The Relationship Between Doctoral-Level Teaching Preparation Strategies In Cacrep-Accredited Counselor Education Programs And Self-Efficacy Toward Teaching

This study focused on the preparation of doctoral students enrolled in counselor education and supervision (CES) programs for their future responsibilities as teachers. Specifically, this study examined the relationship between CES doctoral students’ self-efficacy toward teaching, as measured by the Self-Efficacy toward Teaching Inventory (SETI), and several teaching preparation strategies identified in the CES literature and accreditation standards: formal coursework on college teaching, fieldwork experiences in teaching, and supervision of teaching fieldwork experiences. Data were collected from 171 CES doctoral students through an electronic survey tool. This study found that all of the identified teaching preparation variables were signicantly related to the students’ self-efficacy toward teaching. These findings support the requirement, by individual CES doctoral programs or nationally by CACREP, that CES students take formal coursework on college teaching, engage in numerous teaching fieldwork experiences, and receive weekly, high quality supervision of these fieldwork experiences. The results of this study suggest that a substantial number of CES programs are not requiring these experiences. Although this study found that fieldwork in teaching, coursework in teaching, and supervision of teaching were all significantly related to self-efficacy toward teaching, the results suggested that the quality of supervision is particularly important in strengthening efficacy beliefs. This finding represents a notable contribution to the literature, as previous quantitative research in CES did not include the frequency or quality of supervision of teaching as a variable. Implications are provided for leaders of CACREP, CES doctoral programs and faculty, and current and future CES doctoral students. By emphasizing teaching preparation practices as supported in this and previous research, faculty can better focus time and programmatic resources on training experiences that are most effective in strengthening students’ self-efficacy toward teaching. Suggestions for future research include investigating what elements within coursework, fieldwork, and supervision of teaching are most effective in promoting self-efficacy toward teaching, strengthening the psychometric properties of the SETI, and investigating the relationship between SETI scores and actual teaching effectiveness