Questionnaires

A questionnaire is a self-report instrument useful for economically and speedily obtaining data from a large number of respondents (Brown, 2001). According to Wisker (2007), questionnaires gather information directly by asking people questions and using them as data for analysis. A questionnaire-based survey in this study context was used to easily obtain information from a large number of participants in order to investigate perceptions and changes in teachers’ self-efficacy and their perceptions of the importance of self-efficacy, characteristics of good quality PD, and the relationship between participation in PD/TSGs and their self-efficacy (see Appendix H).

The six-page questionnaire used for this study was divided into three separate parts. Part A (demographic data) was used to gather teachers’ demographic information, including

69 their gender, location of school, and years of teaching experience. Data gained from this section were used to analyse if there were any relationships between the level of

teachers’ self-efficacy and length of teaching experience, gender, and teaching location.

Part B employed a Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES). The TSES by Tschannen- Moran and Hoy (2001) that consist of 12 items was adapted and administered for this study. In the current study, the 12 items were modified to suit the study context, namely teaching of English as a foreign language in Indonesia by substituting ‘To what extent’ or ‘How much’ with ‘How well’ in all items, and adding ‘English language’ in all items (see Table 4.5 for all individual items). The TSES required the participants to rate each of the 12 statements on a given five point scale, ranging from “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly Agree”. The TSES consists of three subscales: (a) efficacy for instructional strategies, (b) efficacy for classroom management, and (c) efficacy for student engagement. An example of efficacy for instructional strategies is: “How well can you

implement alternative teaching strategies in your English class?” An example of

efficacy for classroom management is: “How well are you able to prevent disruptive

behaviour during English language class?” And an example of efficacy for student

engagement is: “How well are you able to help students who have difficulties in English

language?” The TSES was employed because it is a well-known and researched

instrument for teacher efficacy and covers a wide range of teacher activities that determine success in the classroom (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). In addition, the TSES has a high reliability rate in previous research (Hoy & Spero, 2005), with .86 reliability for the subscales and .90 for the full scale (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). The TSES was designed to measure teacher self-efficacy across multiple grade levels and teaching contexts by addressing a wide range of teaching tasks that teachers believe are necessary for classroom practice (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). The 12 items have been used by other researchers (e.g. Karimi, 2011; Murshidi, Konting, Elias, & Fooi, 2006; Ross & Bruce, 2007). Ross and Bruce (2007), for example, used the 12 items with Mathematics teachers in the province of Ontario, Canada to measure teacher self-efficacy with success.

70

Part C comprised of 10 items consisting of closed questions and open-ended questions. The questions in part C were employed to find out the participants’ perceptions of the importance of self-efficacy, characteristics of good quality PD, and the relationship between participation in PD/TSGs and changes in perceived levels of their self-efficacy (see Appendix H, Part C). Closed questions required the participants to tick their choices or to rate each statement on a given five point scale, ranging from ‘Strongly disagree’ to ‘Strongly Agree’. The example of closed questions: “Please indicate the quality of the following types of professional development you have participated in?”

In terms of the open-ended questions in this study, Mertens (2005) explained the value of them for the purpose of getting “balanced view of all perspectives, values, and beliefs

of the participants” (p. 257). The researcher found it necessary to include open-ended

questions in the questionnaires to elicit each teacher’s perceptions of the topic being investigated. The example of items in relation to self-efficacy: “In your opinion, why is self-efficacy important for English language teachers?” An example of items in relation to the effect of TSGs on teacher self-efficacy: “In your opinion, does the teacher study group help you to enhance your self-efficacy?” At the end of the questionnaire (open- questions), participants were asked to add any further comments or suggestions they had regarding PD/TSG activities or other aspects in their area.

3.6.1.1Questionnaire pilot

Prior to data collection in Phase One, the questionnaire was piloted with four secondary EFL teachers (three females and one male) who were studying in two universities in New Zealand. A pilot study, as Van Teijlingen and Hundley (2002) indicate, is important to ensure that the instrument is appropriate to be used to collect data for a particular study or research project. For this study context, the pilot study was done to ensure that the questions in the questionnaires were easy to understand by the participants and had content validity.

Potential participants for the pilot study were identified in coordination with the Indonesian Students Association, both in Wellington and Palmerston North. An Information Sheet and Participation Consent Form were sent to them. A time and place

71 to conduct the pilot was set that was mutually convenient. The average time to complete the questionnaires was 30-45 minutes. Suggestions from the pilot participants were sought and used to develop the final version.

3.6.1.2Administration of questionnaires

Permission to access junior secondary EFL teachers was obtained from the head of the education department in the three districts (see Appendix B). School names and addresses of the participants were given by the education department staff. The questionnaires that were sent to the participants were accompanied by an information sheet. The information sheet provided information about the researcher, the research purposes, and the confidentiality commitment (see Appendix C).

The initial questionnaires were distributed during the first month of data collection (on 15 - 16 August 2013), while the follow-up questionnaires were distributed during the last month of data collection (on 10 - 11 January 2014). Potential participants were provided with a stamped, pre-addressed envelope to send the completed questionnaires back to the researcher. The initial questionnaires were distributed by post, while the follow-up questionnaires were distributed by post and through email. To be noted, at the end of the initial questionnaires, the participants were asked to provide their email address if they would prefer to get the follow-up questionnaires via email (some of the participants provided their email address).

Recognising that there is not specific or particular word to differentiate between self- efficacy (i.e. a judgement about task capability that is specific to a particular task) and self-confidence (i.e. a general concept of self) in the Indonesian language, I provided the participants with a definition of self-efficacy by writing it in the questionnaires (see Appendix H) and clarified it again at the beginning of the interviews. This was done to minimize the potential misconception or misunderstanding of the meaning of self- efficacy and the role played by self-efficacy itself in relation to the teachers’ teaching activities.

72