1

FACTORS INFLUENCING SELF-EFFICACY IN ENVIRONMENTAL

EDUCATION AMONG MALAYSIAN SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS
Masitah Hj. Mohammad Yusof, Azizi Muda, Ahmad Makmom Abdullah,
Mohamed Khaidir Alias & Noriati A. Rashid
Faculty of Environmental Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM
Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify the antecedents of teachers’ self-efficacy in
Environmental Education. The factors were teachers’ knowledge, attitudes and
awareness towards environment, teachers’ perception towards school principals’
instructional leadership practices, teachers’ background factor and school location
factor. This study involved 300 teachers from 30 Malaysian Daily Secondary School
from the states of Perlis representing Northern Zone, states of Selangor representing
Central Zone, states of Pahang representing Eastern Zone, states of Malacca
representing Southern Zone and states of Sarawak representing East Malaysia.
Nevertheless, the analyses of the study were based on 263 sets (87.7%) of completed
questionnaires from 283 questionnaires collected. Descriptive statistics (mean,
standard deviation, frequency and percentage) and inferential statistics (t-test, one-way
ANOVA, correlation Pearson r and multiple linear regressions) were utilized to analyze
and present the findings. The findings showed that level of teachers self-efficacy in
Environmental Education were moderate (M=3.53, SD=.30), teachers’ perception
towards school principals’ instructional leadership practices (M=3.36, SD=.77),
teachers’ knowledge about Environmental Education and Environmental Issues (%M=
57.05, SD=9.74) and teachers’ awareness towards environment (M=3.60, SD=.58)
were also moderate. Yet, the results reported that teachers’ attitudes toward
environment was good and positive (M=4.22, SD=.42). The findings also showed that
there is a significant and positive relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy with
teachers’ academic qualifications (r=.148, p=.017), teachers’ attitudes towards
environment (r=.440, p=.000), teachers’ awareness towards environment (r=.462,
p=.000) and teachers’ perception towards school principals’ instructional leadership
for all the three dimension that is Dimensional of Defining the School and the
Environmental Goal (r=.185, p=.003), Dimensional of Instructional Management
Programs and Environmental Programs (r=.150, p=.015) and Dimensional of Climate
Nurturing Teaching and Learning of Environmental Education (r=.277, p=.000). The
findings showed that the factors influence teachers’ self-efficacy were teachers’
awareness towards environment (Beta=.323, p=.000), teachers’ perception towards
school principals’ instructional leadership for Dimensional of Climate Nurturing
Teaching and Learning Environmental Education (Beta=.298, p=.001), teachers’
attitudes towards environment (Beta=.234, p=.000), teachers’ perception towards
school principals’ instructional leadership for Dimensional of Instructional
Management Programs and Environmental Programs (Beta=-.219, p=.012), teachers’
age (Beta=-.191, p=.000) and teachers’ academic qualification (dummy variable
1=Masters) (Beta=.129, p=.014). These factors explained 34.4% variance of teacher’s
self-efficacy in Environmental Education. These finding proved that there are other
 2

variables that influence teachers’ self-efficacy. According to the findings, several

suggestions were suggested to Malaysian school, ministry and researchers in future.
Keywords: Environmental Education, Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Knowledge,
Attitudes, Awareness, Instructional Leadership.
Introduction
Educational play an important role in shaping the mind, thoughts and attitude towards
the goodness. Environmental Education (EE) also emphasises in changing minds,
attitudes and practices towards caring for the environment in any action taken.
According to Palmer (1998:7): "Environmental Education is the process of recognizing
values and clarifying concepts in order to develop skills and attitudes necessary to
understand and appreciate the inter-relatedness amongst man, his culture, and his
biophysical surroundings. Environmental Education also entails practice in decision-
making and self-formulation of behaviour about issues concerning environmental
quality.”
In the Malaysian context, EE has been officially introduced with the publication of
Guidebook of Environmental Education Teacher Cross Curriculum for Primary and
Secondary Schools (1998) by the Curriculum Development Division, Ministry of
Education. For the preschool this book was published in 2005. Nevertheless, according
to Pudin, Tagi and Periasamy (2004), the effectiveness of its implementation is still
limited and unequal implementation amongst schools. They stated that; “Although the
Ministry of Education provides a guide book on EE to all school, and they have all been
exposed to EE across the curriculum, the implementation is uneven. One of the
problems identified in implementing EE in schools is that the guide book is rarely
utilised by some principals and/or teachers. Some teachers are even unaware of its
existence. The guide book does outline proposed activities for EE but these may not be
detailed enough for some teachers to conduct EE programmes. Also, some teachers may
not be able to develop EE programmes themselves.”
It clearly shows that EE has less successful to implemented effectively in schools. This
is because teachers are not so proficient in the manual, teachers' lack of skills,
motivation and commitment to implementing EE. The study by Aini, Nurizan and
Fakhru'l-Razi (2007), also found that among a number of issues and problems identified
to implementing EE in Malaysia are not all teachers use the guidebook that has been
prepared to teach EE, the guidebook provided is solely to assist teachers in
implementing EE activities, time constraints to finish the syllabus and the problem of
provisions for environmental activities.
The question is, whether the Malaysian teacher is capable or has high self-efficacy to
integrate and incorporate the values of EE in the field of curriculum and co-curriculum
in school? Are Malaysian teachers able to produce students who acquired the positive
attitudes and have the skills to enable them to play an active role in solving problems
related to environmental issues in practical? These questions can be unfolded by
motivating teachers to integrate EE in teaching and learning process effectively and
meaningfully. Therefore, this study attempted to find out what factors contribute to the
improvement of skills, abilities or self-efficacy of Malaysian teachers in the
implementation of EE in schools.
 3

Teachers’ ability or self-efficacy in general, is not a strange terminology for researchers

from other countries. However, these elements are still considered as new issues in
Malaysian education. In fact, some teachers would not understand the term. This
phenomenon occurred probably due to the lack of attention in teachers self-efficacy
studies as alleged by Lim and Poon (1997). A study conducted by Ishak (2001) has
identified that teachers’ self-efficacy was moderate. Early retirement of teachers showed
that teachers felt less confident in their ability to teach and perform duties in their
perspective school (Lim and Poon, 1997). Teng Lung Kiu (2006), also indicated that
teachers’ self-efficacy predicted the phenomenon of "teacher burnout."

Research questions
1) What are the levels (whether very low, low, moderate or high level) of teachers’
knowledge, attitudes and awareness towards environment, levels of teachers’
perceptions towards school principals' instructional leadership and levels of teachers’
self-efficacy in implementation of EE?
2) Is there a significant difference between teachers’ background factors and school
location factor with teachers' self-efficacy?
3) Is there a significant relationship between teachers' background factors, school
location factors, teachers’ knowledge, attitudes and awareness towards environment as
well as teacher perceptions towards school principals' instructional leadership practices
with teachers’ self-efficacy?

4) Is the selected factors indentified such as teachers' background factors, school

location factors, teachers’ knowledge, attitudes and awareness towards environment as
well as teacher perceptions towards school principals' instructional leadership practices
factors contributed to teachers’ self-efficacy in implementation of EE?
Significance of Study
The results of this study enhance knowledge, cultivate awareness and intensify the
involvement of school principals and teachers in implementing the subject of EE cross
the curriculum. The importance of this research on teacher’s efficacy in implementation
of EE is to provide information to the relevant authorities in providing exposure and
knowledge to school principals and teachers in Malaysia. So that, the importance of
preserving and conserving the environment can be done by having courses, workshops,
awareness camps, seminars and lectures.
Methodology

This study is descriptive-correlation study involved 300 teachers from 30 Malaysian

Daily Secondary Schools selected from the five states of Perlis, Selangor, Pahang,
Malacca and Sarawak. The method used is based on a stratified random sampling.
However, only 263 sets of completed questionnaires (out of 283 sets of collected
questionnaires) are used to analyse the data. The total of respondent (n = 263) meet the
sample size that had been calculated by the GPower programs with alpha value; α = .05,
effect size value = 0.15(middle) and the actual power or 1-β test statistics inferential
 4

value = 0.95. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, frequency and

percentage) and inferential statistics (t-test, one-way ANOVA, correlation Pearson r and
multiple linear regressions) were utilized to analyze and present the findings.

Questionnaire survey instrument was divided into four main sections. Part A seeks to
obtain information of respondent background and school background. The respondent
background aspects including gender, age, position held, period of holding the post,
teaching experience, academic qualifications and staff development program on EE.
The school background aspects include the location of schools, whether it’s situated in
urban or rural area. Part B is divided into B1, consisting questions of teacher’s
knowledge which has been adapted and developed from research done by Noraini
(2009) in the form of objectives with four multiple choice questions. Section B2 and B3
are questions adapted and developed by Riley Dunlap, Kent Van Liere, Angela Mertig
and Robert Jones; New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale (in Valerie, 2005) to measure
teachers' attitudes and awareness towards environment. In order to measure the
teachers’ perceptions towards school principals instructional leadership practices on EE
(Section C), these questions had been adapted from the Principal Instructional
Management Rating Scale (PIMRS) questionnaires. PIMRS questionnaire meets the
purpose of this study that has been developed by Hallinger and Murphy (1987). To
measure the level of teacher self-efficacy (Part D) on EE a questionnaire developed by
Archibald P. Sia (Sia et., al, 1992) from the Department of Elementary Education,
California State University Northridge, entitled Environmental Education Efficacy
Belief Instruments (EEEBI) was used. This instrument consists of two scales namely,
Environmental Education Personal Teaching Efficacy Belief Scale and Environmental
Education Teaching Outcome Expectancy Scale. The entire questionnaire used in this
study has been validated by experts appointed.

Level of teacher’s knowledge is determine based on the percentage value that is 0-24%
shows very low level of knowledge, 25-49% shows low level, 50-74% shows moderate
level and 75-100% shows high level of knowledge towards the environment. While the
level of teachers’ self-efficacy, teachers' attitudes and awareness towards the
environment and teacher perceptions towards school principals' instructional leadership
is determined based on the mean score value on a Likert scale of 1-Strongly Disagrees,
2-Disagree, 3-Uncertain, 4-Agree and 5-Strongly Agree. The interpretation of these
levels are 1.00-2.33 shows low level, 2.34-3.66 shows moderate level and 3.66-5.00
shows high level of self-efficacy, awareness and leadership. The interpretation for
attitude is 1.00-2.33 shows negative attitude, 2.34-3.66 shows neutral attitudes and 3.66-
5.00 shows positive attitudes towards the environment.
 5

Findings
(1) i. Level of teacher’s knowledge
Knowledge of EE is defined as the concepts and information related to the environment
(Palmer and Neal, 1994). Burrus-Bammel (1978) defines knowledge of the environment
as a total score obtained by the respondents on the items that measure the concepts, facts
and/or information on the environment.
Generally, the findings shows moderate level of teachers knowledge (%M=57.05,
SD=9.74), see Table 1. Specifically, the level of teachers knowledge on Environmental
Education itself were moderate (%M=49.35, SD=13:45) and the level of teachers
knowledge on the environmental issue were also moderate (%M = 64.75, SD =13.97).
This is because in the era of the information technology (IT) system, teachers can access
information about the environment through internet, in additional knowledge about the
environment are seriously discuss in the electronic media and mass media. This can
open teachers mind and increase their knowledge towards the environment.

Table 1: Levels of Teachers Knowledge on EE and Environmental Issues

Variables Levels Frequency Percentage %M SD
(n=263) (%)
Overall Very Weak 0 0 57.05 9.74
Weak 40 15.2
Moderate 216 82.1
High 7 2.7

Knowledge on Very Weak 12 4.6 49.35 13.45

EE Weak 78 29.7
Moderate 169 64.3
High 4 1.5

Knowledge on Very Weak 3 1.1 64.75 13.97

Environmental Weak 15 5.7
Issues Moderate 183 69.6
High 62 23.6

ii. Level of teacher’s attitudes

Attitude refers to human behavior towards the environment. Fishbein and Ajzen (1980)
and Knapp (1999) assert that attitude towards the environment plays an important role
to influence and motivate human behavior towards the environment. In this study a
survey was conducted to examine the attitudes shown by teachers in the school towards
environment, whether the attitudes were positive, neutral or negative in implementing
and applying EE effectively.
These findings revealed teachers' with good and positive attitudes towards the
environment (M = 4.22, SD =. 42); see Table 2. Besides knowledge, attitude plays an
important role to encourage teachers teaching EE in school. Teachers showed a positive
 6

attitude because they has realized how important the environment to their recently
populations and next generations.

Table 2: Levels of Teachers Attitudes towards Environment

Variable Levels Frequency Percentage M SD
(n=263) (%)
Attitude Negative 0 0 4.22 .42
Neutral 22 8.4
Positive 241 91.6

iii. Level of teacher’s awareness

Environmental awareness is the ability to describe the processes of natural occurrences

in life. Positive action is to be a tool for awareness in one’s evaluation system (S.M.
Mohd Ideris, 1983). In this study, awareness is defined as the total mean score of a high,
medium or low level of awareness.
According to this study, teachers showed a moderate level of awareness towards the
environment (M=3.60, SD=.58); refer Table 3.
Table 3: Levels of Teachers Awareness towards Environment
Variable Levels Frequency Percentage M SD
(n=263) (%)
Awareness Low 6 2.3 3.60 .58
Moderate 141 53.6
High 116 44.1
 7

iv. Levels of Teachers Perception towards School Principals Instructional

Leadership

Leadership in environment concept is viewed as a leader who has the passion towards
environment. Environmental leadership refers to leaders who have the personality,
appreciate and love the environment. Hence, in the context of this study leadership in
environment refers to school principals and how the principals show their leadership in
instructional field exert to set in motion the energy within a group in order to enhance
and applied EE in their perspective schools. Based on the concept model by Hallinger
and Murphy (1987), researchers have adopted the instructional leadership to the concept
of environmental instructional leadership that has been divided into three dimensions,
namely (i) Dimensional of Defining the School and the Environmental Goal, (ii)
Dimensional of Instructional Management Programs and Environmental Programs (iii)
Dimensional of Climate Nurturing Teaching and Learning of EE. The three dimensions
are then divided into eleven functions, namely (i) Functional of formulate academic
goals and objectives of the school environment, (ii) Functional of school goals and
objectives of the environment, (iii) Functional of observation and evaluation teachers
teaching related to EE (iv) Functional of coordinating EE curriculum, (v) Functional of
monitoring academic progress and implementation of environmental improvement, (vi)
Functional of controlling and protecting instructional time, (vii) Functional of
supporting in teaching EE, (viii) Functional of providing an incentive for teachers'
efforts to implement EE programs and activities, (ix) Functional of cultivating staff
development on EE, (x) Functional of setting and enforcing academic standards and
environmental standards (xi) Functional of providing benefits for students.

The findings also identified teachers' perceptions towards school principals instructional
leadership practices in EE is moderate (M=3.36, SD=.77), see Table 4. Specifically,
teachers' perceptions towards school principals instructional leadership practices for the
first dimension: Defining the School and the Environmental Goals (M=3.19, SD=.87),
second dimension: Instructional Management Programs and Environment Programs
(M=3.10, SD=.92) and third dimension: Climate Nurturing Teaching and Learning of
EE (M=3.54, SD=.77) is moderate.

Table 4: Levels of Teachers Perception towards School Principals Instructional

Leadership in Implementation of Environmental Education
Variables Levels Frequency Percentage M SD
(n=263) (%)
Overall Low 26 9.9 3.36 .77
Moderate 138 52.5
High 99 37.6
Dimension 1: Low 43 16.3 3.19 .87
Moderate 127 48.3
 8

Defining the School and the High 93 35.4

Environmental Goals

Dimension 2: Low 56 21.3 3.10 .92

Instructional Management Moderate 119 45.2
Programs and Environment High 88 33.5
Programs

Dimension 3: Low 19 7.2 3.54 .77

Climate Nurturing Teaching Moderate 111 42.2
and Learning of EE High 133 50.6

v. Levels of Teachers Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is defined as a person’s consideration of its ability to manage and

implement the actions needed to achieve the performance been set. It is also associated
with a person’s skill but it is more of a person’s judgments about any issues that can be
done using skills own (Bandura, 1986). In this study, self-efficacy refers to the two
scales developed by Sia (1992) which are Personal Environmental Education Teaching
Efficacy Belief Scale and Environmental Education Teaching Outcome Expectancy
Scale.

The findings of this study showed that overall teachers self-efficacy in implementation
of EE is moderate (M=3.53, SD=.30), refer Table 5. Specifically, the level of teachers
self-efficacy for Environmental Education Personal Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Scale is
also moderate (M=3.29, SD=.32). Instead, the results showed the level of teacher self-
efficacy for Environmental Teaching Outcome Expectancy Scale were high (M=3.82,
SD=.43).

Table 5: Levels of Teachers Self-Efficacy in Implementation of Environmental

Education
Variables Level Frequency Percentage M SD
( n=263) (%)
Overall Low 0 0 3.53 .30
Moderate 196 74.5
High 67 25.5

Environmental Low 1 0.4 3.29 .32

Education Personal Moderate 233 88.6
Teaching Efficacy Beliefs High 29 11.0
Scale

Environmental Teaching Low 0 0 3.82 .43

Outcome Expectancy Scale Moderate 81 30.8
High 182 69.2
 9

(2) Significant difference between teachers’ background factors and school location
factor with teachers' self-efficacy

Table 6 below shows there is significant difference between academic qualifications and
school location factors with teacher’s self-efficacy in implementations of EE. The p-
value is below than 0.05 level of significant. Based on academic qualifications factor,
there is significant different in overall (t(261)= -2.47, p=.017) of the efficacy and also in
the Environmental Education Personal Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Scale (t(261)= -2.10,
p=.035). Based on school location factor, there is significant difference in
Environmental Education Personal Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Scale (t(261)= -2.42,
p=.016).

Table 6: Different significant between academic qualifications and school location

with teachers self-efficacy

Efficacy Variables n M SD t* df p eta²

Academic
qualifications

Overall -2.41 261 .017** .02

Degree 232 3.5 .29

1

Masters 31 3.6 .31

5

EE Personal Teaching -2.10 261 .035** .02

Efficacy Beliefs Scale
Degree 232 3.2 .32
8

Masters 31 3.4 .37

1

Environmental -1.78 261 .076 -

Teaching Outcome
Expectancy Degree 232 3.8 .43
Scale 1

Masters 31 3.9 .46

6

School
Location

Overall -1.89 261 .060 -

Urban 124 3.4 .30

9
 10

Rural 139 3.5 .29

6

EE Personal Teaching -2.42 261 .016** .02

Efficacy Beliefs Scale
Urban 124 3.2 .31
5

Rural 139 3.3 .33

4

Environmental -.652 261 .515 -

Teaching Outcome
Expectancy Scale Urban 124 3.8 .42
1

Rural 139 3.8 .44

4

(3) Significant relationship between teachers’ background factors and school

location factor with teachers' self-efficacy

The study also showed that there was a positive significant relationship (see Table 7)
between academic qualification factors (r=.148, p=.017), teachers' attitude towards the
environment factors (r=.440, p=.000), teachers' awareness towards environment factors
(r=.462, p=.000) and teachers' perceptions towards school principals' instructional
leadership practices factors for all the three dimension namely Dimension 1: Defining
the School and the Environmental Goals (r=.185, p=.003); Dimension 2: Instructional
Management Programs and Environmental Programs (r=.150, p=.015); and Dimension
3: Climate Nurturing Teaching and Learning of EE (r=.277, p=.000) with teachers self-
efficacy.

Table 7: Pearson r Correlations between Teachers Self-Efficacy and Its Subscale

with Independent Variables that are studied
Variables R p
Overall Personal Outcome
Scale Expectancy
Sale
Gender -.016 .794 -.007 .908 -.019 .761
Academic Qualifications .148* .017 .129* .037 .109 .076
Position Held .003 .958 .035 .574 -.029 .641
Staff Development Programs on EE -.038 .545 .002 .971 -.062 .315
School Location .116 .060 .148* .016 .040 .515
Age -.118 .057 -.114 .066 -.077 .216
Teaching Experience -.099 .110 -.084 .177 -.076 .219
 11

Period of Holding the Post -.042 .499 -.011 .859 -.056 .365
Level of knowledge .062 .313 .092 .138 .010 .873
 Knowledge on EE .040 .515 .052 .403 .014 .825
 Knowledge on .048 .437 .078 .207 .001 .993
Environmental Issues

Level of attitudes towards .440** .000 .270** .000 .438** .000

environment
Level of awareness towards .462** .000 .250** .000 .493** .000
environment
Level of school principal .23** .000 .020 .748 .358** .000
instructional leadership practices .185** .003 .762 263 .277** .000
 Dimensions 1 .150* .015 -.032 .611 .270** .000
 Dimensions 2 .277** .000 .048 .434 .395** .000
 Dimensions 3

Note: ** Significant at 0.01 (2 tailed)

* Significant at 0.05 (2 tailed)

(4) Factors indentified contributed to teachers’ self-efficacy in implementation of

EE
The findings showed that teachers’ self-efficacy predictors consists only six of the
independent variables (refer Table 8). The six independent variables were teachers
awareness towards environment (Beta=.23, p=.000), teachers perceptions towards
school principals' instructional leadership practices for the Third Dimensional of
Climate Nurturing Teaching and Learning of EE (Beta=.298, p=.001), teachers' attitudes
towards environment (Beta=.234, p=.000), teacher perceptions towards school
principals' instructional leadership practices for the Second Dimensional of Instructional
Management Programs and Environmental Programs (Beta= -.219, p=.012), teachers
age (Beta= -.191, p=.000) and teachers academic qualifications (dummy variable 1=
Masters) (Beta=.129, p=.014). These variables can only explain 34.4% variance of
teachers’ self-efficacy.
The regression equation model for teachers self-efficacy towards Environmental
Education was:

Ŷ (teachers self-efficacy) = 2.349 +.166 (Xtaw) +.169 (Xtat) - .008 (Xtag) +

.120 (Xtaq) + .116 (Xild3) - .071 (Xild2) + e

Where;
Xtaw =Teachers awareness
Xtat =Teachers attitudes
Xtag =Teachers age
Xtaq =Teachers academic qualifications
Xild3 = Instructional leadership dimensional 3
Xild2 = Instructional leadership dimensional 2
 12

Constant = 2.349
Table 8: Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standardized T p Collinearity
Coefficients coefficients Statistics
B Standard Beta Toleranc VIF
Error e
Constant 2.349 .184 12.740 .000
Teachers .166 .033 .323 4.983 .000 .608 1.645
Awareness (Xta)
Teachers Attitudes .169 .044 .234 3.859 .000 .694 1.440
(Xta)
Teachers Age -.008 .002 -.191 -3.669 .000 .944 1.061
(Xta)
Teachers .120 .048 .129 2.478 .014 .943 1.061
Qualifications
(Xtq)
Instructional .116 .033 .298 3.521 .001 .357 2.804
Leadership
Dimensions 3
Instructional
Leadership -.071 .028 -.219 -2.537 .012 .344 2.903
Dimensions 2
R=.586 F=22.371
R²=.344 p=.000
R adjusted =.329 n=263

Discussions
The findings of these current studied shows Malaysian Daily Secondary School
Teachers have a moderate level of environmental knowledge, positive attitude and
moderate levels of awareness towards the environment. Although many efforts have
been undertaken, the level of awareness and attitude of the society still reflect their
uncaring attitude towards conserving the environment (Ahmad Salihin, 2004). This
current research support the research done by Krantz (2002) which states that teachers'
level of knowledge causes teachers to teach EE according only the parts or topics that
they understand. Scientific or global topics are less touched by teachers. According to
Sia (1992), teachers realized they do not have high level of EE knowledge but they
believed that effective teaching will develop students' understanding EE.
This current research reveals, school principals’ demonstrated experience and
confidence characteristics at moderate level according to their teachers’ perception.
Baharom (1998) found that teachers' perceptions towards school principals' instructional
leadership affect their job satisfaction. This gives the impression that the instructional
leadership of school principals can lead to motivate teachers in performing their duties.

The current findings also showed Malaysian secondary school teachers have moderate
level of self-efficacy in implementation of EE. In particular, teachers were found to
have moderate levels of self-efficacy for Environmental Education Personal Teaching
 13

Efficacy Belief Scale and high level of self-efficacy for Environmental Education
Teaching Outcome Expectancy Scale. This is because teachers give less attention in
their skills in teaching EE but spend more attention in the outcome of student practices
environmental values.
This current study identified a positive and significant different with teacher’s self-
efficacy in implementation of EE. The differences were based on academic qualification
and school location factors. This situations show academic qualification factor effect
teacher’s efficacy. The higher level in academic qualification show higher level of
efficacy. Teacher’s efficacy also depends on the location of the school situated.
Teachers in rural area show high efficacy compare to teachers in urban area. More
attention should be given by the educational leaders on teachers in urban area. This is
because rural area is surroundings with green environment and less pollution so they
appreciate the nature more than teachers in the urban area.
Teachers' attitudes and awareness towards environment indicate a significant
relationship with teachers’ self-efficacy. According to Hungerford & Bryant (1977)
change in attitude towards environment of an individual from young age and continue to
grow, at which stage of adolescent and adult understanding of environmental issues
become more significant.
The current finding also indicates a significant relationship between teachers self-
efficacy with teachers' perceptions towards school principal instructional leadership
practices. This current result shows school principals instructional leadership practices
improve teachers' beliefs on their ability to implement EE. Instructional leadership will
not only improve the effectiveness of the performance of subordinates, but it also
increases a person self-efficacy to produce any results beyond expectations (Bass &
Avolio, 1990). These current findings support the study done by Hipp (1996), Short and
Spenser (1990). According to Hallinger and Murphy (1987 & 1985), teachers
perception on school principals have effective instructional leadership and they always
involved in the teaching supervision and curriculum management.
These current study showed independent variable such as teachers academic
qualifications, age, attitudes and awareness towards environment as well as teacher
perceptions towards school principals' instructional leadership practices of third
dimension (Nurturing Teaching and Learning Climate Educational Environment) and
second dimension (Teaching and Management Program and Environment Programme)
emerged as predictors of teachers self-efficacy in implementation of EE. It’s supported
research model done by Palmer and Neal (1994), Bandura (1986) and Hallinger &
Murphy (1985).
Research model by Palmer and Neal (1994) asserted that education for the environment
is in relation to the development of caring attitudes and values of the environment,
including elements of human understanding and behaviour. EE encourages individuals
to explore a personal response to the relationship with the environment and
environmental issues, namely by emphasising on personal ethics, the nature of
responsibility and awareness towards environment. While the Social Cognitive Theory
by Bandura (1986), stresses that the way of humans function in life were influenced by
personal factors, individual behaviour and environmental influences that make up the
 14

human interaction. Cognitive aspect is important to determine the role of self-efficacy,

self regulation, information, and develop individual behaviour (Pajares, 1997).
Teachers’ age in this current study contributed to teachers’ self-efficacy. Teachers
below the age of 30 showed higher level of self-efficacy than teachers in the age range
between 40 to 50 years old. These findings lend support to findings of previous
researchers such as Celep (1999-2000), Edwards, Green and Lyons (1996).
The results also indicate teacher’s academic qualifications contributed to teachers’ self-
efficacy. The higher level of academic qualifications, the higher their level of self-
efficacy. According to Hoy and Woolfolk (1993) academic qualifications influenced
teacher’s personal teaching efficacy (PTE).
The current study revealed teachers' perceptions towards school principal instructional
leadership for third dimension (Nurturing Teaching and Learning Climate Educational
Environment) and second dimension (Instructional Management Program and
Environmental Program) contributed to teacher’s self-efficacy in implementation of EE.
This current study supported the studied done by Hipp (1996), Hipp and Bredeson
(1995), Reames and Spencer (1998). According to Hallinger & Murphy (1985) the
effectiveness and excellence of a school is based on the principals’ instructional
leadership. This includes effectiveness in implementation of EE which is closely related
to the commitment of principals and teachers teaching. Instructional leadership is an
activity undertaken by the school to enhance the successful of teaching and learning
process and the development of school. Environmental activities should be implemented
to further enhance the quality of teaching and school environment. Instructional
leadership functional should be applied in schools. Leadership is considered dominant
in the leadership of principals. This is due to instructional leadership can enhance
motivation and confidence of subordinates towards greater excellence. A study done by
Andi Audryanah (2007) stated an effective principal should adopt the functions of
instructional leadership because leadership influenced many aspects of education
towards achieving the goals and vision of education.
This current study showed predictors on teachers self-efficacy in implementation of EE
is the teachers 'awareness towards environment (B=.168), teachers perception towards
principals' instructional leadership practices for third dimensions: Climate Nurturing
Teaching and Learning of EE (B =. 116) and teachers attitude towards environment
(B=.169). This situation showed that the higher level of teachers’ awareness, the
positive attitude shown by teachers towards environment and the higher level of school
principal instructional leadership practices for the dimensions of Climate Nurturing
Teaching and Learning of EE will increase the level of teacher’s self-efficacy in
implementation of EE. Furthermore, the next predictor is teachers’ perception towards
school principal instructional leadership practices of second dimension: Instructional
Management Programs and Environmental Programs (B= -.071). The negative sign
showed an increased in principal instructional leadership for Instructional Management
Programs and Environmental Programs will lead to decrease of teacher self-efficacy.
Teachers age factor (B= -.008) also showed an increase of teachers’ age will lead to the
decrease of teacher self-efficacy. Meanwhile academic qualification factors (B=.120)
indicate high level of teachers’ academic qualification will lead to higher level of their
self-efficacy.
 15

Conclusion
The study was conducted to identify factors influencing teachers’ self-efficacy in
implementation of EE in the state of Perlis, Selangor, Pahang, Melaka and Sarawak in
Malaysia. Therefore, this study can only be generalized to teachers in five states
involved with this study at the time research data were collected. The results of this
current studied showed the factors influencing teachers’ self-efficacy are teachers’
awareness and attitude towards environment, teachers’ perception towards school
principal instructional leadership practices as well as teachers academic qualification
and teacher’s age.
Information derived from these current researches provides valuable information to
Malaysian Ministry of Education; in particular Curriculum Development Division and
policy makers to take into account these findings in updating the curriculum and
syllabus of EE. This is to ensure that EE can be truly implemented effectively and
achieve the goals and objectives as set out in the Teachers' Guidebook of Environmental
Education Cross Curriculum for KBSM, 1998. Therefore, teachers’ efficacy or
teachers’ ability in teaching EE should be given serious attention and not to be taken
lightly.
This current study should be able to obtained knowledge, cultivate awareness and
intensify the involvement of school principals, teachers and students in implementation
of EE as a cross curriculum subjects. The findings of this study is also to help the
Malaysian Educational Institution such as District Education Office, Department of
Education, Institute of Principal ship Studies, Institute of Teachers Education and other
organizations to provide exposure and knowledge of school administrators and teachers
about the importance of preserving and conserving the environment. This can be done
by holding a convention, seminars, courses, workshops, camps and environmental
lectures. Finally, this study should be able to contribute useful knowledge by enrich and
expand the research in the field of EE in addition to help and to be a source of reference
to others researchers in the near future.

References

Ahmad Salihin. (2004). Persepsi guru terhadap modul ekosistem hutan bakau mengikut
bidang mata pelajaran di sekolah-sekolah menengah daerah Tampin.
Unpublished Masters Project Paper. Serdang: Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Andi Audryanah. (2007). Kepemimpinan pengajaran dan efikasi kendiri pengetua
sekolah menengah dan hubungannya dengan pencapaian akademik sekolah.
Unpublished Masters Thesis. Skudai: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs.
NJ:Prentice Hall.
Baharom Mohamad (1998). Persepsi guru-guru terhadap kepemimpinan pengajaran
pengetua sekolah harapan negara di negeri Johor: Satu Tinjauan. Unpublished
Masters Thesis. Skudai: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
 16

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1990). Transformational Leadership Development: Manual
for Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto: California: Consulting
Psychologist Press Inc.
Celep, C. (1999-2000). The correlation of the factors. The prospective teachers’sense of
efficacy, beliefs and attitudes about student control. National Forum of
Educational Administration & Supervision Journal 17(4).
http://www.natinalforum.com/23celep.htm.

Edwards, J.L., Green, K.E. & Lyons, C.A. (1996). Teacher efficacy & school & teacher
characteristic. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Research
Association (New York, NY, April 8-12, 1996). ED397055.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Instructional leadership and school socio-economic
status: A preliminary investigation. Administrator’s Notebook. 31(5): 1-4.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1987). Assessing and developing principal instructional
leadership. Education Leadership. 45(1): 54-62.

Hipp, K.A. (1996). Teacher efficacy: Influence of principal leadership behaviour. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, on April 8-12, 1996, New York). ED396409.

Hipp, K.A. and Bredson, P.V. (1995). Exploring connections between teacher efficacy
and principals’ leadership behaviour. Journal of School Leadership, 5(2), 136-
150.

Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A.E. (1993). Teacher's sense of efficacy and the
organizational health of shools. Elementary School Journal. 93(4): 355-372.

Hungerford, H.R dan Bryant D. (1977). An Analysis of Strategies for Teaching

Environmental Concepts and Values Clarification in Kindergartens. The Journal
of Environmental Education. 9: 44-49.

Ishak bin Sin. (2001). Pengaruh kepimpinan pengajaran, kepimpinan transformasi dan
gantian kepada kepimpinan ke atas komitmen terhadap organisasi, efikasi dan
kepuasan kerja guru. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia.
Krantz, P.D. (2002). A study of the impact of environmental education workshops on
teachers’ attitude and efficacy. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Missouri-Columbia.
Umi ProQuest Digital Dissertations.

Lim, B.L. & Poon, M.L. (1997). Kesan efikasi kendiri terhadap komitmen, daya usaha
dan prestasi kerja di kalangan guru sekolah. Educational Journal, 18, 37-55.
 17

Ministry of Education (1998). Buku Panduan Guru Pendidikan Alam Sekitar Merentas
Kurikulum KBSR dan KBSM, Curricullum Development Divisions, MOE, Kuala
Lumpur.

Pajares, F. (1997). Current Directions in Self-efficacy Research. in. M. Maehr & P. R.

Pintrich (Edu.). AdvancesIin Motivation and Achievement. Greenwich, CT: JAI
Press. 10: 1-49.

Palmer, J.A. (1998). Environmental education in the 21 st century: Theory, practice,

progress and promise. New York: Routledge.

Palmer, J dan Neal, P. (1994). The handbook of environmental education. London and
New York: Routledge.

Pudin, S., Tagi, K. & Periasamy, A. (2004). Environmental education in Malaysia and
Japan: a comparative assessment. Available online at
http://www.ceeindia.org/esf/download/paper20.pdf (accessed 3 January 2009).

Reames, E.H. and Spencer, W. A. (1998). Teacher efficacy and commitment-

Relationship to Middle School culture. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
the American Educational Research Association (San Diego, CA, April 13-17,
1998). ED419793.

Sia, A. P. (1992). Preserves elementary teachers’ perceived efficacy in teaching

environmental education: A preliminary study. East Lansing, MI: National Centre
for Research on Teacher Learning. Paper presented at the ECO-ED North
American Association for Environmental Education Annual Conference, Toronto,
Canada, October 28, 1992. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No.ED362487).

Short, P. M. & Spencer, W. A. (1990). Principal instructional leadership. Journal of

Research and Development in Education.

Teng Lung Kiu. (2006). Pengaruh faktor terpilih terhadap efikasi kendiri guru sekolah
menengah di negeri Sarawak. Tesis Doktor Falsafah Fakulti Pendidikan, Serdang:
UniversitiPutraMalaysia.
 18

vi.