[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-593603-105":59,"doc-detail-593603-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","australian-journal-of-teacher-education-vol-40-issue-2-article-10-changing-expectations-same-perspective-pre-service-teachers-judgments-of-professional-efficacy","Australian Journal of Teacher Education - Vol 40 - Issue 2 - Article 10 - Changing Expectations, Same Perspective: Pre-service Teachers’ Judgments of Professional Efficacy","","This two-part study tracks professional self-efficacy judgments among two cohorts of pre-service teachers (PST) in England. Part One used the GTCE’s Code of Conduct and Practice (2009) to build an instrument measuring change across a one-year graduate program with 211 PST, gathering ratings about themselves and practicing teachers. Part Two used the DfE Teaching Standards (2011) to construct a parallel instrument for 416 PST. Findings show extremely high self-judgements in both parts, consistently more positive than ratings for current serving teachers. Self-judgements changed little over the year, while views of practicing teaching increased markedly but remained below self-ratings.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/australian-journal-of-teacher-education-vol-40-issue-2-article-10-changing-expectations-same-perspective-pre-service-teachers-judgments-of-professional-efficacy/593603/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/australian-journal-of-teacher-education-vol-40-issue-2-article-10-changing-expectations-same-perspective-pre-service-teachers-judgments-of-professional-efficacy/593603.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Jasmine","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":39},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"How were the two cohorts of pre-service teachers studied in this paper?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"Part One measured change over a one-year graduate program (211 PST) using an instrument derived from the GTCE Code of Conduct and Practice (2009). Part Two used an instrument derived from the DfE Teaching Standards (2011) with a subsequent cohort of 416 PST.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What framework was used to interpret PST responses?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Responses were analyzed through two professional frameworks and viewed using Bourdieu’s concepts of “dispositions,” “habitus,” and “field” to explain how emerging competence was evaluated.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What were the main outcomes comparing self-judgments and judgments of practicing teachers?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"PST self-judgments of professional self-efficacy were extremely high in both parts and in nearly all cases more positive than their ratings of current serving teachers. Self-judgements barely changed across the one-year program, while views of practicing teaching increased but did not reach self-judgement levels.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},593603,1792167572,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":39,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},2336478487870,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","Australian Journal of Teacher Education  \n\n| Volume 40 | Issue 2 | Article 10 |\n| --- | --- |\n| 2015\u003Cbr>Changing Expectations, Same Perspective: Preservice Teachers’ Judgments of Professional Efficacy\u003Cbr>Graham Hardy\u003Cbr>University of South Australia, [graham.hardy@unisa.edu.au](graham.hardy@unisa.edu.au)\u003Cbr>David Spendlove University of Manchester\u003Cbr>Damien Shortt Edge Hill University |  |\n\nRecommended Citation  \nHardy, G., Spendlove, D., & Shortt, D. (2015). Changing Expectations, Same Perspective: Pre-service Teachers’ Judgments of Professional Efficacy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40 (2).  \n[http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n2.10](http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n2.10)  \nThis Journal Article is posted at Research Online.  \n[http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol40/iss2/10](http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol40/iss2/10)  \nAustralian Journal of Teacher Education  \nChanging Expectations, Same Perspective: Pre-service Teachers’Judgments of Professional Efficacy  \nGraham Hardy  \nUniversity of South Australia  \nDavid Spendlove  \nUniversity of Manchester, UK  \nDamien Shortt  \nEdge Hill University, UK  \nAbstract: This two-part study tracks and measures the professional self  \nefficacy judgements of two cohorts of pre-service teachers (PST). In Part  \nOne, the GTCE’s Code of Conduct and Practice (GTCE, 2009) was used to  \nhelp form an instrument which tracked changes in the professional self  \nefficacy judgements of 211 PST through a one-year graduate program.  \nJudgements were sought from PST both about themselves, and importantly,  \nalso about practicing teachers in the profession. In Part Two, statements  \nmaking up the new DfE Teaching Standards (DfE, 2011) were similarly  \nused to form an instrument and used with a subsequent cohort of 416 PST.  \nOutcomes showed that PST’s judgement of professional self-efficacy were  \nextremely high on both occasions, and in nearly all cases, significantly  \nmore positive than their ratings for current serving teachers. Tracked  \nthrough their one-year program, the self-judgements barely changed,  \nalthough views of the practicing teaching increased markedly, although  \nnever quite reaching the levels of self-judgements. The detail and  \nsignificance of these findings is analysed and discussed.  \nIntroduction  \nIn September 2000 the UK government established the General Teaching Council for England (GTCE) as an independent arm’s length body (ALB) to promote and regulate the teaching profession in England. The GTCE’s remit was: to keep a register of qualified teachers; to provide policy advice to government and other agencies; and to formulate and maintain standards for the teaching profession. The self-declared aims of the GTCE were to inspire confidence amongst the general public and to promote the teaching profession. However, due to its perceived high-profile ‘policing methods’ in which teachers who had behaved unprofessionally were ‘named and shamed’, it became recognised more for its role in regulating teacher behaviour than for promoting the virtues of teaching, (see for example Spendlove, Barton, Hallett and Shortt, 2012) . In a move to lay down more unambiguous expectations and tighten regulation of the profession, the GTCE (2009) published a revised Code of Conduct and Practice (Code) setting out the minimum professional expectations for all 540,000 registered teachers employed within English schools. The content of the revised Code reflected ‘the standards that teachers expect of themselves and others expect of the profession’(p.2) . Implicit in the regulation of the Code, and within the cited examples of  \nVol 40, 2, February 2015 146  \nAustralian Journal of Teacher Education  \ninstances where teachers had fallen seriously short of expected standards, were a number of professional dispositions and professional competences which built up to what the Code called ‘a shared picture of teacher professionalism’ (p.1) .  \nIn previous research, Shortt, Hallett, Spendlove, Hardy a","cbCaiadP5bq7JAPn","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiadP5bq7JAPn","pdf",212388,25,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction","[{\"question\":\"How were the two cohorts of pre-service teachers studied in this paper?\",\"answer\":\"Part One measured change over a one-year graduate program (211 PST) using an instrument derived from the GTCE Code of Conduct and Practice (2009). Part Two used an instrument derived from the DfE Teaching Standards (2011) with a subsequent cohort of 416 PST.\"},{\"question\":\"What framework was used to interpret PST responses?\",\"answer\":\"Responses were analyzed through two professional frameworks and viewed using Bourdieu’s concepts of “dispositions,” “habitus,” and “field” to explain how emerging competence was evaluated.\"},{\"question\":\"What were the main outcomes comparing self-judgments and judgments of practicing teachers?\",\"answer\":\"PST self-judgments of professional self-efficacy were extremely high in both parts and in nearly all cases more positive than their ratings of current serving teachers. Self-judgements barely changed across the one-year program, while views of practicing teaching increased but did not reach self-judgement levels.\"}]","Australian Journal of Teacher Education - Vol 40 - Issue 2 - Article 10 - Changing Expectations, Same Perspective: Pre-service Teachers’ Judgments of Professional Efficacy | PDF",1792077554,63]