Mohd.

Ahamar Khan, International Journal of Research in Management, Economics and Commerce,

ISSN 2250-057X, Impact Factor: 6.384, Volume 07 Issue 12, December 2017, Page 45-49

The Moderation Effect of Teaching-

Experience on the Relationship between
Self-Efficacy and Organizational
Commitment
Mohd. Ahamar Khan
(Research Scholar, Department of Psychology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, UP, India)
Abstract: This article examined the relationships and evaluates whether demographic characteristic such as
teaching experience moderates the relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment. The study
was undertaken on 300 teachers employed in central university (AMU), India. Obtained data were analyzed by
correlation and moderation analysis. Results of correlation analysis revealed that teaching-experience
significantly and positively correlated with the self-efficacy as well as organizational commitment. A significant
positive correlation was also found between self-efficacy and organizational commitment. Moderation
analyses confirm the significant interaction effect of teaching-experience of the relationship between self-
efficacy and organizational commitment. These findings substantiate the crucial role of teaching-experience
of university teachers’ in determining their self-efficacy and organizational commitment.
Keywords: Self-efficacy, organizational commitment, and teaching-experience.

I. INTRODUCTION
Bandura has made the major contribution in the development of self-efficacy concept in different areas
of human behavior. According to Bandura’s (1977a) social learning theory, the self-efficacy concept refers to the
degree to which people assume that they have the ability to perform an intended action. In addition, the more
individuals believe they can perform the behavior, the more possible they will be to employ in the particular
behavior. He believed that particular adequate motivation to employ in a behavior, it is a human’s self-efficacy
beliefs that decide the choice of behavior that the individual will initiate, the amount of effort that will be
expended, and what extent the individual will persist in the face of obstructions and aversive conditions. He then
explained self-efficacy as the individual’s confidence in their ability to carry out a specific behavior in a specific
situation.
Bandura (1977b) has been also made the distinction between self-efficacy expectations and outcome
expectations. In current definitions of teacher self-efficacy, some authors focus on teachers’ perceived ability to
affect student outcomes (De la Torre Cruz & Casanova Arias, 2007), whilst others focus exclusively on efficacy
expectations but extend this by considering the contexts in which teachers work (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, & Hoy,
1998).
Woolfolk, Rosoff, and Hoy (1990) believed that teacher self-efficacy is a central issue and an effective
variable in educational research. Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2007) suggested that teachers’ sense of self-efficacy
have a major role in outcome of vital academic results. It is associated with greater degree of student’s
achievement and motivation, and has been observed its’ effect on teachers’ instructional practices, use of
innovative teaching methods, enthusiasm, commitment, and teaching behavior. According to Gavora (2010) it
exists in many domains of human functioning, including both professional and private behaviour. Particularly in
an educational context, Gavora refers teacher self-efficacy as teacher’s personal (i.e., self-perceived) belief in
ability to plan instruction and accomplish instructional objectives. It is in effect the conviction the teacher has
about his/her ability to teach their pupils efficiently and effectively.
Lin (2004) said that teaching efficacy is an empowerment that gives teachers’ power to take decisions
and acquire new knowledge to improve students’ learning results. Chu (2003) believed that teaching efficacy can
induce students’ learning motivation and help them to produce growth ability. Marsh and Bailey (1991)
suggested that the evaluation of teaching effectiveness contains multidimensional constructs, including
learning/value, instructor enthusiasm, organization/clarity, group interaction, individual rapport, and breadth of
coverage, examinations /grading, assignments/readings and workload/difficulty. Rastegar and Moradi (2016)
reviewed numerous literatures and found that self-efficacy varies across task to task as well as context to context.
For example, teacher may trust their skills in teaching the material effectively, but they may doesn’t have
efficacy when it comes to dealing with disruptive behavior in the class. Further, they reported that teacher self-
efficacy has close relationship with students achievement, students motivation, students own sense of efficacy,
and teachers classroom management strategies.

http://indusedu.org Page 45

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
 Mohd. Ahamar Khan, International Journal of Research in Management, Economics and Commerce,
ISSN 2250-057X, Impact Factor: 6.384, Volume 07 Issue 12, December 2017, Page 45-49

It has been observed that teachers with a high strength of sense of efficacy have reported higher level
of commitment to their job (Coladarci, 1992), and constantly witnessed lower degree of burnout (Brouwers &
Tomic, 2000; Friedman, 2003; Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008). Jex and Bliese (1999) conducted a multilevel study
and found high positive relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment. Sinha, Talwar, and
Rajpal (2002) studied the members of Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company of India and reported the
positive relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment. More recently, Agarwal and Mishra
(2016) reported the significant positive relationship of self-efficacy with organizational commitment and its
components (affective, continuance, and normative) among revenue personal. The literature surveys on teachers’
efficacy beliefs are showing its’ persistent impact on diverse dimensions of teachers’ performance. Therefore, the
aim of present study is to view the moderating effect of teaching-experience of the relationship between self-
efficacy and organizational commitment.
Objectives of the Study
1. To examine the relationship between teaching-experience and self-efficacy.
2. To examine the relationship between teaching-experience and organizational commitment.
3. To examine the relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment.
4. To study the moderating effect of teaching-experience of the relationship between self-efficacy and
organizational commitment.
Hypotheses
Ha1: There will be a positive relationship between teaching-experience and self-efficacy.
Ha2: There will be a positive relationship between teaching-experience and organizational
commitment.
Ha3: There will be a positive relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment.
Ha4: Teaching-experience will moderate the relationship between self-efficacy and organizational
commitment.

II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Participants
A representative sample of teachers was selected ensuring the quality and characteristics of the target
population. In the present study, faculty members teaching in an Indian Central University (Aligarh Muslim
University) were the target population. Based on the criterion developed by Carvalho (1984) a sample size of 200
respondents is sufficient for the research study. To ensure the true variance and minimizing the error variance,
systematic and random errors; the sample size of the present study was 300 teachers (150 male and 150 female)
selected from different faculties using stratified random sampling. In stratified random sampling, the strata were
formed based on teachers’ working strength of the faculty. In the sample, the mean age of the teachers was 45.28
years (SD = 10.01) with 26 years as minimum and 64 years as the maximum. The mean teaching-experience of
the teachers was 16.51 years (SD = 10.33) with 2 years as a minimum and 35 years as the maximum. In terms of
educational qualification, they were 90 Post Graduates and 210 Ph.D. In academic rank they were 134 Assistant
Professors, 89 Associate Professors and 77 Professors.
Measures
Two standardized psychometric measures were used to study the self-efficacy and organizational
commitment of university teachers. The description of the measures used in the present study is discussed in the
following paragraphs.
General Self-Efficacy Scale
General Self-Efficacy Scale was developed by Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1995). Initially, the scale was
developed in German with 20 items but later on it was translated in English and reduced 10 items. Sud (2002)
adopted the scale in Indian context and translated from English to Hindi. This 10 items bilingual (English &
Hindi) was used in present study. This scale contained in four point response categories such as; (1) not at all
true; (2) hardly true; (3) moderately true; and (4) exactly true. The overall score of the scale was considered in
this research. The minimum and maximum score of the scale ranges from 10 to 40. Higher the score higher is the
self-efficacy and vice-versa. The reliability coefficient of the scale was ranging from 0.76 to 0.90. The reliability
of the scale was verified on the target sample and Cronbach’s alpha was found to be 0.71 which is moderate but
adequate to accept as suggested by George and Mallery (2003). Exploratory Factor Analysis explained 57.48% of
the total variance which confirms the high construct/factorial validity. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
was conducted to verify the dimensionality.
Organizational Commitment Scale
Organizational commitment scale of the Shah and Ansari (2000), was used. This scale composed of
three components which are; affective, continuance and normative commitment. It was comprised of 15 items
and each component includes 5 items. The responses were on a 7-point Likert scale with anchors labeled
(1=Strongly Disagree and 7=Strongly Agree). The minimum and maximum score of the scale ranges from 15 to
105. The reliability coefficient of the scale was 0.80 and the congruent validity 0.76. The psychometric properties

http://indusedu.org Page 46

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
 Mohd. Ahamar Khan, International Journal of Research in Management, Economics and Commerce,
ISSN 2250-057X, Impact Factor: 6.384, Volume 07 Issue 12, December 2017, Page 45-49

of the scale were re-visited on the target sample. The Cronbach’s alpha was found to be 0.88 and confirms the
good reliability of the scale (George & Mallery, 2003). Exploratory Factor Analysis explained 46.46% of the
total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted and confirmed the dimensionality.
Data Collection Procedure
Teachers were contacted individually. They were explained about the utility of the study and requested
with due respect to extend their cooperation for success of the study. Great care was taken to address any
misunderstanding about the purpose of the study and they were told that it is to be used only for research. They
were requested to discuss when they feel any doubt in understanding and resultant response of the items, but
don’t leave any item un-attempted. They were assured of the confidentiality that their identity would not be
disclosed at any stage. The order of the tools administration was general self-efficacy scale, organization
commitment scale and at last personal data sheet.
Data Analysis
Keeping in view the objectives and hypotheses of the present research, statistical analyses and
discussion have been carried out in two stages. At the first stage, the Pearson Correlation Analysis was calculated
in order to determine the relationship of proposed variables. At the second stage, Moderation Analysis was
undertaken to examine the role of teaching-experience as moderator of the relationship between self-efficacy and
organizational commitment. The analyses were carried out using software SPSS ver. 22.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Pearson Correlation Analysis
Table 1 showed that teaching-experience is positively and significantly related to self-efficacy (r=0.15,
p<0.01). Teaching-experience is positively and significantly related to organizational commitment (r=0.36,
p<0.001). Self-efficacy is positively and significantly related to organizational commitment (r=0.39, p<0.001).
Therefore, Ha1, Ha2, and Ha3 are supported. These results are in line with previous research findings (e.g.,
Agarwal & Mishra, 2016; Jex & Bliese, 1999; Sinha, Talwar, & Rajpal, 2002; Salami, 2008; Saremi & Rezeghi,
2015).
Table1: Descriptive statistics and Inter-correlations
Variables Mean SD Correlation Coefficients
TE SE OC
TE 45.28 10.01 1
SE 31.94 4.01 0. 15** 1
OC 78.28 15.20 0.36*** 0. 39*** 1
**: p<0.01, ***: p<0.001, TE: Teaching-experience, SE: Self-efficacy, OC: Organizational commitment
Moderation Analysis
Hierarchical multiple regression analysis outputs in following paragraphs shows the effects of
moderating variable. Variables were standardized to make interpretations easier and to avoid multicollinearity.
Table-2 shows hierarchical regression analysis outputs for the moderation effect of teaching-experience on the
relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment. In the analysis Model 1 (without the
interaction) and Model 2 (with the interaction) was examined using the PROCESS procedure given by
Andrew F. Hayes (http:// www.afhayes.com). Moderation schema teaching-experience as moderator of
relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment prepared and showed in Figure 1.

Figure1: Schema for Teaching-Experience as moderator between Self-Efficacy and OC

Table2: Model Summary
Change Statistics
Model R R2 Sig. F
R2 Change F Change df1 df2
Change
1 .498 .248 .248 49.074 2 297 .000
2 .544 .296 .048 19.978 1 296 .000
Model 1: Predictors: Teaching-Experience, Self-Efficacy

http://indusedu.org Page 47

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
 Mohd. Ahamar Khan, International Journal of Research in Management, Economics and Commerce,
ISSN 2250-057X, Impact Factor: 6.384, Volume 07 Issue 12, December 2017, Page 45-49

Model 2: Predictors: Teaching-Experience, Self-Efficacy, Interaction between Teaching-Experience and Self-

Efficacy
As shown in Table 2, Model 1 without the interaction accounted for a significant amount of variance in
organizational commitment, R2= .248, F (2, 297) = 49.074, p< .001. It can be inferred that self-efficacy is a
significant predictor of organizational commitment. Next, the interaction between teaching-experience and self-

organizational commitment, R2 = 0.048, F(1, 296) = 19.978, p< .001. On the basis of this quantitative analysis
efficacy was added to the regression model (Model 2) which accounted for a significant amount of variance in

it can be inferred that there is a significant moderating effect of teaching-experience on the relationship of self-
efficacy with organizational commitment. Further, for visualizing the conditional effect of self-efficacy (X) on
organizational commitment (Y) interaction plot prepared and shown as Figure 2.

Figure2: Interaction Plot- Teaching-Experience as moderator between Self-Efficacy and OC

Examination of the interaction plot showed an enhancing effect as teaching-experience and self-
efficacy increases, teachers’ organizational commitment also increases. At low self-efficacy, teachers’
organizational commitment was different for their low, average, and high teaching-experience groups. Teachers
with average and high self-efficacy with their low, average and high teaching-experience groups had an
enhancing pattern in organizational commitment and came closer to substantiate the interaction effect. Therefore,
Ha4 is supported.

IV. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

The results of the study showed that teaching-experience, self-efficacy and organizational commitment
are significantly and positively correlated to each other. Further, teaching-experience has moderating effect of the
relationship of self-efficacy and organizational commitment. Therefore, it can be concluded that teaching-
experience significantly affects the teachers’ self-efficacy and organizational commitment. Numerous studies
suggested the hiring and retaining highly committed employees is a key part of their human resource
management strategy (Gong, Law, Chang, & Xin, 2009; Kehoe & Wright, 2013). This is because organizational
commitment, defined as an individual’s psychological attachment with an organization, has been indicative of
desirable outcomes such as job performance (Cooper-Hakim & Viswesvaran, 2005; Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch,
& Topolnytsky, 2002; Riketta, 2002), organizational citizenship behavior (Meyer et al., 2002; LePine, Erez, &
Johnson, 2002), and turnover (Meyer et al., 2002; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Therefore, further studies required to
examine the moderating effect of other demographic variables such as gender, designation, qualification,
academic discipline, type of family and marital status of the relationship between self-efficacy and organizational
commitment. Findings also would be of interest to observe the factors that affect organizational commitment
such as work design, leadership, organizational politics, organizational justice, trust, coworker support, perceived
organizational support, psychological contract breach, psychological empowerment, quality of work life, and
person organization fit.

V. REFERENCES
[1] Agarwal, S., & Mishra, P. C. (2016). Self-efficacy as predictor of organizational commitment among revenue personnel. The
International Journal of Indian Psychology, 3(4), 44-52.
[2] Bandura, A. (1977a). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84,191-215.
[3] Bandura, A. (1977b). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
[4] Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2000). A longitudinal study of teacher burnout and perceived self-efficacy in classroom management.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 239-253.

http://indusedu.org Page 48

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Mohd. Ahamar Khan, International Journal of Research in Management, Economics and Commerce,
ISSN 2250-057X, Impact Factor: 6.384, Volume 07 Issue 12, December 2017, Page 45-49

[5] Carvalho, J. (1984). Archival application of mathematical sampling techniques. Records Management Quarterly, 18, 60-63.
[6] Chu, C. L. (2003). A study of the relationship between personality traits and teaching effectiveness of teachers in reward and non-
reward kindergarten in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Spalding University, Kentucky.
[7] Coladarci, T. (1992). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 60(4), 323-
337.
[8] Cooper-Hakim, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The construct of work commitment: Testing an integrative framework.
Psychological Bulletin, 131, 241-259.
[9] De la Torre Cruz, M., & Casanova Arias, P. F. (2007). Comparative analysis of expectancies of efficacy in inservice and
prospective teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 641–652.
[10] Friedman, I. A. (2003). Self-efficacy and burnout in teaching: The importance of interpersonal-relations efficacy. Social
Psychology of Education, 6, 191-215.
[11] Gavora, P. (2010). Slovak pre-service teacher self-efficacy: Theoretical and research considerations. The New Educational
Review, 21(2), 17-30.
[12] George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
[13] Gong, Y., Law, K. S., Chang, S., & Xin, K. R. (2009). Human resources management and firm performance: The differential role
of managerial affective and continuance commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 263-75.
[14] Jex, S. M., & Bliese, P. D. (1999). Efficacy beliefs as a moderator of the impact of work-related stressors: A multilevel study.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 349-361.
[15] Kehoe, R. R., & Wright, P. M. (2013). The impact of high-performance human resource practices on employees’ attitudes and
behaviors. Journal of Management, 39, 366-391.
[16] LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical
review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 52-65.
[17] Lin, C. H. (2004). The study of organizational commitment and teaching effectiveness for special education teachers teaching.
Unpublished master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Taiwan.
[18] Marsh, H. W., & Bailey, M. (1991). Multidimensional students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness: A profile analysis, Australia.
New South Wales: Geographic Srce./Country of Publication, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 350310).
[19] Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates and consequences of
organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 171-194.
[20] Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the
organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20- 52.
[21] Rastegar, M., & Moradi, S. (2016). On the relationship between EFL teachers’ job satisfaction, self-efficacy, and their spiritual
sense of well-being. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 6, 1-12.
[22] Riketta, M. (2002). Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 23, 257-266.
[23] Salami, S. O. (2008). Demographic & psychological factors predicting organizational commitment among industrial workers.
Anthropologist, 10, 31-38.
[24] Saremi, H., & Rezeghi, A. A. (2015). A study on the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and organizational commitment with
job satisfaction in office employees in Esfarayen city, Iran. International Journal of Life Sciences, 9(6), 15 – 23.
[25] Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 152-171.
[26] Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in
health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.
[27] Shah, S. A., & Ansari, S. A. (2000). Influence of HRD activities and perceived upward mobility on employees' organizational
commitment and QWL. Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh: PhD Thesis.
[28] Sinha, P. S., Talwar, T., & Rajpal, R. (2002). Corelational study of organizational commitment, self-efficacy and psychological
barriers to technological change. Psychologia, 45(3), 176-183.
[29] Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with strain factors, perceived collective
teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 611-625.
[30] Sud, S. (2002). Hindi version of General Self-Efficacy Scale. Varanasi: Rupa Psychological Centre.
[31] Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational
Research, 68, 202–248.
[32] Woolfolk, A. E., Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and their beliefs about managing students. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 6, 137–148.

http://indusedu.org Page 49

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License