Blazing New Trails - Connexions

Self-Efficacy and Principal Involvement in Character Education 225
education of students’ character is the promise that academic goals can be attained as
character goals are accomplished. As Ryan (2003) stressed,
Teachers must help students see that the hard, often tedious work of school is the stuff
of their own character formation…Teachers must confidently make them the promise,
however, that while doing this hard work of forging good character, they will be able
to achieve the academic goals we have set for them. (p. 16)
School administrators implementing character education initiatives will find both academic
and character goals accomplished.
Efficacy research is replete with assorted ways in which principals’ self-efficacy
impacts the different components of school leadership (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1993; Lee, Dedrick,
& Smith, 1991; Moore & Esselman, 1992). Resultant leadership effectiveness positively
correlates to teachers’ sense of efficacy. The efficacy dynamic is important in light of the
educational benefits students could enjoy as the by-product of educators’ increased levels of
efficacy; and, if this efficacy impacts the implementation of effective character education,
then the benefits extend to all members of society.
REFERENCES
American School Counseling Association. (1998). American School Counseling Association character education
position statement. Retrieved from http://www.schoolcounselor.org
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84,
191–215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Bandura, A. (2000). Cultivate self-efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In E. A. Locke (Ed.),
The Blackwell handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp. 120–136). Malden, MA: Oxford
University Press.
Bandura, A. (2001). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales (Revised). Available from Frank Pajares, Emory
University.
Bandura, A., & Wood, R. (1989). Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards on selfregulation
of complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 805–814.
Beck, L., & Murphy, J. (1994). Ethics in educational leadership programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2001). Leading with soul: An uncommon journey. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Campbell, E. (1997). Ethical school leadership: Problems of an elusive role. Journal of School Leadership, 7(4),
287–300.
Covrig, D. (2000). The organizational context of moral dilemmas: The role of moral leadership in administration
in making and breaking dilemmas. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(1), 40–63.
Doggett, M. (1988). Ethical excellence for school-based administrators. NASSP Bulletin, 72(512), 6–8.
Drummond, A., Ellis, C., Hook, M., Murray, M., & Seymour, A. (2002). Leadership in victim services.
Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Justice.
English, F. W. (1994). Theory in educational administration. New York, NY: Harper Collins College Publisher.
Freeley, M. E. (2005, November). We’re all called to teach the whole child. ASCD Education Update, 47(11).
Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/
Friedman, I. A. (1997, April). High and low burnout principals: What makes a difference? Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED410685)
Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability.
Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 183–211.
Greenfield, W. D. (1991, April). Rationale and methods to articulate ethics and administrator training. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.