Self-efficacy of Estonian and Finnish teachers in relation to paradigm shift in science education: integration of socio-scientific topics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2026.14.1.03Keywords:
Digital technology, socio-scientific issues, teacher self-efficacy, transversal skillsAbstract
Selles uurimuses võrreldakse Eesti ja Soome loodusainete õpetajate enesetõhusust seoses paradigma muutusega loodusteaduslikus hariduses, keskendudes sotsiaalteaduslike probleemide integreerimisele. Uurimuse eesmärk on välja selgitada, kuivõrd pädevatena tunnevad ennast loodusainete õpetajad sotsiaalteaduslike probleemide õpetamisel ning millised kitsaskohad ilmnevad nende enesetõhususes lõimida keerukaid, interdistsiplinaarseid ja ühiskondlikult olulisi teemasid loodusteaduste õpetamisse. Analüüsiti nii kogenud õpetajate kui ka õpetajakoolituses õppivate üliõpilaste hinnanguid neljas valdkonnas: ülekantavad oskused, tervis ja meditsiin, kestlik areng ning digipädevused. Tulemused näitasid, et Eesti õpetajad hindasid end oluliselt pädevamaks terviseja meditsiiniteemades ning digitehnoloogia kasutamisel võrreldes Soome õpetajatega. Mõlema riigi õpetajad andsid kõige madalamaid hinnanguid aga terviseja meditsiiniteadmistele ning kestliku arenguga seotud interdistsiplinaarsetele teadmistele võrreldes teise kahe valdkonnaga. Samuti ilmnesid erinevused kogenud õpetajate ja õpetajakoolituses õppivate üliõpilaste võrdluses – kogenud loodusainete õpetajad hindasid oma pädevusi kõrgemalt ülekantavate oskuste, tervise- ja meditsiini ning kestliku arengu valdkondades. Tulemused rõhutavad vajadust täiendada õpetajakoolituse õppekavasid selliselt, et toetada loodusainete interdistsiplinaarset lähenemist, lõimides õpetamisel uusi ja kaasaegseid digitehnoloogiaid ning tõstes loodusteaduslikku kompetentsust.
Downloads
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Boedeker, P., Newell, A., & Moreno, N. (2023). COVID-19 public health lessons in science class boost knowledge and efficacy beliefs. Health Education Journal, 82(7), 792–806. https://doi.org/10.1177/00178969231198951
Borg, C., Gericke, N., Höglund, H.-O., & Bergman, E. (2014). Subject- and experience-bound differences in teachers’ conceptual understanding of sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 20(4), 526–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.833584
Brevik, L. M., Gudmundsdottir, G. B., Lund, A., & Strømme, T. A. (2019). Transformative agency in teacher education: Fostering professional digital competence. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.07.005
Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. National Science Teachers Association.
Caprara, G., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. (2006). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.001
Cotton, D. R. E. (2006). Implementing curriculum guidance on environmental education: The importance of teachers’ beliefs. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(1), 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500038644
Cruz, E., & Albuquerque Costa, F. (2025). Empowering teacher agency in the development of digital competence in primary education: Lessons from the Escol@s Digitais Project. European Educational Research Journal, 14749041251369925. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041251369925
Davis, F., & Davis, F. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Dayan, E., & Tsybulsky, D. (2024). Designing and teaching socio-scientific issues online: Digital curation in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 0(0), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2381133
Digikiirendi arenguprogramm. (2025, September 14). https://harno.ee/arenguvoimalused-ja-kvalifikatsioonid/kogukonnale/esf-tegevused-2015-2023#digikiirendi.
European Commission. (2023). Digital Education Action Plan (2021–2027): Resetting education and training for the digital age. https://education.ec.europa.eu/focustopics/digital-education/action-plan.
Evagorou, M., Albe, V., Angelides, P., Couso, D., Chirlesan, G., Evans, R., Dillon, J., Garrido, A., Güven, D., Zeynep Mugaloglu, E., & Nielsen, J. A. (2014). Preparing preservice science teachers to teach socio-scientific (SSI) argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 69, 39–48.
Evans, N. (Snowy), Stevenson, R. B., Lasen, M., Ferreira, J.-A., & Davis, J. (2017). Approaches to embedding sustainability in teacher education: A synthesis of the literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 405–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.013
Finnish National Board of Education. (2016). National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2014. Helsinki: FNBE.
Finnish National Board of Education. (2019). National Core Curriculum for General Upper Secondary Schools. Helsinki: FNBE.
Finnish National Board of Education. (2022). National Core Curriculum for Early Childhood Education and Care. Helsinki: FNBE.
Gümnaasiumi riiklik õppekava. (2011). Vabariigi Valitsus. https://http.riigiteataja.ee/akt/129082014021?leiaKehtiv
Haberbosch, M., Vick, P., Feuchter, F., & Schaal, S. (2025). Exploring molecular biology in lower secondary education: Assessing content relevance and teachers’ challenges, self-efficacy, and knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 0(0), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2517887
Hadjichambis, A., Reis, P., Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, D., Cincera, J., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Gericke, N., & Knippels, M.-C. (2020). Conceptualizing Environmental Citizenship for 21st Century Education. Environmental Discourses in Science Education, Vol. 4. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20249-1
Herranen, J., & Aksela, M. (2024). Fostering teachers as sustainability and climate change educators through understanding of teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 12(3), 30–52. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.3.2085
Jimoyiannis, A. (2010). Designing and implementing an integrated technological pedagogical science knowledge framework for science teachers professional development. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1259–1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.022
Kaarakainen, M.-T., & Saikkonen, L. (2021). Multilevel analysis of the educational use of technology: Quantity and versatility of digital technology usage in Finnish basic education schools. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(4), 953–965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12534
Karışan, D., & Zeidler, D. (2023). Teaching socioscientific issues in the digital age: Emerging trends and unexplored frontiers [Dijital çağda sosyobilimsel konuların öğretimi: Ortaya çıkan eğilimler ve keşfedilmemiş sınırlar]. Turkish Journal of Education, 13(1), 92–109. https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.1384524
Key competences for lifelong learning. (2019). Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/569540
Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. C. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.06.001
Laius, A., & Orgusaar, G. (2025). The critical role of science teachers’ readiness in harnessing digital technology benefits. Education Sciences, 15(8), 1001. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15081001
Laurie, R., Nonoyama-Tarumi, Y., Mckeown, R., & Hopkins, C. (2016). contributions of education for sustainable development (esd) to quality education: A synthesis of research. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 10(2), 226–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973408216661442
Lavonen, J., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2022). Experiences of Moving Quickly to Distance Teaching and Learning at All Levels of Education in Finland. In F. M. Reimers (Ed.), Primary and Secondary Education During Covid-19: Disruptions to Educational Opportunity During a Pandemic (pp. 105–123). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81500-4_4
Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Choi, K. (2006). Korean science teachers’ perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6(2), 97–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150609556691
Leijen, Ä., Jõgi, A.-L., Pedaste, M., Poom-Valickis, K., Uibu, K., Eisenschmidt, E., Oppi, P., Taimalu, M., Tinn, M., & Kalle, V. (2025). OECF rahvusvahelise õpetamise ja õppimise uuringu TALIS 2024 Eesti tulemused. HARNO. https://harno.ee/sites/default/files/documents/2025-11/TALIS2024_UURING_Eesti_tulemused.pdf
Lin, J., Neuman, K., Sadler, T. D., & Fortus, D. (2024). Transforming issues-based science education with innovative technologies. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 33(2), 157–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10086-5
Mikkilä-Erdmann, M., Warinowski, A., & Iiskala, T. (2019). Teacher Education in Finland and Future Directions. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.286
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Muench, S., Stoermer, E., Jensen, K., Asikainen, T., Salvi, M., & Scapolo, F. (2022). Towards a green & digital future. JRC Publications Repository. https://doi.org/10.2760/977331
Nagel, I., Guðmundsdóttir, G. B., & Afdal, H. W. (2023). Teacher educators’ professional agency in facilitating professional digital competence. Teaching and Teacher Education, 132, 104238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104238
OECD. (2019a). PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. OECD Publishing. https://http.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2018-assessment-and-analytical-framework_b25efab8-en.html
OECD. (2019b). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners. TALIS, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en
OECD. (2023). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2023. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en
Owens, D. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2024). Socio-scientific issues instruction for scientific literacy: 5E Framing to enhance teaching practice. School Science and Mathematics, 124(3), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12626
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
Põhikooli riiklik õppekava. (2011). Vabariigi Valitsus. https://http.riigiteataja.ee/akt/129082014020?leiaKehtiv
Saarinen, A. I. L., Lipsanen, J., Hintsanen, M., Huotilainen, M., & Keltikangas-Järvinen, L. (2021). The use of digital technologies at school and cognitive learning outcomes: A population-based study in Finland. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 10(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.17583/ijep.2021.4667
Sadler, T. D. (2011). Situating Socio-scientific Issues in Classrooms as a Means of Achieving Goals of Science Education. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific Issues in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning and Research (pp. 1–9). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_1
Saunders, K. J., & Rennie, L. J. (2013). A pedagogical model for ethical inquiry into socioscientific issues in science. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 253–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9248-z
Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.001
Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34(9), 1337–1370. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.605182
Soobard, R., & Rannikmäe, M. (2011). Assessing student’s level of scientific literacy using interdisciplinary scenarios. Science Education International, 22(2), 133–144.
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801
Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7
Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173684
Tidemand, S., & Nielsen, J. A. (2017). The role of socioscientific issues in biology teaching: From the perspective of teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 39(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1264644
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2016). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
Ulfert-Blank, A.-S., & Schmidt, I. (2022). Assessing digital self-efficacy: Review and scale development. Computers & Education, 191, 104626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104626
Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Sormunen, K., Dillon, P., & Sointu, E. (2015). The impact of authentic learning experiences with ICT on pre-service teachers’ intentions to use ICT for teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 81, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.09.008
Valtonen, T., Leppänen, U., Hyypiä, M., Sointu, E., Smits, A., & Tondeur, J. (2020). Fresh perspectives on TPACK: Pre-service teachers’ own appraisal of their challenging and confident TPACK areas. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2823–2842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10092-4
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
von Knebel, K., Schroeder, S., & Bögeholz, S. (2023). Factors influencing self-efficacy beliefs of interdisciplinary science teaching – The role of teaching experience, science subjects studied, and desire to teach interdisciplinary science. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1147441
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The authors who publish in Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian Journal of Education agree to the following terms:
- This journal provides immediate open access to its content. All the articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.
- Authors grant the journal right of (1) first publication and distribution of the article, (2) making it available to public, (3) public presentation.
- Authors have the right to enter into separate contractual arrangements for posting the article to an institutional repository or publish it in a book with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted to post citations from their work online (e.g. on their website) with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal (see Open Access).
