Journal of Agricultural Educatio, 57(1), 73-90. doi: 10.5032/jae.2016.01073 An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory in Agricultural Education Aaron J. McKim1 and Jonathan J. Velez2 Abstract This research sought to evaluate the use of the self-efficacy theory in agricultural education. A total of 30 studies, published between 1997 and 2013 using self-efficacy as a theoretical foundation were compiled and analyzed. The findings of these studies were compared to expected outcomes identified by the self-efficacy theory, specifically the positive relationship between Bandura’s four identified self-efficacy building experiences and increased self-efficacy as well as the relationship between self-efficacy and career persistence. This synthesis highlights important considerations for the use of self-efficacy theory in agricultural education, including a shift from mastery experiences to vicarious experiences in the teacher development process and specific considerations for the establishment of social persuasion between cooperating and student teachers. Finally, based on the comparison of past research in agricultural education and self- efficacy theory, recommendations are made for future research that will continue the articulation of this theory in both research and practice within agricultural education. Keywords: self-efficacy, teacher development, career commitment. Introduction In his book, Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn (2012) suggested scientific progress stems from the continual re-evaluation of theoretical foundations within an academic discipline. Kuhn posited that through continual reevaluation of theoretical foundations, researchers can identify anomalous results that provide a context to progress a foundational theory closer to reality. In agricultural education, self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977b, 1986, 1997) has played a foundational role in research conducted on agriculture teacher development as well as teacher attrition. The purpose of our study is to utilize self-efficacy research conducted in agricultural education to reevaluate the use of self-efficacy theory in the agricultural education discipline. The self-efficacy theory originated from Bandura’s early work developing the social learning theory (1977a). The social learning theory was a rebuttal to learning theorists’ focus on learning through behaviorism and the consequent exclusion of social interaction as a determinant of learning (Bandura 1977a). In his social learning theory, Bandura posited human behavior was reciprocally determined by three factors: (a) the environment, (b) previous behavior, and (c) personal characteristics. From his theoretical ideas surrounding behavior, Bandura developed the concept of self-efficacy. Bandura defined self-efficacy as, “peoples judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances” (1986, p. 391). Self-efficacy was Bandura’s answer to the question of how behavior changes. 1 Aaron J. McKim is a graduate student in the Department of Agricultural Education and Agricultural Sciences at Oregon State University, 112 Strand Agriculture Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, [email protected]. 2Jonathan J. Velez is an Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural Education and Agricultural Sciences Department at Oregon State University, 112 Strand Agriculture Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, [email protected] 73 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory Bandura (1986) thought behavior, or intention to behave a certain way, changed with experience. Specifically, Bandura conceptualized four experiences critical to the development of an individual’s self-efficacy, and therefore behavior. The first, and as Bandura identified the most powerful, of these experiences are mastery experiences. Mastery experiences refer to an individual successfully accomplishing a given behavior. Bandura noted that once an individual was successful in accomplishing a behavior, that individual would be more likely to attempt the task again and find success. Vicarious experiences, the second strongest developer of self-efficacy, entail an individual observing another individual successfully accomplish a given behavior. Bandura described many important considerations when evaluating vicarious experiences, for example, the more the observing individual perceives him- or herself as similar to the observed individual, the more powerful the vicarious experiences are. Social persuasion, the third self-efficacy builder identified by Bandura (1986), refers to the impact of others on one’s self-efficacy. More specifically, the concept of social persuasion states that if an individual were to receive verbal support from others in their environment (e.g., someone stating “I know you can do this” as the individual considers a task) their self-efficacy would increase. The final self-efficacy builder identified by Bandura, physiological and emotional states, acknowledges the importance of internal states to an individual’s self-efficacy. Bandura posited that if an individual experienced, for example, excessive nerves or sweaty palms when considering a task, this individual’s self-efficacy could be reduced. The following table, developed from a synthesis of relevant literature (Bandura, 1997, 1986; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, & Hoy, 1998; Wolf, Foster, & Birkenholz, 2010), describes the application of the four self-efficacy developing experiences and an example of their application in teacher development (see Table 1). Table 1 Description of Self-Efficacy Building Experiences and Examples in Teacher Development Experience Definition Teacher Development Examples Mastery Successfully Student teaching, early field experiences, accomplishing the task. peer teaching Vicarious Observing someone else Observing peers teach, observing early successfully accomplish career teachers, observing videos of the task. teachers Social Persuasion Encouragement or Communication with cooperating teacher, feedback on your ability to peer encouragement, feedback from teacher accomplish the task. educator Physiological and Internal state and emotions Occurs when contemplating or completing Emotional States when considering or any task associated with teaching completing the task. In addition to the developmental components of self-efficacy, Bandura postulated the impact of self-efficacy on an individual’s persistence in a given task (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1997). Bandura identified individuals anticipate challenges associated with tasks they are considering attempting. If an individual perceives the challenges associated with a task as being greater than his or her perceived abilities (i.e., self-efficacy), this individual is at a high risk to not attempt the task or discontinue their involvement in future tasks they perceive as similar. Alternatively, if an individual perceives his or her abilities related to a given task as higher than the perceived challenges, this individual is more likely to persist in the task. Journal of Agricultural Education 74 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory Educational research picked up on the value of using the concept of self-efficacy in the development and success of teachers (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). In education, the self- efficacy of a teacher, or teacher self-efficacy, is identified as a teacher’s belief in his or her abilities to execute the tasks associated with teaching (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Teacher self-efficacy research has identified positive relationships between teachers’ self-efficacy and their intention to remain in the teaching profession, persistence when working with difficult students, and overall effectiveness as a teacher (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Within the field of agricultural education, self-efficacy research originated with a doctoral dissertation completed by Juan Rodriguez (1997) and has spanned to recent publications in the Journal of Agricultural Education (Stripling & Roberts, 2013a; 2013b). The research in agricultural education mirrors the dualistic nature of the theory of self-efficacy, addressing both the development of and outcomes associated with agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy. With more than 17 years of research in agricultural education contributing to our knowledge of self-efficacy, an evaluation of the current state and future directions of the self-efficacy theory is needed. Furthermore, given self-efficacy research in agricultural education is often limited in scope and generalizability; we feel a synthesis of the research allows for a clarifying look at commonalities and conflicts within findings and gives readers a better understanding of how self-efficacy theory can be applied to both research and practice throughout agricultural education. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this research was to describe the contributions of previous research in agricultural education as they inform our current understanding of self-efficacy theory in the agricultural education discipline. Furthermore, this research sought to provide future directions for self-efficacy research within agricultural education. This research addresses National Research Agenda priority area number five, efficient and effective agricultural education programs (Doerfert, 2011). By evaluating the current state and future directions of self-efficacy theory, we are providing an important synthesis of information related to the development of teachers’ confidence in their abilities to teach agriculture effectively and their commitment to the agriculture teaching profession. The following research objectives were developed to guide our work. Using research conducted in agricultural education related to self-efficacy: 1. Analyze the use of mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological and emotional states in the development of agriculture teachers; 2. Analyze evidence of the relationship between agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy and their persistence in the agriculture teaching profession; and 3. Describe areas of research necessary for the continual development of self-efficacy theory within the agricultural education profession. Methods Data Collection Using the Journal of Agricultural Education, Academic Search Premier, Regional and National Agricultural Education Conference Proceedings, the Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, and Google Scholar, researchers collected 30 studies conducted in agricultural education, published between 1997 and 2013, that utilized the concept of self-efficacy as a theoretical foundation. The 30 studies were reviewed and categorized by their investigation of the development of self-efficacy or outcomes associated with self-efficacy, specifically the relationship between self-efficacy and agriculture teachers’ persistence in the profession. Journal of Agricultural Education 75 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory Data Analysis For both categories of studies, research addressing the development of self-efficacy and research addressing the outcomes associated with self-efficacy, a content analysis was conducted. A content analysis is defined as “…a careful, detailed, systematic examination and interpretation of a particular body of material in an effort to identify patterns, themes, biases, and meanings” (Berg, 2007, pp. 303-304). We systematically analyzed the findings of each study by comparing them to the theoretical postulations forwarded within self-efficacy theory. Once each study was analyzed in light of the self-efficacy theory, we looked across studies to identify commonalities and conflicts, both of which are highlighted in our findings. Through this process, researchers also identified areas of self-efficacy theory not yet investigated in agricultural education that, if researched, would continue the development of this theory within the field of agricultural education. Findings and Discussion Our discussion of previous research studies in agricultural education and their relationship to the self-efficacy theory is separated into two major themes: the development of self-efficacy and the relationship between self-efficacy and agriculture teachers’ persistence in the teaching profession. We will first focus on the development of self-efficacy. This discussion is broken into four parts, which relate to the four self-efficacy building experiences put forth by Bandura (1977, 1986). Furthermore, to improve the flow of information, we merged the findings and discussion sections of this paper. While we acknowledge this is atypical, we feel it provides readers with evidence of how our discussion directly links to previous research within agricultural education. Development of Self-Efficacy: Mastery Experiences Throughout the teacher development process there are a variety of opportunities for mastery experiences related to teaching (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Within agricultural education, the first opportunities for teachers to engage in mastery experiences are early field experiences and peer teaching. In a 2001 study, Knobloch analyzed the impact of an early field experience in which, among other tasks, students “assisted their cooperating teacher with teaching or facilitating responsibilities” and a peer teaching experience in which teams of students taught their peers using a variety of teaching strategies. The study conducted by Knobloch identified early field experiences were not significantly related to preservice teachers’ teaching efficacy, but peer teaching was significantly related to increased levels of teaching efficacy for one of the two groups analyzed. In addition to the Knobloch study, the peer teaching experience was tested as a component of a recent evaluation of the development of agriculture teachers’ general and mathematics teaching efficacy (Stripling & Roberts, 2013a, 2013b). In this quasi-experimental study, preservice teachers in the treatment group were required to teach their peers two math-enhanced micro-teaching lessons. The research conducted by Stripling and Roberts found this treatment was ineffective at significantly improving the personal or mathematics teaching efficacy of preservice agriculture teachers. Researchers in agricultural education have also investigated potential mastery experiences during student teaching. Student teaching is designed to offer students practical, mastery experiences as teachers (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998; Wolf et al., 2010). Research conducted by Wolf et al. (2010) found teaching additional courses during student teaching was related to lower levels of classroom management efficacy. Furthermore, a study of first through third year teachers conducted by Whittington, McConnell, and Knobloch (2006) found the number of classes taught was negatively correlated with the teaching efficacy of first through third year agriculture teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education 76 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory The research in agricultural education exploring specific mastery experiences and their relationship with agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy has highlighted important considerations for the use of the Self-Efficacy Theory in agricultural education. First, it is important to acknowledge that for mastery experiences to have a positive influence on self-efficacy, they must be perceived as positive by the individual (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1997). This brings about a major concern in teacher preparation; increased self-efficacy leads to success, yet success is required to build self- efficacy. This concern may explain why previous research in agricultural education has found a negative relationship between additional preservice teaching experience and self-efficacy (Whittington et al., 2006; Wolf et al., 2010). In light of these findings, we suggest there is a potential for mastery experience overload among preservice teachers. Preservice teachers may not have had the opportunity to build their self-efficacy through mastery teaching experience; therefore, when they are presented with the potential for additional mastery experiences, in the form of additional courses to teach, they are susceptible to additional challenges and failure resulting in reduced self- efficacy. Development of Self-Efficacy: Vicarious Experiences In the absence of mastery experiences, vicarious experiences can be extremely powerful builders of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977). However, research in agricultural education focused on the development of self-efficacy through vicarious experiences is limited. Two studies, discussed in the previous section, have investigated the impact of peer teaching experiences on preservice agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy. The peer teaching experience offers a combination of both mastery and vicarious experiences as students both teach (mastery experience) and observe their peers teach (vicarious experience). Therefore, the findings from these studies will also be considered in this discussion. One additional study has addressed the relationship between specific vicarious experiences and preservice agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy (Wolf et al., 2010). This research found the vicarious experiences of observing a first year agriculture teacher, observing another student teacher, observing a non-agriculture teacher, observing their cooperating teacher, and observing an agriculture teacher other than their cooperating teacher were all positively correlated with student teachers’ general teaching efficacy. Furthermore, the most powerful of these experiences, observing a first year agriculture teacher, was found to explain 11% of the variance in general teacher efficacy. These findings support Bandura’s position on the positive effect of vicarious experiences in the absence of mastery experience (Bandura, 1977). The limited research in agricultural education supports the idea that vicarious experiences, when considered without the presence of mastery experiences, are positively related to the teaching efficacy of agriculture teachers. Development of Self-Efficacy: Social Persuasion Research in agricultural education evaluating the impact of social persuasion on agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy is sparse. In a 2007 study conducted by Edgar, Roberts, and Murphy, the type of social persuasion provided by student teachers’ cooperating teacher was evaluated. In this quasi-experimental study, a structured communication tool outlining “12 sections of accomplished practices of the student teacher” (p. 22) was given to cooperating teachers. Cooperating teachers were asked to rate students in each of the twelve fields as well as provide feedback for each of the areas. When compared to a control group, the presence of this structured communication tool was detrimental to the teaching efficacy of these student teachers. The research team of Roberts, Harlin, and Briers (2008) also assessed the potential influence of social persuasion, through a peer student teacher, on a student teacher’s self-efficacy. Roberts et al. (2008) found that placing two student teachers within the same student teaching experience, at the same time, did not result in increased Journal of Agricultural Education 77 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory self-efficacy gains when compared to a student teacher completing their experience without a peer student teacher. Research conducted by Wolf et al. (2010) also evaluated the impact of social persuasion on student teachers in agricultural education. This research team found both written and verbal feedback from the cooperating teacher was positively correlated with the teaching efficacy of student teachers. The strongest of these communication types, verbal feedback, explained 10% of the variance in student teachers’ general teaching efficacy. Alternatively, being observed by another student teacher, which the researcher categorized as social persuasion, did not have a significant relationship with student teachers’ general teaching efficacy. The research conducted in agricultural education on the relationship between social persuasion and teaching efficacy provides important insight into the role of social persuasion in the development of agriculture teachers. Research conducted by Wolf et al. (2010) supports the inclusion of social persuasion as a self-efficacy builder; however, additional research on social persuasion in agricultural education (Edgar et al., 2007; Roberts et al., 2008; Wolf et al., 2010) provide clarifying structure toward the type of social persuasion that supports the development of self-efficacy among student teachers. Development of Self-Efficacy: Physiological and Emotional States Agricultural education research has not yet assessed the role of physiological and emotional states as an influential factor to the development of agricultural education teachers’ self- efficacy. Wolf et al. (2010) establish that physiological and emotional states are not assessed “as it is a construct that does not lend itself to measurement on a survey instrument” (p. 42). However, as we continue to develop the use of self-efficacy theory in agricultural education, consideration must be given to methods for measuring physiological and emotional states and their relationship to the development of self-efficacy among preservice and practicing agriculture educators. The majority of research in agricultural education evaluating the development of teachers’ self-efficacy has looked at the relationship between teachers’ perception of a broad experience (e.g., student teaching) and their self-efficacy. These studies have identified a positive relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and their perception of student teaching (Knobloch, 2006; Knobloch & Whittington, 2002; Whittington et al., 2006; Wolf, 2008), teacher preparation (Knobloch, 2006), and the first year of teaching agriculture (Wolf, 2008). These studies provide valuable insight into the importance of having positive teacher development experiences; however, they fail to identify specific experiences related to increased levels of self-efficacy. Therefore, as we discussed the development of agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy, our focus centered on those studies which have analyzed specific experiences and their relationship with preservice and practicing agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy. Outcomes of Self-Efficacy: Persistence in the Agriculture Teaching Profession One of the aspects of self-efficacy theory that makes it appealing to researchers in agricultural education is the relationship between self-efficacy and persistence in a given task. For a number of years, agricultural education has suffered a shortage of agriculture teachers (Kantrovich, 2010), a shortage often attributed, in part to teachers’ persistence. Researchers in agricultural education have utilized self-efficacy theory as a theoretical foundation for the investigation into why agriculture teachers’ are leaving the profession. Knobloch and Whittington (2003a) pioneered this research with an investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy and career commitment. This study found teachers with higher career commitment are more likely to maintain a steady level of self-efficacy, while teachers with a lower career commitment are more likely to experience declines in their self-efficacy. Journal of Agricultural Education 78 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory Additional research in agricultural education has analyzed the relationship between self- efficacy and career commitment (Blackburn & Robinson, 2008; Swan, 2005; Wheeler & Knobloch, 2006). The work completed by Swan (2005) found 17% of the variance in career intent could be attributed to the perceived efficacy of student teachers. Additionally, the research completed by Wheeler and Knobloch (2006) supports the idea of agriculture teachers’ self-efficacy being positively related to career commitment. Furthermore, when studying the job satisfaction of Kentucky agriculture teachers, Blackburn and Robinson (2008) identified a positive relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction. The research completed in agricultural education supports the theorized relationship between self-efficacy and persistence in a given task. Our discussion of the research studies conducted in agricultural education focused on studies addressing specific components of the theory of self-efficacy. However, we acknowledge research in agricultural education using self-efficacy as a theoretical foundation includes far more lines of inquiry. Therefore, we have synthesized these studies and provide the population, self- efficacy instrument, and selective findings for the 30 identified studies conducted in agricultural education and provide this information in Table 2. Journal of Agricultural Education 79 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory Table 2 History of Self-Efficacy Research in Agricultural Education Author(s), Population Teacher Efficacy Findings Year Instrument Used Rodriguez, Preservice through second Teacher Self Efficacy Scale Field dependent learning style yielded higher perceived 1997 year agriculture teachers in (short form) efficacy scores than field independent or field neutral. Ohio during the 1996-1997 Learning style was measured using the Group Embedded (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1993) school year. Figures Test. Knobloch, Two groups of preservice Teacher Self Efficacy Scale One group experienced a significant increase in perceived 2001 agricultural education students (short form) personal teaching efficacy after peer teaching, the other enrolled in a foundational group did not. Neither group experienced an increase in (Woolfolk & Hoy, 1990) agricultural education class. perceived efficacy after their early field experience. Knobloch & Student teachers through third The Ohio State Teacher Sense Collective teacher efficacy accounted for 10.8% of the Whittington, year agriculture teachers in of Efficacy Scale (TSES) variation in perceived efficacy, teacher support accounted 2002 Ohio during the 2001-2002 for 1.0% of perceived efficacy, and perception of student (Tschannen-Moran & school year. teaching accounted for 2.8% of perceived efficacy. Woolfolk Hoy, 2001) Knobloch & First through third year TSES After ten weeks of teaching, the perceived efficacy of a low Whittington, agriculture teachers in Ohio career commitment group dropped while the perceived 2003a during the 2001-2002 school efficacy of a high career commitment group remained the year. same. Knobloch & Student teachers through third Questionnaire developed After the initial ten weeks of school, student teachers were Whittington, year agriculture teachers in based on Bandura’s concept found to have the highest sense of efficacy while first year 2003b; Ohio during the 2001-2002 of self-efficacy and Darling- teachers were found to have the lowest sense of efficacy. school year. Hammonds (1999) review of Knobloch, effective teacher qualities. 2002 Swan, 2005 Preservice agricultural TSES Learning style did not relate to perceived efficacy. This education students at The Ohio study found 17% of the variance in career intent was State University in 2004. associated with self-efficacy. Whittington, Ohio agriculture teachers in TSES Perceiving the student teaching experience as excellent was McConnell, & their first three years of a significant, positive predictor of teacher efficacy. Number Knobloch, teaching in 2002. of class preparations was a significant, negative predictor 2006 of teacher efficacy. Journal of Agricultural Education 80 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory Table 2 (continued) History of Self-Efficacy Research in Agricultural Education Author(s), Population Teacher Efficacy Findings Year Instrument Used Knobloch, Student teachers at The Ohio TSES Those student teachers who perceived their teacher prep 2006 State University and programs positively had a higher sense of efficacy. The two University of Illinois during groups had similar perceived efficacy throughout the the 2001-2002 school year. student teaching experience. Roberts, Student teachers at Texas TSES Perceived efficacy increased during a four week on-campus Harlin, & A&M in the 2004 Fall cohort. experience, then dropped halfway through student teaching, Ricketts, 2006 but rebounded by the end of the student teaching experience. Perceived student engagement efficacy dropped during student teaching. Rocca & Agriculture teachers in their TSES Alternatively certified teachers were, on average, 10 years Washburn, first five years of teaching in older than traditionally certified teachers, with an average 2006 Florida during the 2003-2004 of 12 more years of agricultural experience. Alternatively school year. and traditionally certified teachers were equally efficacious. Duncan & Middle school and/or high Researcher developed Traditionally certified teachers had higher self-efficacy Ricketts, 2006 school agriculture teachers in a instrument measuring self- scores in the following areas: content knowledge, southern state during the 2004- efficacy in four areas specific FFA/SAE/Leadership Development, program management. 2005 school year. to agricultural education. Similar efficacy was observed in teaching and learning. Wheeler & Illinois agriculture teachers in TSES Teaching experience was negatively correlated with Knobloch, the first four years of teaching perceived efficacy. Contract length, career commitment, 2006 during the 2002-2003 school student enrollment, and teaching experience explained 11% year. of the variation in teachers’ sense of efficacy. Harlin, Student teachers at Tarleton TSES Teachers’ sense of efficacy increased through a four week Roberts, State, Texas A&M, Texas on-campus experience, declined to its lowest level at the Briers, Tech, and Oklahoma State in mid-point of student teaching, and rebounded to the highest Mowen, & 2005. level at the end of student teaching. Edgar, 2007 Hamilton & Mississippi agriculture Science Teaching Efficacy Mississippi agriculture teachers in this study identified a Swortzel, teachers participating in a Belief Instrument (Riggs & high self-efficacy toward teaching science. A low, negative 2007 GIS/GPS workshop in 2006. Enochs, 1990) relationship was found between agriculture teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy and capacity to teach science integrated process skills. Journal of Agricultural Education 81 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016 McKim and Velez An Evaluation of the Self-Efficacy Theory Table 2 (continued) History of Self-Efficacy Research in Agricultural Education Author(s), Population Teacher Efficacy Findings Year Instrument Used Edgar, Student teachers at Texas TSES Structured communication with the cooperating teacher Roberts, & A&M during the 2004, 2005, yielded a lower perception of efficacy while the perceived Murphy, 2007 and 2006 Fall cohorts. efficacy in the unstructured group increased. Roberts, Student teachers at Texas TSES Researchers observed a dip in perceived efficacy at the Mowen, A&M during the 2005 Spring mid-point of student teaching. Researchers found the Edgar, Harlin, and Fall semesters. personality type “sensing” was negatively correlated with & Briers, 2007 instructional strategies efficacy and the personality type “judging” was positively related to classroom management efficacy. Wolf, 2008, Agriculture teachers in Ohio Researcher designed Highest level of perceived efficacy found in the classroom 2011 who had been licensed though instrument used to collect domain, lowest sense of efficacy in the SAE domain. The Ohio State University agriculture teachers’ sense of Teachers’ perception of their student teaching and first year teaching four years or less in efficacy in classroom, FFA, of teaching were positively correlated with perceived 2008. and SAE. efficacy. Roberts, Texas A&M student teachers TSES Student teachers paired with another student teacher within Harlin, & from 2004 to 2006. the same experience had statistically similar self-efficacy Briers, 2008 development trajectories to those student teachers completing their experience individually. Blackburn & Agriculture teachers in TSES Teachers with three to four years of teaching experience Robinson, Kentucky in their first six had the lowest self-efficacy and job satisfaction scores. 2008 years of teaching. Perceived efficacy was positively correlated with overall job satisfaction. Stripling, University of Georgia and TSES Preservice students’ perceived teaching efficacy increased Ricketts, Texas A&M University at each point of data collection: before teaching methods Roberts, & students from the Fall of 2004 class, after teaching methods class, and after student Harlin, 2008 to the Spring of 2006. teaching. Journal of Agricultural Education 82 Volume 57, Issue 1, 2016