In this article, I review the diverse ways in which perceived self-efficacy contributes to cognitive development and functioning. Perceived self-efficacy exerts its influence through four major processes. They include cognitive, motivational, affective, and selection processes. There are three different levels at which perceived self-efficacy operates as an important contributor to academic development. Students' beliefs in their efficacy to regulate their own learning and to master academic activities determine their aspirations, level of motivation, and academic accomplishments. Teachers' beliefs in their personal efficacy to motivate and promote learning affect the types of learning environments they create and the level of academic progress their students achieve. Faculties' beliefs in their collective instructional efficacy contribute significantly to their schools' level of academic achievement. Student body characteristics influence school-level achievement more strongly by altering faculties' beli...

https://www.itma.vt.edu/courses/tel/resources/bandura(1993)_self-efficacy.pdf

Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and Functioning

released a remarkab le report, A Nation at Risk. This Report has s t imulated in the media considerable discussion about the problems in our schools, speculation about the causes, and ass ignment of blame. Astonishingly, f e w of the media reports have focused on the specific f indings and recommendat ions of the Commission. A lmos t none of the med ia reports tells that the Commission i tsel f re frained f rom speculation on causes and f rom assignment of blame. Because of the extraordinary clarity and importance of the Commission's Report, the editors of the Communica t ions decided to reprint the Report's main section in its entirety. We are p leased to present it to you here.

A nation at risk: the imperative for educational reform

The purpose of this article is to examine the contribution made by the self-efficacy component of Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory to the study of self-regulation and motivation in academic settings. The difference between self-efficacy beliefs and other expectancy constructs is first explained, followed by a brief overview of problems in self-efficacy research. Findings on the relationship between self-efficacy, motivation constructs, and academic performances are then summarized. These findings demonstrate that particularized measures of self-efficacy that correspond to the criterial tasks with which they are compared surpass global measures in the explanation and prediction of related outcomes. The conceptual difference between the definition and use of expectancy beliefs in social cognitive theory and in expectancy value and self-concept theory is then clarified. Last, strategies to guide future research are offered.

Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings

Over the past two decades, debate over the most suitable leadership role for principals has been dominated by two conceptual models: instructional leadership and transformational leadership. This article reviews the conceptual and empirical development of these two leadership models. The author concludes that the suitability or effectiveness of a particular leadership model is linked to factors in the external environment and the local context of a school. Moreover, the paper argues that the definitions of the two models are also evolving in response to the changing needs of schools in the context of global educational reforms.

Leading Educational Change: reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership

School‐level conditions and school leadership, in particular, are key issues in efforts to change instruction. While new organizational structures and new leadership roles matter to instructional innovation, what seems most critical is how leadership practice is undertaken. Yet, the practice of school leadership has received limited attention in the research literature. Building on activity theory and theories of distributed cognition, this paper develops a distributed perspective on school leadership as a frame for studying leadership practice, arguing that leadership practice is constituted in the interaction of school leaders, followers, and the situation.

/pdf/towards-a-theory-of-leadership-practice-a-distributed-3bynoupyil.pdf

Towards a theory of leadership practice: a distributed perspective

/pdf/effective-schools-a-review-575v0q0c9k.pdf

Effective Schools: A Review

cation [1983]). While the latter are generally critical of the nation's schools, the former attempts to identify the characteristics of exemplary schools (e.g., Cohen 1983; MacKenzie 1983). Providentially, the reports criticizing education in the United States have focused public attention on schools and the need for change at precisely the time when over a decade of research suggests means by which this change might be accomplished. In this paper we will briefly review findings from the school effectiveness literature and, based on that literature, suggest local strategies and policies that will stimulate and facilitate school

School Reform: The District Policy Implications of the Effective Schools Literature

Too Soon to Cheer? Synthesis of Research on Effective Schools.

On April 18th George Bush re newed his claim to be the na tion's Education President by announcing America 2000—a broad strategy for reforming U.S. schools in this last decade of the 20th century. One highlight of that plan is the devel opment of a voluntary set of national tests, the American Achievement Tests, to be given in five core academic areas in the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades. These tests, designed to monitor the country's progress toward achieving the President and governors' national edu cation goals, mark a shift in American attitudes about national influences in ed ucation. Previously when public leaders and educators in the United States have discussed national tests and national cumculums, it has been in reference to the educational systems of other na tions—the traditions of local control and state responsibility were thought to be the American way forever. Now. for better or worse, the U.S. Department of Education, headed by former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander, is publicly calling for na tional testing. In private conversations, state and national leaders acknowledge that this activity and others like it are moving the country closer to a national curriculum. Moreover, such a move ment is not without public support. Ac cording to the 21st Annual Gallup Poll, 77 percent of the public support manda tory national achievement testing and 69 percent support the use of a standard ized national curriculum.' We review in this article the-develop ments that illustrate the current interest in a national curriculum and then ex plore the various forms a U.S. national curriculum might take. We examine a variety of design, governance, and tran sition options and consider whether there may be an American way to de velop a national curriculum—a way that could preserve variety and initiative for teachers, as well as democratic control of education. But first, we want to be clear about how we are using the terms national and ' curriculum. First, national needs to be distinguished from federal. While in the past there were few national education efforts that did not emanate from the federal government, there are now dozens of foundations, quasi-govern mental organizations such as the Nation al Academy of Sciences (NAS), busi ness and education groups, and professional associations that sponsor re ports about the condition of education in the nation and conceive and finance na tional reform initiatives. Second, we use the term curriculum to denote more than scope and sequence guidelines and text books; our broader definition encom passes all that gets taught, including con tent, skills, and intellectual orientation.

A National Curriculum in the United States

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses the characteristics of school culture that encourage academic achievement. Effective schools research and past experience with federal and state education programs suggest that the following: (1) school differences have an effect upon student achievement, (2) it is the culture of the whole school that creates that effect, (3) district, state, and federal policy would best focus on instigating school-specific, whole-school improvement efforts, and (4) outcomes are the preferable means of monitoring and evaluating such efforts. There is some indication that school improvement programs of the type indicated by the effective schools literature are not politically attractive. Stimulating school staffs to evaluate the learning climate and academic culture of their school and providing them with the resources necessary for the long-haul process of school improvement is not dramatic. It does not attract publicity, offer a quick-fix solution, or involve some new technological breakthrough that will revolutionize education. Instead, school-based reform requires hard, sustained work. Fundamental school improvement demands the educational equivalent of patient money that is invested with the expectation of seeing results 3 or more years in the future. While the concept of school culture may sound soft to the technocratic ear, evidence shows that it is precisely this culture that accounts for the impact differences schools have on student achievement.

Marshall S. Smith

Papers

Effective Schools: A Review

School Reform: The District Policy Implications of the Effective Schools Literature

Too Soon to Cheer? Synthesis of Research on Effective Schools.

A National Curriculum in the United States

Educational Policy and School Effectiveness