov, Saratov University Publ., 2007, no 2, p. 206 – 211.

Bandura A., (1977).  Self –efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, pp.191-215.

Bandura A., (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist № 3, p. 344–358.

Bandura A., (1982).  Self –efficacy mechanism in guman agency. American Psychologist, 37, pp. 122-147.

Bandura (1992) A. Exercise of personal agency through the self-efficacy mechanism. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.). Self-efficacy: Thought control of action. Washington, DC.: Hemisphere, pp. 335-394.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of human behavior. New York: Academic Press, vol. 4, pp.71-81.

Bandura A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control / A. Bandura. New-York: W.H. Freeman, 604 p.

Belykh T.V., Mayramyan A.M. Integration of formally dynamic properties in the structure of individuality among students with different levels of communicative self-efficacy. Vestnik Severo-Kavkazskogo federal'nogo universiteta [Bulletin of the North-Caucasian Federal University]. 2015, No 2, P. 193-197.

Boyd, D., Landford, H., Loeb, S., Rockoff, J., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). The Narrowing Gap in New York City Teacher Qualifications and Its Implications for Student Achievement in High-Poverty Schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27(4), pp.793–818.

Bray-Clark, N., & Bates, R. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications for professional development. The Professional Educator, 26(1), pp.13-22. 

Burtovaya N.B. Psychological means of adapting the personality of high school teachers to professional activities. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Bulletin of Tomsk State Pedagogical University]. 2015,No 3, P. 9-13.

Caprara, G. V., Vecchione, M., Alessandri, G., Gerbino, M., & Barbaranelli, C. (2011). The contribution of personality traits and self-efficacy beliefs to academic achievement: a longitudinal study. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(Pt 1), 78–96. doi:10.1348/2044-8279.002004

Carson, J. A., Gilham, M. B., Kirk, L. M., Reddy, S. T., & Battles, J. B. (2002). Enhancing self-efficacy and patient care with cardiovascular nutrition education. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 23(4), 296–302.

Chaplin A.V., Shatskaya S.S. Factors affecting the self-efficacy of the individual. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal eksperimental'nogo obrazovaniya [International Journal of Experimental Education]. 2015, No. 11, pp. 991-993.

Kobets V.N. Self-effectiveness as a self-evaluation characteristic of the readiness of future managers for professional activity. Nauchnye vedomosti Belgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki [Scientific bulletins of Belgorod State University. Series: The humanities]. 2013, T. 19. No 20, pp. 222-228.

Dinther M. V., Dochy F., Segers M.R.(2011) Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher education. Educational Research Review, 6, p.95–108.doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.10.003  

Gaydar M.I. Lichnostnaya samoeffektivnost' psikhologa. Psikholog v sovremennom obshchestve: ot obrazovaniya k professional'noy deyatel'nosti. [Personal self-efficacy of a psychologist. Psychologist in modern society: from education to professional activity]. Voronezh: VSU, 2007. P. 52-63

Gaydar M. I. Razvitie lichnostnoy samoeffektivnosti studentov-psikhologov na etape vuzovskogo obucheniya. Dokt, Diss. [Development of personal self-efficacy of students-psychologists at the stage of university education. Doct. Diss.]. Kursk: Kursk State University, 2008, p. 26.

Ghanizadeh, A, & Moafian, F. (2014). The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ self-efficacy and their pedagogical success in language institutes. Asian EFL Journal (scopus), 13(2), pp/249-272.

Gonchar S.N. Self-efficacy as a professional quality of future teachers-psychologists. Pedagogicheskoe masterstvo: materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii [Proc. Pedagogical skill: materials of the international scientific conference]. Moscow: Buki-Vedi Publ., 2012. P. 250-253.

Gordeeva T.O., Shepeleva E.A. Gender differences in academic and social self-efficacy and coping strategies in contemporary Russian adolescents. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta [Bulletin of Moscow University]. 2006, Vol. 3, pp. 78–85

Hoffman E. Predstavlenie sebya drugim. Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya sotsial'naya psikhologiya [Representing oneself to others. Modern foreign social psychology]. Moscow: Publishing house of Moscow University, 1984, pp. 188 - 196.

Graur, M.V. Means of academic adaptation as predictors of self-efficacy of students in the middle link of the school. Vektor nauki TGU. Seriya: Pedagogika i psikhologiya [Vector of science TSU. Series: Pedagogy and psychology]. 2017, No 3. P.42-47.

Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, pp.63-69.

Kheydmets M. Fenomen personalizatsii sredy: teoreticheskiy analiz. Sredovye usloviya gruppovoy deyatel'nosti [The phenomenon of personalization of the environment: theoretical analysis. Environmental conditions of group activities]. Tallinn, 1988. P. 7-15.

Hebert, E., Lee, A., & Williamson, L. (1998). Teachers’ and teacher education students’ sense of efficacy: Quantitative and qualitative comparisons. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 31(4), pp. 214-225.

Huitt, W. (2000). Teacher efficacy. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from

http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/teacher/tcheff.html

Holden, M.E., Groulx, J., Bloom, M.A, & Weinburgh, M.H. (2011). Assessing teacher self-efficacy through an outdoor professional development experience. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 12(2), pp,1-25. http://ejse.southwestern.edu/article/view/7385/6890

Jex S. M., Bliese P. D., Buzzell S., Primeau J. (2001).The Impact of Self-Efficacy on Stressor-Strain Relations: Coping Style as an Explanatory Mechanism // Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 86. № 3. P. 401-409

Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy as a resource factor in stress appraisal processes. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 195-213). Washington, DC: Hemisphere

Kola A.J., Sunday O.S. (2015). A Review of Teacher Self-Efficacy, Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and Out-of-Field Teaching: Focussing on Nigerian Teachers. International Journal of Elementary Education.  Volume 4, Issue 3,  рр. 80-85

Krichevsky R.L. Self-efficacy and acmeological approach to personality research. Akmeologiya [Acmeology]. 2001, no 1, pp. 47-53.

Lowe R., Cockshott Z., Greenwood R., Kirwan J. R., Almeida C., Richards P., Hewlett S. (2008). Self-Efficacy as an Appraisal that Moderates the Coping-Emotion Relationship. Psychology and Health, vol. 23, № 2, pp. 155-174.

Mintzes,J., Marcum B., Messerschmidt-Yates, C., & Andrew Mark. (2013). Enhancing Self-Efficacy in Elementary Science Teaching With Professional Learning Communities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, рр.  1201-1218.  

Mojavezi А., Tamiz M. P. (2012) The Impact of Teacher Self-efficacy on the Students’ Motivation and Achievement //  Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 483-491. 

Nartova-Bochaver S.K. Chelovek suverennyy: psikhologicheskoe issledovanie sub"ekta v ego bytii [A sovereign man: a psychological study of the subject in his being]. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008. P. 400.

Nielsen, Tine;   Makransky, Guido; Vang, Maria Louison & Dammeyer, Jesper (2017) How specific is specific self-efficacy? Studies in Educational Evaluation,  Vol 53, pp. 87-97.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self­efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543­578

Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self­beliefs and school success: Self­efficacy, self­concept, and school achievement. In R. Riding & S. Rayner (Eds.), Self­perception (pp. 239­266). London: Ablex Publishing. 

Percy, B. (2012). Concept of thresholds: Key to self -efficacy and effective teaching in higher education. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 9(2), 119-123.

Petrovsky A.V., Petrovsky V.A. The individual and his need to "be a person". Voprosy filosofii [Issues of Philosophy], 1982, No 2, p. 44-53.

Petrovsky V.A. Sistemno-deyatel'nostnaya paradigma: kontseptsiya personalizatsii [System-activity paradigm: the concept of personalization]. Rostov-on-Don, 1996. P. 393-403.

Petrovsky V.A. Chelovek nad situatsiey [Man over the situation]. Moscow: Sense, 2010b.

Petrovsky A.V. Psikhologiya i vremya [Psychology and time]. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007. 447 p.

Pogorelov A.A. Self-efficacy as a predictor of effective and safe personality behavior. Izvestiya Yuzhnogo federal'nogo universiteta. Tekhnicheskie nauki [Bulletin of Southern Federal University. Technical science]. 2012, No. 3, pp. 140-145.

Rockoff, J. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94, рр.247–252.

Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy, motivation, and performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 7(2), pp.112-137.

Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2005). Competence beliefs in academic functioning. In A. J. Elliot & C. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 85–104). New York: Guilford Press.

Schwarzer R., Jerusalem M., Romek V. Russian version
of the General Self-Efficacy Scale // Fоreign Psychology. 1996. Vol. 7. P. 71–77 

Stein, M. K., & Wang, M. C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: The process of teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, pp.171-187.

Selezneva E.V. Self-efficacy as an acmeological invariant of the professionalism of cadre management. Akmeologiya [Akmeologiya]. 2016, No. 1, P.19-26

Seligman M. Kak nauchit'sya optimizmu:  Izmenite vzglyad na mir i  svoyu  zhizn' [Learned Optimism. How to Change Your Mind and Your Life]. Moscow, Alpina Pablisher, 2013.338p.

54. Shepeleva E.A. Osobennosti uchebnoy i sotsial'noy samoeffektivnosti shkol'nikov. Dokt. Diss. [Features of educational and social self-efficacy of schoolchildren. Doct. Diss.] Moscow, 2008. 24 sec.

Skaalvik, E. M., &Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burn out: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1059–1069. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.001  

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2002). The influence of resources and
support on teachers’ efficacy beliefs. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Education Research Association.  April 2, 2002. New Orleans, LA. http://www.coe.ohio-state.edu/ahoy/AERA%202002%20megan.pdf

Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy:
Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68 (2), 202–248.
doi:10.3102/00346543068002202

Vasilyeva T.I. Dinamika professional'noy samoeffektivnosti budushchego pedagoga-psikhologa. Dokt.Diss.[Dynamics of professional self-efficacy of the future teacher-psychologist: the author's abstract. Doct.Diss.]. Moscow, Moscow Pedagogical State University, 2008.

Vodopyanova N.E., Gusteleva A.N. Perceived self-efficacy and resource security as factors preventing professional burnout. Vestnik TvGU. Seriya «Pedagogika i psikhologiya» [Bulletin of the Tver State University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology"]. 2013. Vol. 4. P. 23-30.

Westin A. Privacy and Freedom. London: The Bodley Head, 1970. 488 p.

Wolfe, M. Childhood and privacy. In I. Altman & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Children and the environment. New York: Plenum Press, 1978, pp.175-222.

Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for  academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal-setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 663-676 

Etko E.A. Ideas of personalization and personification in domestic psychology: the current state and prospects for research. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya [Psychological research], 2015, 8 (41), 8. http://psystudy.ru

1. Doctor of Psychology, Professor of the Department of Pedagogy and Methods of Professional Education of the Belgorod State Institute of Arts and Culture, Belgorod, e-mail: isaeva3@mail.ru

2. Senior Lecturer, Chair of Pedagogy and Methods of Professional Education, Belgorod State Institute of Arts and Culture, e-mail: mamatova75@mail.ru

3. Candidate of Psychological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Tourism and Ethnic Culture of the Belgorod State Institute of Arts and Culture, Belgorod, e-mail: 280177@inbox.ru

4. Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Pedagogy and Methods of Professional Education of the Belgorod State Institute of Arts and Culture, Belgorod, e-mail: kovalprom@list.ru

5. Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Pedagogy and Methods of Professional Education of the Belgorod State Institute of Arts and Culture, Belgorod, e-mail: olga9803284560@mail.ru