| Rank | Instrument | Construct | Items and format | Subscales | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES), long form (Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy, 2001) | Teachers’ efficacy beliefs | 24 items; nine-point response from “nothing” to “a great deal” | Efficacy in student engagement, instructional practices and classroom management | A main instrument in a thesis about teachers |
| 2 | TSES, short form | Same construct | 12 items; same response format | The same three subscales | Short questionnaires, or a thesis that measures many other variables |
| 3 | Teacher Efficacy Scale (Gibson and Dembo, 1984) | Teacher efficacy | Check the original paper for item count and structure | Check the original paper | Replication of older studies, or comparison with earlier work |
| 4 | General Self-Efficacy Scale (Schwarzer and Jerusalem) | General perceived self-efficacy, not specific to teaching | 10 items; four-point response from “not at all true” to “exactly true” | Treated as unidimensional | A general baseline, or comparison between teachers and other groups |
Our recommendation: use the long form of the TSES for a thesis about teachers or teacher candidates, because it is built for teaching, has three named subscales and is widely cited. The runner-up, for a tighter questionnaire, is the 12-item short form. The ranking criteria are fit to the construct (teaching versus general), the structure the instrument gives you for hypotheses, and how easily you can justify it to a committee. The General Self-Efficacy Scale ranks last for a teacher thesis only because it is not specific to teaching, not because it is a weak scale.
Self-efficacy is one of the most common variables in Canadian education theses, from teacher candidates in a practicum to experienced teachers facing inclusion, assessment reform or new curricula. The risk is choosing a scale because another thesis used it, and then discovering that it measures something different from what your research question asks. This comparison shows what each instrument measures, what it gives you for hypotheses and what you must check before you adopt it.
What is teacher self-efficacy, and where does the construct come from?
The concept comes from Bandura (1977), who published “Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change” in Psychological Review (volume 84, issue 2, pages 191-215). Self-efficacy is commonly summarised as a person’s belief in their capacity to act in the ways necessary to reach specific goals. Bandura proposed four sources of such beliefs: mastery experiences, vicarious experiences from watching similar others, social persuasion and physiological and psychological states. For an education thesis, that gives you a ready framework. A teacher candidate’s practicum is a mastery experience, observing an associate teacher is a vicarious one, and feedback from a supervisor is social persuasion. If your thesis explains why efficacy changes, those four sources are your explanatory variables.
Teacher efficacy has its own measurement tradition. Gibson and Dembo (1984) published “Teacher efficacy: A construct validation” in the Journal of Educational Psychology (volume 76, issue 4, pages 569-582), and Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) revisited the construct in Teaching and Teacher Education (volume 17, issue 7, pages 783-805) under the title “Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct”. The 2001 paper is the origin of the TSES.
Rank 1: the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale, long form
The TSES was developed by Megan Tschannen-Moran and Anita Woolfolk Hoy. The authors’ own page describes a full 24-item scale and a 12-item short form, and three subscales: efficacy in student engagement, efficacy in instructional practices and efficacy in classroom management. The long form asks, on a nine-point scale, how much a teacher can do in situations such as getting through to the most difficult students, helping students think critically, controlling disruptive behaviour or adjusting lessons for individual students. According to the authors, subscale scores are calculated as unweighted means of the items that load on each factor.
What it gives your thesis: three subscales you can hypothesise about separately. A thesis on inclusive classrooms might predict that efficacy for instructional practices differs from efficacy for classroom management; a thesis on a mentoring program might predict that student engagement efficacy changes most. The structure lets you say something more specific than “efficacy increased”.
What to check: the authors’ page provides a permission letter for using the scale. Follow it, and cite the original paper. Compute reliability for the total and for each subscale in your own sample; our explainer on what counts as an acceptable Cronbach’s alpha tells you what to do if one subscale comes out low.
Rank 2: the TSES short form
The short form has 12 items and keeps the same three subscales. Its advantage is length. In a thesis that also measures workload, well-being, school climate and demographics, 24 efficacy items may cost you completion rates; 12 will cost less. The disadvantage is that subscales have fewer items each, so subscale reliability deserves closer attention in your sample. If you adopt the short form, say why in the methods chapter, and report reliability for each subscale, not only for the total.
How do I decide between the long and the short form?
Ask three questions in order:
- Will I analyse subscales as separate variables? If yes, prefer the long form, because each subscale has more items and its reliability is easier to defend.
- How long is the rest of my questionnaire? If respondents will also complete several other scales, a short form can protect your response rate. Pilot the full questionnaire and note how long it takes.
- Do I need to compare with earlier studies? Check which form they used and use the same one, so your numbers are comparable.
Rank 3: the Gibson and Dembo Teacher Efficacy Scale
Gibson and Dembo (1984) is the older tradition, and many earlier studies cite it. We do not describe its item count or factor structure here because you should take those details from the original paper, not from a summary; open it, and report what it says. Use this instrument when your thesis replicates or extends a study that used it, or when you need to compare your results with older findings. If you have no such reason, the TSES is usually easier to defend, because it is the more recent teacher-specific instrument, comes with named subscales and a stated scoring method, and is the one most current studies cite.
Rank 4: the General Self-Efficacy Scale
The General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) by Schwarzer and Jerusalem has ten items, rated from 1 (not at all true) to 4 (exactly true). Its authors define perceived self-efficacy as an optimistic self-belief: the belief that one can perform novel or difficult tasks, or cope with adversity. Their page says the scale is available in 33 languages, and reports that in samples from 23 nations Cronbach’s alphas ranged from .76 to .90, with the majority in the high .80s. It is unidimensional, so you get one total score.
When it makes sense: a general baseline alongside a teacher-specific scale (to ask whether teaching efficacy adds anything beyond general efficacy), or a comparison between teachers and another occupational group. When it does not: as the only measure in a thesis about teaching, because a general scale cannot tell you whether a teacher feels able to manage a classroom or adapt a lesson. If your sample includes teachers who respond in French, see how to translate and validate a questionnaire for a thesis in Canada before you decide, because a translation is not automatically a validated version.
Which design fits which scale?
- Correlational survey: TSES total or subscales against an outcome such as job satisfaction, intention to stay or use of a teaching practice. Choose the subscale that matches your outcome.
- Pre-post design: TSES before and after a practicum, a course or a mentoring program. Use the same form both times, and read Bandura’s four sources as your explanatory frame.
- Group comparison: TSES in two groups, for example teachers with and without inclusion training. Plan the sample size before you collect; see which statistical test to use in an education thesis.
- Mixed methods: TSES plus interviews about the experiences behind the scores. This suits questions about why efficacy changed.
How do I justify the choice in the methods chapter?
A committee wants to see four things in a short paragraph. Name the instrument and cite its source. State why it fits your construct and your population. Report its structure (items, response format, subscales) as the authors describe it. Report the reliability you obtained in your own sample. A model paragraph (illustrative, replace every element) would read: teacher self-efficacy was measured with the long form of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy, 2001), which has 24 items rated from 1 to 9 and three subscales; permission to use the scale was obtained from the authors’ page; Cronbach’s alpha in this sample was reported for the total and for each subscale.
If your thesis topic is not yet fixed, see education thesis topics in Canada for 40 options and the access each needs, and research gap examples for a special education thesis if inclusion is your area. If you want to see how a single construct is framed from definition to scale, read our guide to resilience as a thesis variable.
What will a committee ask about a self-efficacy variable?
- “Is this efficacy or competence?” Answer that efficacy is a belief about capability, and say how your design separates it from performance.
- “Why this scale and not another?” Use the comparison criteria above: fit to teaching, structure for hypotheses, reliability evidence.
- “Does your sample resemble the one the scale was built on?” Describe your sample’s grade levels, experience and context, and acknowledge where it differs.
- “What does a change in score mean?” Tie it to the four sources of efficacy and to a design that could plausibly produce the change.
- “What are the limits of self-report?” Say that the scale records what teachers believe they can do, and list what you did to reduce bias, such as anonymity.
What mistakes should I avoid?
- Using a general scale for a teaching question. It will measure something real, but not what your question asks.
- Reporting three subscales you did not measure. If you used one score, you cannot report subscales.
- Skipping permission. Many scales have terms of use; follow them and keep a copy of the permission.
- Assuming published reliability applies to your sample. Compute your own and report it.
- Treating efficacy as skill. Self-efficacy is a belief about capability, not a measure of performance. If your question is about actual practice, add an observation or a performance measure.
Where Tesify fits
Choosing the scale is one step; the chapters around it are the rest of the thesis. Tesify helps you structure and organise your thesis. 9,000+ students have written 15,000+ chapters with Tesify, and the text stays 100% written by you.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best scale for teacher self-efficacy in a thesis?
For a thesis about teachers, the long form of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale is the usual choice, because it is built for teaching and has three subscales. The 12-item short form suits shorter questionnaires.
How many items does the TSES have?
The authors describe a 24-item long form and a 12-item short form, with three subscales: student engagement, instructional practices and classroom management.
What response scale does the TSES use?
The long form uses a nine-point response from “nothing” to “a great deal”, as printed on the authors’ form.
Do I need permission to use the TSES?
The authors’ page provides a permission letter for using the scale. Follow its terms and cite the original paper.
Can I use the General Self-Efficacy Scale for teachers?
You can, as a general baseline, but it is not specific to teaching. Its authors describe a 10-item, four-point scale that treats self-efficacy as one dimension.
Which subscale should I use for my hypothesis?
Choose the subscale that matches your outcome: student engagement for motivation questions, instructional practices for pedagogy and classroom management for behaviour.
Should I report the total score or subscales?
Report both if the instrument gives you both, and justify which you analyse. Report reliability for each in your own sample.
What is the theory behind self-efficacy?
Bandura (1977) proposed that self-efficacy is shaped by mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion and physiological and psychological states.
Can I use a French version of the TSES?
Check whether a validated French version exists and whether you have permission. If not, a translation needs its own adaptation and validation steps.
How do I measure change in self-efficacy after a practicum?
Use a pre-post design with the same form at both points, report reliability at each point and interpret change using the four sources of efficacy.