CC BY-NC-ND
0Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
SciVerse ScienceDirect PfOCSCl ¡0
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 1071 - 1080
International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2011)
Teachers' and Students' Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy: Implication
for Effective Teaching Practices
aZaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie*,bAfsaneh Bagheri
a'b Faculty of Educational Studies, University Putra Malayisa, Serdang, Selangor, 43400, Malaysia
Abstract
As a developing nation with a strong ambition to become a developed leading country through a knowledge-based and innovative economy by the year 2020, Malaysia has been focusing on entrepreneurship development as an effective means to enact its vision. Accordingly, entrepreneurship education has increasingly grown all over the country. However, little attention has been directed to measuring entrepreneurial self-efficacy among Malaysian teachers and students specifically in technical and vocational schools. Utilizing a descriptive research design, this study attempted to determine entrepreneurial efficacy among 315 teachers and 3,000 students from technical and vocational secondary schools. An instrument of entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) was used to measuring teachers' and students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Findings indicated that there was a significant difference between teachers' and students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy. More specifically, entrepreneurial self-efficacy was significantly high in all its six dimensions among teachers whereas, students perceived themselves as moderately high in entrepreneurial self-efficacy. This difference in teachers' and students' entrepreneurial efficacy requires more purposeful and effective interventions in terms of entrepreneurship teaching and learning in technical and vocational schools to ensure successful implementation of the idea "Entrepreneurship as an alternative career" for all technical and vocation students.
©2011Published byElsevier Ltd.Selectionand/orpeer-review underresponsibilityofDr ZaferBekirogullari.
Keywords: teacher entrepreneurial self-efficacy; student entrepreneurial self-efficacy; entrepreneurship education; technical and vocational schools.
1. Introduction
As a developing nation with a strong ambition to become a developed leading country through a knowledge-based and innovative economy by the year 2020, Malaysia has recognized the importance of entrepreneurship development as an effective means to enact its vision (Mastura & Abdul Rashid, 2008). Accordingly, various strategies have been developed by Malaysian government to create qualified and salient entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship education has increasingly grown all over the country (Cheng et al., 2009). However, little attention has been directed to measuring entrepreneurial competence of teachers and students as the core elements of entrepreneurship learning process (Wah, 2007; Sharrif & Saud, 2009). Specifically, there is not enough knowledge about entrepreneurial self-efficacy among Malaysian teachers and students from technical and vocational schools
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +03-89468217; fax: +03-89435386. E-mail address: zalp@educ.edu.upm.my.
ELSEVIER
1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Dr Zafer Bekirogullari. doi :10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.340
where students have the knowledge and skills to establish their own venture if provided with effective entrepreneurship education (Zaidatol Akmaliah & Bagheri, 2010). Few studies examined the association between entrepreneurship and technical and vocational education and training (Hussain & Matlay, 2007; Matlay, 2001) and measuring entrepreneurial self-efficacy among technical and vocational students has been almost overlooked (Zaidatol Akmaliah & Bagheri, 2011). This lack of knowledge and understanding about entrepreneurial competence may face educators with serious challenges in developing effective curriculum structure and content as well as teaching and learning strategies based on the specific philosophy, nature, and purpose of entrepreneurship education in technical and vocational schools (Pittaway & Hannon, 2008; Henry et al., 2005a; Gibb, 1993). In response, this study set up to determine entrepreneurial self-efficacy among teachers and students from technical and vocational secondary schools.
2. Self-efficacy and entrepreneurship education
Grounded in social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1997), self-efficacy is "a cognitive process in which people construct beliefs about their capacity to perform at a given level of attainment" (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998, p. 203). Based on the theory, people's judgments about their abilities to successfully perform a specific take shape through dynamic, continuous, and reciprocal interactions between personal, behavioral, and environmental factors (Bandura, 1997). These judgments highly "influence how much efforts people put forth, how long they will persist in the face of obstacles, how resilient they are in dealing with failures, and how much stress or anxiety they experience in coping with demanding situations" (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998, p. 203). Perceived self-efficacy has significant influence on different aspects of teaching and learning process (Pajares & Urdan, 2006).
In the context of entrepreneurship education, self-efficacy has been mostly applied in order to explain entrepreneurial attitude and intention of students (Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005; Chen, Greene & Crick, 1998) and there are few researches about teachers' entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Peltonen, 2008). Particularly, little empirical evidence exists on measuring teachers' and students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy while, previous research findings indicated that teacher's self-efficacy affects and is affected by students' efficacy (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). van Dinther, Dochy and Segers (in press) called for further investigation about the patterns of teachers' self-efficacy in relation to students' self-efficacy.
2.1 Entrepreneurial self-efficacy of teachers
In less than half a century from its first conceptualization, teacher self-efficacy has become one of the main focuses of educators and researchers because of the prominent roles that teachers play in the whole process of teaching and learning (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Research into teacher self-efficacy is specifically crucial in developing countries because tremendous amount of money has been allocated to educational system and "teachers have to be accountable for the academic development of their pupils" (Adedoyin, 2010, p. 141). In Malaysia, a growing body of research has recently concentrated on measuring teacher self-efficacy (Wah, 2007). However, there exists relatively little consensus among scholars on conceptual definition and measurement of teacher self-efficacy (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Teacher self-efficacy has been defined as the combination of teacher's perceived abilities to successfully play specific tasks of a teacher in a particular context and effectively instill desired behaviors, skills, and competencies in students (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). While teacher efficacy reflects the specific personal abilities for teaching, teaching efficacy indicates abilities of a teacher to affect learning environment and influence students' motivation and achievement. Teacher efficacy has influential impacts on their instructional behaviors.
It is argued that teacher self-efficacy highly affects teachers' motivation and preparation to teach such as selection into teaching a specific subject, enthusiasm to teach effectively, and expending time to chose, plan, and organize instruction (Bayraktar, 2011; Adedoyin, 2010; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). Self-efficacy has also significant impacts on teacher's behavior and performance in the process of delivering instructions such as considering students' needs, applying various student-centered and innovative teaching methods, spending more efforts to teach difficult and unmotivated students, and considering students' mistakes as a part of learning process (Adedoyin, 2010; Chan, Tan & Khoo, 2007; Ho & Hau, 2004). It also influences teachers' interactions with their students and colleagues, specifically in case of encountering conflicts (Adedoyin, 2010). In addition to before and in
the process of instructional delivery, teacher self-efficacy enhances teacher's tendency and ability to assess their instructional performance when students fail and increases their commitment to teaching profession (Coladarci, 1992). Furthermore, teacher's efficacy improves students' motivation, self-efficacy, learning, and achievement (Adedoyin, 2010; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Therefore, teachers with high sense of self-efficacy are more likely to be successful in providing an effective learning environment and developing students' knowledge and skills. Importantly, teachers' and students' efficacy are reciprocally related (Bayraktar, 2011). That is, "Low teacher efficacy leads to low student efficacy and low academic achievement, which in turn leads to further decline in teacher efficacy" (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998, p. 222). Various personal and contextual factors contribute to teacher efficacy formation and development which should be identified if teacher educators are to develop a strong sense of efficacy in teachers (Tschannen-Moran & Johnson, 2011; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2007; Wah, 2007).
Based on Bandura's (1997) assertion that self-efficacy is subject-specific and context-oriented, a robust body of research has recently concentrated on measuring teacher efficacy in specific subjects and different contexts (Bayraktar, 2011; Tschannen-Moran & Johnson, 2011; Siwatu, 2011; Chong et al., 2010; Betoret, 2009; Palmer, 2006; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Accordingly, entrepreneurship scholars adopted teacher self-efficacy in order to improve teachers' effectiveness in teaching entrepreneurship (Peltonen, 2008) and students' intention and competence to become successful entrepreneurs (Barbosa, Gerhardt & Kickul, 2007; Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Segal, Borgia & Schoenfeld, 2005; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005). However, there is an ongoing debate among entrepreneurship educators and researchers on the conceptual definition of entrepreneurship, whether it can basically be taught, to what extent it can be taught (Matlay, 2008; Anderson & Jack, 2008; Heinonen, 2007; Klein & Bullock, 2006; Fiet, 2000), and which specific competencies teachers require to teach entrepreneurship (Peltonen, 2008; Gibbs, 2002). While many scholars believe that both entrepreneurship science (management and business skills) and art (innovativeness and creativity) can be taught, there are some researchers who argue that current entrepreneurship teaching methods failed to cultivate specific entrepreneurial competencies in students (Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006; Henry et al., 2005b; Gibbs, 2002). These critical questions faced entrepreneurship teachers with serious challenges such as selection of effective instruction and assessment methods and engaging students in the process of learning that may reduce their sense of ability to successfully teach entrepreneurship (Heinonen, 2007; Smith, Collins & Hannon, 2006; Edwards & Muir, 2005; Gibbs, 2002; Fiet, 2000). To successfully deal with these challenges and develop entrepreneurial competencies in students, therefore, entrepreneurship teachers need to be strongly efficacious in influencing students' entrepreneurial learning process. However, our understanding about entrepreneurship teacher's efficacy, the sources that build their sense of teaching efficacy, and the contextual factors that affect their teaching efficacy formation and development is limited (Peltonen, 2008; Gibbs, 2002).
2.2 Entrepreneurial self-efficacy of students
Given the critical influence of self-efficacy on students' motivation, learning, and achievement (van Dinther, Dochy & Segers, in press; Pajares & Urdan, 2006), entrepreneurship scholars applied self-efficacy to explain students' entrepreneurial behavior, competence, and intention (Barbosa, Gerhardt & Kickul, 2007; Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Segal, Borgia & Schoenfeld, 2005). By definition, entrepreneurial self-efficacy is students' judgments about their abilities to successfully create a new venture and play the roles and tasks of an entrepreneur (Chen, Greene & Crick, 1998). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy is a personal motivation factor that enables students to choose entrepreneurship as their future career path and persist in the face of challenges and difficulties associated with a new venture creation and management (Kumar, 2007; Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Shane, Lock & Collins, 2003). Therefore, students with high entrepreneurial self-efficacy are more likely to explore entrepreneurial opportunities, exert effort encountering with uncertainties and difficulties, and persist to achieve their vision (Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005; Erikson, 2003). While, those who perceive themselves as lacking entrepreneurial abilities avoid establishing a new business and simply give up if they face problems (Chen, Greene & Crick, 1998). Particularly at secondary schools, self-efficacy has great influences on students' entrepreneurial knowledge acquisition, attitude, and intention (Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Fillion, 1994).
Students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy can be constructed and developed through entrepreneurship education (Fayolle, Gailly, & Lassas-Clerc, 2006; Rae & Carswell, 2000). Numerous entrepreneurship education and training programs have been developed to create and improve students' sense of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. These programs engage students in experiential learning opportunities where they can practice the real roles and tasks of an
entrepreneur and improve their entrepreneurial self-efficacy through mastery experiences (Erickson, 2003; Rae & Carswell, 2000). They also involve students in case studies and working with entrepreneurs in course projects which enhance their entrepreneurial efficacy through vicarious experiences (Erickson, 2003). Entrepreneurship instructors describe the values and merits of entrepreneurship for personal and social development and provide feedback on students' performances which improve their entrepreneurial efficacy through verbal persuasion (Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005). In addition, entrepreneurship education provides opportunities for students to interact with entrepreneurial-mined people who socially support and encourage students to establish their own venture (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005). Although these researches provide better insights on students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy development, our knowledge about entrepreneurial self-efficacy of students from technical and vocational secondary schools where the nature and teaching methods of entrepreneurship education may differ from other schools is limited (Zaidatol Akmaliah & Bagheri, 2011; Matlay, 2008). Furthermore, there is not enough information about students' self-efficacy in relation to teachers' efficacy (van Dinther, Dochy & Segers, in press).
3. Methods
This research utilized a descriptive research design to determine entrepreneurial self-efficacy among teachers and students from technical and vocational secondary schools. More specifically, this study aimed to examine perceived entrepreneurial self-efficacy of technical and vocational secondary school teachers and students and if there was a significant difference between teachers' and students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy.
3.1 Participants
A sample of 315 teachers and 3,000 students from technical and vocational schools in three states of Malaysia were selected in the year 2009 to participate in the study. Permission to conduct the survey was obtained from the Educational Planning and Research Division, the Ministry of Education, and the Directors of Education of three selected states in Malaysia. The school principals were contacted to fix the date of data collection and to make the necessary preparations with form four students following technical and vocational classes. Data were collected by the researchers.
3.2 Measures and analysis of data
To measure entrepreneurial self-efficacy among teachers and students, a modified questionnaire of entrepreneurial self-efficacy developed by De Nobel, Jung, and Ehrlich (1999) was utilized. The first part of the questionnaire included items on background information of the participants such as age, gender, and race. The second part measured entrepreneurial self-efficacy of teachers and students in six dimensions including coping with unexpected challenges, developing new products and opportunities, building an innovative environment, initiating investor relationships, defining the core purpose, and developing critical human resources. The reliability of the questionnaire had a Cronbach's a value of 0.89 indicating that the questionnaire is reliable to measure entrepreneurial self-efficacy construct. The measurement of items in the survey questionnaire was based on a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating "strongly disagree" and 5 indicating "strongly agree". A mean score above 3.80 was considered high, 3.40 to 3.79 was considered moderate, and below 3.39 was considered low. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics such as mean, standard deviation (s.d), and t-test.
4. Findings
Analysis of the data indicated a significant difference between teachers and students in their entrepreneurial self-efficacy. While entrepreneurial self-efficacy was significantly high in all its six dimensions among teachers, students perceived themselves as moderately high in entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Table 1 illustrates the mean scores for entrepreneurial efficacy of technical and vocational secondary school teachers and students. The teachers perceived themselves as highly efficacious in all dimensions of entrepreneurial self-efficacy whereas, the students had moderate perceptions of their abilities in development of new products, market opportunities, and initiating relationships with investors. Furthermore, the students scored moderately low in coping with unexpected challenges.
Teachers in general perceived themselves as more able in handling entrepreneurial activities since self-efficacy is the personal belief in one's abilities and skills to successfully perform entrepreneurial task s. That means teachers perceived themselves as more capable of performing the roles and tasks of an entrepreneur as compared to the students.
Table 1: Teacher's and students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy
Entrepreneurial self-efficacy dimensions Students Teachers
Mean S.d Level Mean S.d Level
Coping with unexpected challenges 3.57 .64 Moderate 3.81 .54 High
Developing new product and market opportunities 3.75 .56 Moderate 3.81 .58 High
Building an innovative environment 3.69 .61 Moderate 3.83 .59 High
Initiating relationship with investors 3.75 .68 Moderate 3.87 .61 High
Defining core purposes 3.71 .65 Moderate 3.88 .61 High
Developing critical human resources 3.66 .64 Moderate 3.82 .57 High
Overall Mean 3.69 .63 Moderate 3.86 .39 High
Table 2 illustrates the overall mean scores of entrepreneurial self-efficacy among technical and vocational teachers and students. T-test analysis shows that teachers scored significantly higher in all dimensions of entrepreneurial self-efficacy constructs except developing new product and market opportunity.
Table 2: Entrepreneurial self-efficacy of technical and vocational school teachers and students
Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy Dimensions Category Mean (S.d) t-value Sig
Coping with unexpected challenges Teachers 3.81 .54 7.40 .00
Students 3.57 .64
Developing new product and market opportunity Teachers 3.81 .57 1.86 .06
Students 3.75 .56
Building an innovative environment Teachers 3.82 .57 3.75 .00
Students 3.69 .60
Initiating investor relationship Teachers 3.87 .62 3.19 .00
Students 3.74 .68
Defining core purposes Teachers 3.87 .63 4.49 .00
Students 3.70 .65
Developing critical human resource Teachers 3.82 .59 4.62 .00
Students 3.66 .64
5. Discussion
The majority of self-efficacy studies in entrepreneurship education have focused on measuring students' entrepreneurial efficacy as a proxy of their intention and competence to become entrepreneurs (Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005; Chen, Greene & Crick, 1998) and research on teachers' entrepreneurial self-efficacy has recently emerged (Peltonen, 2008). Moreover, research on measuring teachers' efficacy in relation to students' self-efficacy is scarce (van Dinther, Dochy & Segers, in press). In particular, few researches investigated entrepreneurial self-efficacy in the context of technical and vocational secondary schools where exposing students to effective entrepreneurship education may lead to increasing the number and quality of future entrepreneurs (Zaidatol Akmaliah & Bagheri, 2011; Zaidatol Akmaliah & Bagheri, 2010). This lack of research faced educators with serious challenges in providing appropriate entrepreneurship education and training programs both for entrepreneurship teachers and students particularly in technical and vocational schools. This study attempted to determine entrepreneurial self-efficacy among teachers and students from technical and vocational secondary schools in Malaysia.
The findings showed the teachers perceived themselves as highly efficacious in performing the roles and tasks of an entrepreneur and engaging in entrepreneurial activities. With this high entrepreneurial self-efficacy, it is expected that teachers have a high motivation and confidence in their abilities to teach entrepreneurship effectively, apply entrepreneurial teaching methods, persist in facing challenges and difficulties, and enhance their students' entrepreneurial efficacy, motivation, and learning (Adedoyin, 2010; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Particularly, Malaysian technical and vocational secondary schools provided the appropriate environment and sources of self-efficacy information for the teachers that they perceived themselves as efficacious in coping with unexpected challenges. This strong confidence in abilities to face the challenges may help teachers to transfer their efficacy to students and develop their abilities to cope with the difficulties and crises involved in entrepreneurial endeavors. Furthermore, the teachers' high scores on developing new products and building market opportunities indicate that teachers in technical and vocational schools are highly confident in their creative thinking and opportunity recognition abilities which are the core components of entrepreneurship process (Zampetakis, 2008; Ko & Butler, 2007). These abilities may assist the teachers to apply innovative teaching methods to improve students' entrepreneurial creativity, innovativeness, and propensity to risk taking which has been one of the main concerns of entrepreneurship educators (Zampetakis, 2008; Chen, Greene & Crick, 1998).
This study also revealed that technical and vocational secondary school students perceived themselves as moderately capable of performing the roles and tasks required for a new business creation and management. With this moderate sense of efficacy students may avoid to fully engage in entrepreneurial learning opportunities and consequently fail to cope with the complexities of entrepreneurship learning process and improve their entrepreneurial efficacy (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Henry et al., 2005a ; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005). Students' moderate entrepreneurial self-efficacy may also decline teachers' high entrepreneurial self-efficacy since students' and teachers' self-efficacy reciprocally interact and students' low self-efficacy diminish their achievement and their teachers' self-efficacy over time (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2007; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). This necessitates provision of more purposeful and effective entrepreneurship education programs that improve the students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy particularly in the areas that they perceived themselves as less efficacious (Chen, Greene & Crick, 1998). It also seems crucial for technical and vocational schools to pay more attention to students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy improvement through providing them with experiential learning opportunities which most effectively improve their entrepreneurial competencies (Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Fayolle, Gailly, & Lassas-Clerc, 2006; Erickson, 2003; Rae & Carswell, 2000). Students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy can also be developed through working with entrepreneurs, interacting with entrepreneurial-minded people, providing them with positive feedback of their performances, and improving their awareness of the importance of entrepreneurship for personal and social development and the challenges inherited in entrepreneurial endeavors (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Wilson, Kickul & Marlino, 2007; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005; Erickson, 2003). Furthermore, this moderate entrepreneurial self-efficacy among students may partially reflect teachers' lack of abilities to transfer their high self-efficacy to students. Enabling teachers to transfer their self-efficacy has been one of the critical unanswered issues on teacher efficacy (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Therefore, teacher educators may need to design specific education programs to
improve teachers' competence in transferring their entrepreneurial self-efficacy to students, specifically in technical and vocational schools.
6. Conclusion
The main purpose of this study was to determine differences of entrepreneurial self-efficacy among teachers and students from technical and vocational secondary schools. Through looking at entrepreneurial self-efficacy of teachers and students from technical and vocational secondary schools, this study provides contributions to measuring self-efficacy in relation to a specific subject and within a particular context (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998; Bandura, 1997). It also contributes to the few researches on measuring teachers' self-efficacy in relation to students' self-efficacy (van Dinther, Dochy & Segers, in press). The findings extend beyond limited literature on entrepreneurship and technical and vocational education (Hussain & Matlay, 2007; Matlay, 2001). Better understanding of entrepreneurial self-efficacy among technical and vocational school teachers and students might be significant for educators in developing specific education and training programs based on the nature and purpose of entrepreneurship education in the schools (Pittaway & Hannon, 2008). Furthermore, it may assist teachers in improving their entrepreneurial self-efficacy and designing effective entrepreneurship teaching strategies that develop students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy. However, this study opens new agendas for future research. First, this research measured teachers' perceptions toward their entrepreneurial abilities. Future research can be undertaken to measure entrepreneurship teachers' efficacy in teaching entrepreneurship as a specific subject and with a scale specifically developed for measuring entrepreneurship teaching self-efficacy. Second, this study concentrated on measuring different dimensions of teachers' and students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Further studies can be done to explore the sources of information that construct teachers' and students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy in order to provide a clearer picture of their entrepreneurial self-efficacy development. It is of great theoretical and practical value to understand the sources that shape entrepreneurship teachers' self-efficacy in order to provide them with more effective entrepreneurship education and training programs and prepare them for their complex and challenging teaching tasks. Researchers can also examine if high level of entrepreneurial self-efficacy among teachers leads to implementing experiential and innovative teaching methods which are essential to teach entrepreneurship (Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006). It would be useful to examine the impacts of different factors in technical and vocational schools in developing teachers' entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Third, it seems relevant for future study to explore the entrepreneurship teaching methods that effectively enhance students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Particularly, researchers can identify which entrepreneurship teaching methods improve students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Further investigation can also be done to specify which teaching methods more enhance each dimensions of students' entrepreneurial efficacy in order to assist entrepreneurship teachers to more purposefully implement each entrepreneurship teaching method. Exploring a combination of entrepreneurship teaching methods that can highly influence students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy formation and development also has great potential for future examination. Finally, the finding of this study indicated that despite high teachers' entrepreneurial self-efficacy, students had moderate entrepreneurial self-efficacy. This may reflect that other factors than teachers' entrepreneurial self-efficacy may influence students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy which require more investigations. Future longitudinal research can be done to examine how teachers' disappointments with improving students' entrepreneurial intention and competence influence their motivation, resilience and efficacy in teaching entrepreneurship. Future research can also focus on identifying factors that contribute to teachers' entrepreneurial self-efficacy transition to students. Developing effective strategies and methods through which teachers can transfer their entrepreneurial self-efficacy to students would also be valuable. Additionally, it seems crucial for vocational and technical secondary schools to explore the effective teaching methods that enhance their students' entrepreneurial self-efficacy in order to ensure successful implementation of the idea "Entrepreneurship as an alternative career" for all technical and vocation students.
References
Adedoyin O. O. (2010). Factor - analytic study of teachers' perceptions on self-efficacy in Botswana junior secondary schools: Implications for educational quality. European Journal of Educational Studies, 2(2), 139155.
Anderson, A.R., & Jack, S. L. (2008). Role typology for enterprising education: The professional artisan? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 256-273.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of self control. New York: Freeman.
Barbosa, S. D., Gerhardt, M. W. and Kickul, J. R. (2007). The role of cognitive style and risk preference on entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 13(4), 86-104.
Bayraktar, S. (2011). Turkish preservice primary school teachers' science teaching efficacy beliefs and attitudes toward science: The effect of a primary teacher education program. School Science and Mathematics, 111(3), 8392.
Betoret, F. D. (2009). Self-efficacy, school resources, job stressors and burnout among Spanish primary and secondary school teachers: A structural equation approach. Educational Psychology, 29(1), 45-68.
Chan, K.W., Tan, J., & Khoo, A. (2007). Pre-service teachers' conceptions about teaching and learning: A closer look at Singapore cultural context. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35 (2), 181-195.
Chen, C, Greene, P., & Crick, A. (1998). Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers? Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 295-316.
Cheng, M.Y., Chan, W.S., & Amir Mahmood. (2009). The effectiveness of entrepreneurship education in Malaysia. Education + Training, 51(7), 555-566.
Chong, W. H., Klassen, R. M., Huan, V. S., Wong, I., & Kates, A. D. (2010). The relationships among school types, teacher efficacy beliefs, and academic climate: Perspective from Asian middle schools. The Journal of Educational Research, 103,183-190.
Coladarci, T. (1992). Teachers' sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 60, 323-337.
De Nobel, A. D., Jung, A. D., and Ehrlich, S. (1999). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: The development of a measure and its relationship to entrepreneurial action. In: Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, Reynolds, R.D., W.D. Baygrave, S. Mahigart, C.M. Mason, G. D. Meyer, H.J. Sapienze and K.G Shaver (Eds.). P and R Publiction Inc. Waltham MA., pp, 73-78.
Edwards, L. J., & Muir, E. J. (2005). Promoting entrepreneurship at the University of Glamorgan through formal and informal learning. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 12 (4), 613-26.
Erikson, T. (2003). Towards a taxonomy of entrepreneurial learning experiences among potential entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10(1), 106-112.
Fayolle, A., Gailly, B., & Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programmes: a new methodology. Journal of European Industrial Training, 30(9), 701-720.
Fiet, J. O. (2000). The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory. Journal of Business Venturing 16: 101-117.
Fillion, L. J. (1994). Ten steps to entrepreneurial teaching. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 11(3), 68-78.
Gibb, A.A. (1993). The enterprise culture and education. Understanding enterprise education and its links with small business, entrepreneurship and wider educational goals. International Small Business Journal, 11(3), 11-34.
Gibbs, C. (2002). Effective teaching: Exercising self-efficacy and thought control of action. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, 12-14 September, University of Exeter, England.
Heinonen, J. (2007). An entrepreneurial-directed approach to teaching corporate entrepreneurship at university level. Education + Training, 49(4), 310-324.
Heinonen, J., & Poikkijoki, Sari-Anne. (2006). An entrepreneurial-directed approach to entrepreneurship education: Mission impossible? Journal of Management Development, 25(1), 80-94.
Henry, C., Hill, F., & Leitch, C. (2005a). Entrepreneurship education and training: Can entrepreneurship be taught? Education + Training, 47(2), 98-111.
Henry, C., Hill, F., & Leitch, C. (2005b). Entrepreneurship education and training: Can entrepreneurship be taught? Education + Training, 47(3), 158-169.
Ho, I. T., & Hau, K. T. (2004). Australian and Chinese teacher efficacy: Similarities and differences in personal instruction, discipline, guidance efficacy and beliefs in external determinants. Teacher and Teacher Education, 20(3), 313-323.
Hussain, J., & Matlay, H. (2007). Vocational education and training in small ethnic minority businesses in the UK.
Education + Training, 49 (8/9), 671-685.
Klein, P. G., & Bullock, J. B. (2006). Can Entrepreneurship Be Taught? Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 38(2), 429-439.
Ko, S., & Butler, J. E. (2007). Creativity: A key link to entrepreneurial behaviour. Business Horizons, 50, 365-372.
Kumar, M. (2007). Explaining entrepreneurial success: A conceptual model. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 13(1), 57-77.
Mastura, Jaafar., & Abdul Rashid, Abdul Aziz. (2008). Entrepreneurship education in developing country, Exploration on its necessity in the construction programme. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 6(2), 178-189.
Matlay, H. (2008). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial outcomes. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 382-396.
Matlay, H. (2001). Entrepreneurial and vocational education and training in central and eastern Europe. Education + Training. 43 (8/9): 395-404.
Pajares, F., &Urdan, T. (2006). Foreword. In F. Pajares &T.Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. Ix-xii). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Palmer, D. H. (2006). Sourcesofself-efficacyinasciencemethodscourseforprimaryteachereducationstudents. Research in Science Education, 36, 337-353.
Peltonen, K. (2008). Can learning in teams help teachers to become more entrepreneurial? The interplay between efficacy perceptions and team support. LTA, 297-324.
Pittaway, L., & Hannon, P. (2008). Institutional strategies for developing enterprise education: A review of some concepts and models. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(1), 202-226.
Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Simulating entrepreneurial learning: Integrating experiential and collaborative approaches to learning. Management Learning, 38(2), 211-233.
Rae, D., & Carswell, M. (2000). Using a life-story approach in entrepreneurial learning: the development of a conceptual model and its implications in the design of learning experiences. Education + Training, 42(4/5), 220-227.
Segal, G., Borgia, D., & Schoenfeld, J. (2005). The motivation to become an entrepreneur. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 11(1), 42-57.
Shane, S., Locke, E. A., & Collins, C. J. (2003). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human Resource Management Review, 13, 257-279.
Sharrif, M. N. M., & Saud, M. B. (2009). An attitude approach to the prediction of entrepreneurship on students at institutions of higher learning in Malaysia. International Journal of Business Management, 4,129-135.
Smith, A. J., Collins, L. A., & Hannon, P. D. (2006). Embedding new entrepreneurship programmes in UK higher education institutions, challenges and considerations. Education + Training, 48(8/9), 555-567.
Siwatu, K. O. (2011). Preservice teachers' sense of preparedness and self-efficacy to teach in America's urban and suburban schools: Does context matter? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 357-365.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Johnson, D. (2011). Exploring literacy teachers' self-efficacy beliefs: Potential sources at play. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 751-761.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 944-956.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(17), 783-805.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202-248.
van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (in press). Factors affecting students' self-efficacy in higher education. Educational Research Review.
Wah, W. K. (2007). Sources of influence on teacher self-Efficacy among preservice teachers. Seminar Penyelidikan Pendidikan, Institut Perguruan Batu Lintang Tahun, Malaysia. 1-17.
Wilson, F., Kickul, J., & Marlino, D. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 31(3), 387-401.
Zhao, H., Seibert S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1265-1272.
Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie., & Bagheri, A. (2011). Malay secondary school students' entrepreneurial attitude and
entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A descriptive Study. Journal of Applied Science, 11(2), 316-322. Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie., & Bagheri, A. (2010). Entrepreneurial Attitude and Entrepreneurial Efficacy of
Technical Secondary School Students. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 62(3), 351-366. Zampetakis, L. A. (2008). The role of creativity and proactivity on perceived entrepreneurial desirab ility. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3, 154-162.
