Next Article in Journal
Brief Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression and Anxiety in Patients with Schizophrenia in Psychiatric Home Nursing Service: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Previous Article in Journal
Sanity through Insanity: The Use of Dark Humor among United States Veterans
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Behavioral Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 8
10.3390/bs14080678
behavsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Relationships between Resilience and Self-Efficacy in the Prosocial Behavior of Chilean Elementary School Teachers

by
Sonia Salvo-Garrido
1,*,
Karina Polanco-Levicán
2,
Sergio Dominguez-Lara
3,
Manuel Mieres-Chacaltana
4 and
José Luis Gálvez-Nieto
5
1
Departamento de Matemática y Estadística, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco 4780000, Chile
2
Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco 4780000, Chile
3
Instituto de Investigación FCCTP, Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Lima 15102, Peru
4
Departamento de Diversidad y Educación Intercultural, Universidad Católica de Temuco, Temuco 4780000, Chile
5
Departamento de Trabajo Social, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco 4780000, Chile
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Behav. Sci. 2024, 14(8), 678; https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14080678
Submission received: 5 July 2024 / Revised: 31 July 2024 / Accepted: 1 August 2024 / Published: 5 August 2024
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Teachers’ actions go beyond instruction, as their personal traits influence their teaching methods, problem-solving skills, and the quality of their relationships with students. Among these attributes, their prosocial competencies stand out for contributing to school, community, and social coexistence. Furthermore, the connection they have to resilience and self-efficacy promotes increased effectiveness in meeting the demands of an ever-more challenging work environment. This research aimed to analyze the effect of the relationship between self-efficacy and resilience on the prosocial behavior of Chilean elementary school teachers. The sample consisted of 1426 teachers (77.2% women) working in public and subsidized Chilean schools. Structural equation modeling (SEM) explored the relationships between self-efficacy, resilience, and prosocial behavior. The findings indicate that self-efficacy and resilience directly and positively affect the prosocial behavior of elementary school teachers. It is suggested that resilience, self-efficacy, and prosociality among teachers are promoted due to their synergistic effects and, consequently, the benefits for school children, especially those from vulnerable social contexts.

1. Introduction

Teachers play a crucial role in students’ cognitive, social, and emotional development [1], with schools being vital institutions for their socialization during childhood and adolescence [2,3]. In stressful and demanding environments [1,4], teachers face daily challenges, with actions impacting individuals, communities, and society, recognizing that teachers’ behaviors have implications at individual, community, and societal levels [5]. Prosociality, valued by society [6], acts as a protective factor for teachers in challenging situations [7], positively influencing children who interact with them by receiving their values, affection, and altruism [6,8,9].
There are essential competencies for teachers that go beyond mere academic instruction, especially when working with children, given the challenging nature of their work [10,11,12]. Teachers’ socioemotional skills are crucial for establishing effective relationships in the classroom and strengthening the bond with students [13,14], enhancing the teaching and learning process, especially in contexts of high socioeconomic segregation like Chile, where an impact on academic performance and student development is observed [15,16,17,18]. In a constantly changing world, adaptation is crucial [4,19,20,21,22], highlighting the importance of resilience, self-efficacy, and prosocial behavior for teachers to achieve their pedagogical goals and foster the comprehensive development of their students [3,23].
An analysis of the correlation between resilience, self-efficacy, and prosocial behavior is crucial because of its substantial impact on well-being and educational quality. Although previous research has established this connection in other contexts [3,24], the focus on teachers is particularly pertinent. As mentioned in previous paragraphs, teachers play a crucial role in shaping students’ socio-emotional skills, and understanding how their own personal characteristics influence their prosocial behavior can provide valuable insights for improving the educational environment. Furthermore, self-efficacy and resilience are essential skills that empower teachers to confront challenges and adjust to demanding educational settings, both personally and professionally. These skills, in turn, can foster prosocial conduct in the classroom and benefit students.
Prosociality is deemed essential in teachers as it protects against adverse conditions, reduces burnout levels [7], and increases job commitment [25]. This concept has been defined as “dispositions, voluntary behaviors, and processes that focus on or contribute to the well-being of others” at different levels [26]. According to Caprara et al. [27], an individual’s prosociality is reflected in various actions such as helping, sharing (or comforting), caring, and feeling empathy. Currently, multiple studies have linked prosociality with empathy [28,29], helping behaviors, and the possibility of sharing [30], all very relevant in professional education and for practicing teachers [31,32]. Prosocial behaviors foster positive social interactions, benefiting both the giver and the receiver and leading to mutual support and social recognition for positively evaluated actions [6].
In this regard, the close teacher–student relationship fosters students’ prosocial behavior over time [25,33,34], enhancing adaptation, reducing exclusion [35] and bullying among students [36], as well as decreasing discriminatory and racist behaviors among peers [37]. It is crucial that children develop prosocial behavior [38], and thus, it is expected that teachers support the development of social competencies in their students, especially prosociality [39,40]. The bond between the student and the teacher allows children and adolescents to internalize values such as respect and affection in their interactions, which will influence prosocial behavior [8,9]. Moreover, students with attentional and behavioral difficulties improve their behavior management and peer relationships [41].
The perception of self-efficacy is crucial for teachers, enabling them to face challenging environments [17,42]. It is defined as judgments about one’s capabilities to achieve positive outcomes, influencing behavior, thoughts, and emotions [43,44]. This is evident in stressful and changing contexts [44,45,46], affecting effort and persistence in achieving goals [44]. Specifically, teacher self-efficacy is associated with the belief in the ability to facilitate student learning and achieve expected academic performance [46,47,48,49], strengthening the trust relationship with students [50] and promoting inclusive education [51,52].
Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy [48] propose that teacher self-efficacy comprises different domains. The first is called Efficacy in Instructional Strategies, which refers to the perception of a teacher’s ability to generate learning strategies that meet the needs of the class. The second is Efficacy for Classroom Management, which reflects the teacher’s ability to support their students’ emotional and behavioral regulation to conform to classroom norms. The third is Efficacy for Student Engagement, which addresses the teacher’s performance related to the evaluation of their students’ own confidence and appraisal of their abilities, manifesting in students engaging properly in their activities.
Resilience is a dynamic process that utilizes personal, school, social, and community resources to overcome challenges and adapt [53,54,55,56]. Adverse experiences can lead to learning, such as increased self-acceptance, the ability to face challenges, and greater compassion and connection with others, resulting in a beneficial internal transformation for others [57]. According to Saavedra and Villalta [58], resilience is reflected in how problems are approached, one’s self-perception, and personal beliefs, being built over time through experiences that provide continuity to personal development.
Resilience enables individuals to face challenging and problematic situations by dynamically mobilizing resources of various kinds to solve the difficulties they experience [55]. Thus, resilience is not solely a personal, relational, and collective process. Therefore, the conditions present in the school context can function as obstacles or enhancers of these processes [22,59,60,61]. Additionally, teachers’ resilience fosters resilience in their students, which is crucial, especially in vulnerable contexts [53,62]. Teachers act as role models for their students due to the substantial amount of time they spend together, particularly during the early years of elementary education [63].

1.1. Relationship between Resilience and Prosociality

Resilience has been associated with prosocial behavior [3,64,65]; given the potential for personal growth that can arise from overcoming adversity, it is possible that adverse experiences encountered by individuals may foster resilience and strengthen social connections [57,66]. In this context, it is observed that teachers with greater resilience show better emotion regulation and greater empathy, implying that they evaluate the emotions of others more appropriately [56]. Moreover, resilience is negatively associated with stress, emotional exhaustion, and difficulties in maintaining discipline in the classroom [4,5], favoring the possibility of being available to help and support students [30].
Thus, according to Sunbul and Gordesli [23], resilience significantly predicts teacher prosociality. It enables coping with negative feelings linked to perceived obstacles or difficulties and increases the disposition to confront work-related issues constructively. Resilient teachers have a greater capacity to help other people voluntarily. The dynamic and prosocial classroom environment has a reciprocal effect on teacher resilience [67], as it serves as a required resource for the development of teacher resilience and also contributes to teachers’ social enjoyment [68,69,70,71].

1.2. Relationship between Self-Efficacy and Prosociality

Self-efficacy significantly predicts prosocial behaviors in people of different ages, especially in teachers [3,72,73,74,75]. The beliefs in one’s own self-efficacy influence the capacity for self-regulation, manifested in cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral aspects [43], facilitating the display of prosocial behaviors [27]. In this way, individuals are required first to perceive that they have the capabilities to face a situation and its consequences to provide help and support to others, making it important to consider the context and distinguish the required skills [6]. Specifically, caring for another person requires perceiving that they need help and what type of help they need [6].
Consequently, self-efficacy beliefs are linked to prosocial behavior, considering that the confidence to act prosocially is present [72,76,77]. The teachers with greater self-efficacy show a higher development of socio-emotional competencies [78] and higher emotional intelligence [79], and it is associated with the experience of feeling joy, pride, and love in interactions with others [80]. Meanwhile, the perception of teacher self-efficacy influences the exchange of knowledge among teachers and the prosocial behavior that increases the willingness to share useful resources and solve problems [81]. At the same time, teachers who provide socio-emotional and instructional support display prosocial behavior and cope better with problems influencing their students, fostering higher levels of self-efficacy and prosocial behaviors [82,83,84]. Prosociality in the classroom favorably promotes teachers’ professional self-efficacy beliefs and their own mental health [85]. It enables them to benefit from their positive interactions with their colleagues and students [67]. Reciprocally, the students strengthen their academic self-concept [86], express greater confidence [87], and increase their commitment, motivation, and sense of belonging [88]. This way, a better teacher–student relationship is encouraged, conflicts are reduced [89,90,91,92,93], and the management of students’ behavior benefits [94].

1.3. Relationship between Teacher Self-Efficacy, Resilience, and Prosociality

Recent research has explored how teachers’ self-efficacy and resilience are interrelated and affect their prosocial behavior. Developing personal competencies among teachers within the school context promotes prosocial participation; specifically, self-efficacy and resilience maintain a direct, positive, and significant relationship with prosocial behaviors [23]. It is important to mention that resilience and self-efficacy as personal characteristics are linked with contextual factors and are reflected in people’s behavior, i.e., they are expressed in prosocial behavior [3,23]. The interplay among these three variables also applies to peer interactions, since prosociality, resilience, and creative self-efficacy have a positive effect on adolescent students, specifically in reducing stress and increasing their well-being [95]. It is relevant to consider this, given the potential beneficial effect of the school and teachers on promoting such attitudes and behaviors [95].
Moreover, it has been observed that resilience positively relates to teacher self-efficacy [96,97,98]. Therefore, increased self-efficacy and resilience favor coordination with other teachers and collaborative work [99]. This is based on the fact that self-efficacy is relevant for facing adverse situations, bearing in mind the effort involved in achieving the proposed goals by overcoming obstacles that may arise along the way [44,80]; similarly, resilience facilitates the use of different types of resources that the person has when facing problems. Thus, designing and implementing professional development programs that increase self-efficacy and resilience can have a positive impact on promoting prosocial behaviors among students [42].
According to Gratacós et al. [96], resilience is a significant factor for teachers to enhance their adaptability in resolving adverse situations, which entails improving their self-efficacy and augmenting personal resources to confront obstacles better and alleviate adverse conditions [100]. The perception of self-efficacy is crucial for teachers to attain any set goal involving motivation, difficulty assessment, and decision making [101]. The individual’s belief in their capabilities and likelihood of success is more pertinent than their actual skill development [43,45,101]. This, combined with personal values, influences the inclination towards supportive behavior [6]. Consequently, prosocial behavior, self-efficacy, and resilience assist in navigating challenges in teaching [23,67]. Specifically, increased self-efficacy and resilience among teachers are associated with heightened prosocial behavior, thus benefiting their students.
Resilient people are better able to handle abrupt and negative changes, according to a study conducted on Italian participants aged 18 to 60 years. This is related to their self-efficacy beliefs, which support the adaptation of the person to withstand and recover from difficult circumstances and show greater positivity towards life. Resilient people with higher self-efficacy tend to manage their emotions better and, therefore, often express prosocial behavior [102]. The relevance of these three constructs and their connection (self-efficacy, resilience, and prosocial behavior) has been observed in adolescents as they favor their mental health [95].
It is worth noting that self-efficacy and resilience are separate constructs that can be measured independently; however, the scientific literature evidences that they are interrelated. This interrelationship is crucial to understanding how these personal competencies influence teachers’ prosocial behavior.
The conceptual framework for this study is presented in Figure 1.
Therefore, this research aims to analyze the effect of self-efficacy and resilience on prosocial behavior in Chilean elementary school teachers. The hypotheses are that self-efficacy and resilience have a direct and positive effect on teachers’ prosocial behavior (H1) and that resilience and self-efficacy are positively related (H2).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

The study population consists of 85,298 Chilean teachers working in primary education, teaching students aged 6 to 13 years. These teachers are employed in municipal and subsidized schools. A random sample was estimated using the following strata: region, residence (urban, rural), type of education, and gender. The stratified multistage probability sampling was estimated with a 95% confidence level, a sampling error of 2.5%, and a variance of p = q = 0.5 [103]. Consequently, the sample comprised 1441 teachers (77% women, 22.6% men, and 0.4% with no information) with an average age of 41.5 years (SD = 10.8). Most schools were located in urban areas (81.2%), with 83.6% being public schools and 16.4% being subsidized schools. On the other hand, teaching experience measured in years ranged from less than one year to 48 years, with an average of 14.2 years (SD = 10.1). In the sample in this study, the term “teachers” refers exclusively to classroom teachers. Administrators and teachers of specialized subjects were not included. This ensures that the results focus on teachers with direct and continuous interaction with students in the classroom.

2.2. Instruments

The research instruments in this study were divided into two parts. The first part consisted of a sociodemographic questionnaire to capture information about the teacher’s age, gender, ethnic group, type of school, years of experience, and work sector, among others. The second part focused on gathering information related to three perception scales of self-efficacy, resilience, and prosociality, which are detailed as follows:
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale (TSES). Originally developed by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy [48] to assess perceptions of teacher self-efficacy. The original proposal consists of 24 items answered on a five-point ordinal scale (1 = nothing, 5 = a lot), which evaluates three factors with eight items each: efficacy for instructional strategies (e.g., “To what extent can you ask good questions for your students?”), self-efficacy in classroom management (e.g., “What can you do to make children follow the classroom rules?”), and self-efficacy in student engagement (e.g., “How much can you do to help your students value learning?”). The results obtained in a psychometric study aimed at analyzing the evidence of validity and reliability in a population of Chilean elementary school teachers from public and private subsidized schools reveal an internal three-factor structure, as indicated in the original proposal, but with a general factor and three residual factors, and showed good psychometric properties (RMSEA = 0.069; 90%CI [0.065, 0.072]; SRMR = 0.015; CFI = 0.988; TLI = 0.981) and high reliability of the general factor in relation to the scores (α = 0.972) and to the construct (ω = 0.985) [104].
SV-RES60 Resilience Scale for Youth and Adults. This scale was constructed and validated in the Chilean population [58]. This instrument consists of 60 items measured on a Likert-type scale with 5 categories (1 = Strongly disagree, 5 = Strongly agree). It has 12 factors: Identity (I am/basic condition), Autonomy (I am/self-view), Satisfaction (I am/problem view), Pragmatism (I am/resilient response), Bonds (I have/basic condition), Networks (I have/self-view), Models (I have/problem view), Goals (I have/response), Affectivity (I can/basic condition), Self-efficacy (I can/self-view), Learning (I can/problem view), and Generativity (I can/respond). Regarding psychometric properties, it reports an adequate level of reliability, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.96, and adequate validity, with a Pearson linear correlation coefficient of 0.76 [58]. The results found in recent research on elementary school teachers conducted by Salvo-Garrido et al. [105] provide favorable evidence of validity and indicate a general factor and 12 residual factors, showing good psychometric properties (RMSEA = 0.032; 90%CI [0.030, 0.033]; SRMR = 0.012; CFI = 0.986; TLI = 0.977), as well as a high reliability of the general factor for the scores (α = 0.981) and for the construct (ω = 0.991). This suggests that the scale has good internal consistency and dependably measures the resilience construct.
Adult Prosocialness Behavior Scale (APBS). This scale was proposed by Caprara et al. [27] to assess prosocial behavior. It consists of 16 items scaled in a Likert format with 5 categories (1 = Never, 5 = Always) that are associated with the theoretical dimensions that compose prosocial behavior: helping (for example, “I am pleased to help my friends/colleagues in their activities”), sharing (for example, “I am willing to put my knowledge and skills at the disposal of others”), caring (for example, “I try to be close to and take care of those in need”), and empathizing (for example, “I empathize with those who need it”). This scale was adapted and validated with Chilean university students in teaching programs by Mieres-Chacaltana et al. [106], reporting a structure comprised of one general latent factor and four specific residual factors (helping, sharing, caring, and empathy), with adequate reliability of the general factor (α = 0.932; ω = 0.968) and a good level of fit (RMSEA = 0.042; IC90% [0.036–0.049]; SRMR = 0.012; CFI = 0.995; TLI = 0.988).

2.3. Procedure

Initially, all principals of public schools, mayors, and directors of local education services were contacted, considering that Chilean public schools are under the administration of municipalities and local education services depend on the Ministry of Education of Chile. The researchers presented the study to the relevant authorities to invite participation and obtain authorization to apply the instruments. Subsequently, those schools whose directors decided to participate in the research were sent a link containing the informed consent, the sociodemographic questionnaire, the Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale (TSES), the Prosocialness Behavior Scale (APBS), and the Resilience Scale (SV-RES60). The relevant directors then provided the information to the teachers. It is important to mention that the teachers who agreed to participate were informed about the ethical principles of the research, such as the voluntariness of participation, the right to withdraw at any time without prejudice to them, and the risks and benefits, among others. The data were collected on an online platform (Question Pro). Moreover, it is highlighted that this study has the approval of the Scientific Ethics Committee of the Universidad de La Frontera, Chile (Evaluation File No. 053_21; Study Protocol Sheet No. 019/21).

2.4. Data Analysis

This study adopted a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to explore the relationships between self-efficacy, resilience, and prosocial behavior, as proposed in Figure 1. Data from 1406 elementary education teachers were collected and analyzed. A preliminary descriptive analysis was made of the univariate normality of the items by means of their skewness (<2) [107] and kurtosis (<7) [107]. As for the estimation method, the weighted least squares means and variance adjusted (WLSMV) method [108] was used, as recommended for analyzing ordinal variables [109] across a wide range of sample sizes [110]. Furthermore, WLSMV does not make distributional assumptions about the observed variables [111] and makes accurate estimates even if the data are biased [112]. Given the sensitivity of the Chi-Square coefficient to large samples, as is the case in this study, from an interpretative perspective, the model presents a suitable fit when the CFI and the TLI display values over 0.90 [113]; RMSEA values below 0.08 are considered adequate [114]; and SRMR below 0.08 [115] is also regarded as adequate. Regarding the influence assessment, low (<0.30), moderate (between 0.30 and 0.50), and high magnitude (>0.50) [116] were considered. Mplus v. 8.4 software was used [117].

3. Results

Table 1 displays the main descriptive indicators for the items by scale. Skewness was negative for all items on the three scales, indicating that scores were preferred towards the two highest categories. Unlike the other two scales, the kurtosis values for the SV-RES60 scale items were all positive. Thus, in general, skewness and kurtosis reached adequate magnitudes.
The results of the analysis, based on the total sample, show that the model evaluating the impact of self-efficacy and resilience on prosocial behavior in Chilean elementary school teachers (Figure 1) fits the data well [χ2 (4847, N = 1426) = 21,975.474, p < 0.000, χ2/df = 4.5338, with TLI = 0.911, CFI = 0.912, RMSEA = 0.050, CI (90%): 0.049–0.050, SRMR = 0.069].
Table 2 summarizes the standardized factor loadings of the observed items on the latent constructs. All were greater than 0.5 and statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, 88% achieved values greater than or equal to 0.71.
The estimated parameter values of the theoretical model of the impact of self-efficacy and resilience on prosocial behavior shown in Figure 1 were 0.308 (β1) and 0.261 (β2). Both values were statistically significant (p < 0.001) and empirically supported the first hypothesis. Self-efficacy was a strong predictor of prosocial behavior over resilience, which was also important. The results showed a significant positive relationship between the variables of self-efficacy and resilience, with a correlation coefficient of 0.366 (p < 0.001). This supports the hypothesis that self-efficacy and resilience are interrelated, which is consistent with previous studies that have found that confidence in one’s own abilities is associated with personal resilience.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

This study represents an initial effort to apply an integrated model of self-efficacy theory and resilience theory to understand teachers’ prosocial behavior, considering the relevance of all mentioned concepts for research in the field of education. It also supports interventions that consider that self-efficacy, resilience, and prosocial behavior are fundamental variables for teachers to carry out successful work, achieve adequate performance in their students, and promote the comprehensive development of children. Despite this, most of the existing literature only considers these factors separately [62,65,78,84,91], thus failing to make a stronger evidence-based connection between the constructs and how these variables can predict prosocial behavior. Consequently, this study represents a new perspective considering individual self-efficacy and resilience predictors of prosocial behavior.
This study aimed to analyze the effect of self-efficacy and resilience on teachers’ prosocial behavior. The results confirm the initial hypotheses, underscoring the need to promote these competencies to benefit the school environment. It should be noted that self-efficacy and resilience positively influence teachers’ prosocial behavior, H1, as indicated by Sunbul and Gordesli [23]. These personal competencies enable overcoming obstacles and adversities [44,80], fostering prosocial behaviors [3,6,23,101]. This strengthens teacher collaboration [99] and improves student relationships [3,8,9,64].
Another significant finding in this research is that self-efficacy is a strong predictor of prosocial behavior, being a more relevant explanatory variable than resilience. The perception of self-efficacy is linked to an individual’s self-regulation, which fosters the display of prosocial behaviors, thereby facilitating action as a result of confidence in one’s abilities and the perception of less stress, which, depending on their values, will lead to the manifestation of prosocial behaviors in their interpersonal relationships [27,43,101]. Values enable individuals to transcend their concerns to pursue others’ well-being [6]. Consequently, self-efficacy is a fundamental personal resource for resolving difficult situations [100], which is necessary to provide care and support to others in need [6].
Regarding the second hypothesis, which states that resilience and self-efficacy are positively related, it is evident that both variables are positively and significantly associated in line with different research findings [96,97,98]. Resilience is crucial in teachers’ performance as it allows them to face difficult situations through personal, community, and school resources [53,54,55,56]. Additionally, teachers’ perception of self-efficacy enables them to perform in complex environments or face difficulties given their confidence in their own abilities in various areas that would allow them to successfully achieve their purposes [44,45,46,49]. Consequently, this fosters a better learning environment for children and the development of life skills that enable them to face and solve future situations [83].
The significance of this research lies in the positive impact of teachers’ prosocial behaviors on the educational community and society as a whole, a concept supported by [6]. As students observe their teachers throughout the day, they absorb academic content and learn valuable lessons on problem-solving and interpersonal relationships. Therefore, interventions aimed at promoting teachers’ prosocial behavior, encompassing actions like helping, sharing, caring, and empathizing, are crucial, considering the role of self-efficacy and resilience in fostering such behaviors [6,23]. Moreover, interventions focusing on teachers’ personal development could yield multiple benefits, including enhancing their perception of school support, strengthening collaborative networks within the educational community, and fostering constructive responses to professional challenges. Ultimately, these efforts would provide a more enriching educational experience for students, serving as a valuable asset for teachers in addressing the varied needs of their students and fostering a nurturing environment crucial for the success of inclusive schools [41].
The results of this study have important implications for teacher support and development. There are several ways to improve teacher self-efficacy and resilience, such as strengths-based coaching, peer mentoring, and a teacher assessment system that incorporates self-identified goals and strengths [118,119]. In addition, there are related programs that have proven effective, such as Social Emotional Learning for Adults, SEL [120], the Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education, CARE [13] program, and the ACHIEVER Resilience Curriculum [121]. The findings of this study can be valuable for designing interventions aimed at enhancing teachers’ skills, particularly in the areas of resilience, self-efficacy, and prosocial behavior. This will provide a better understanding of the interconnections among these skills.
In conclusion, the findings of this study underscore the importance of self-efficacy and resilience in promoting prosocial behavior among elementary school teachers in Chile. Self-efficacy, as the strongest predictor, suggests that confidence in one’s own abilities is crucial to developing prosocial behaviors. On the other hand, resilience also plays a significant role, facilitating teachers’ ability to cope with adversities and support their students effectively. This study and its results highlight the relevance of fostering these personal competencies to improve school dynamics and students’ educational experiences. In addition, they can guide the development of training and support programs for teachers to enhance their competencies and the well-being of the educational community. They can also provide valuable information for school administrators and educational policymakers.
In terms of limitations, it is important to note that private school teachers were not included, which could limit the generalizability of the results to all types of schools in Chile. In addition, as this was a cross-sectional cohort study, temporal connections cannot be inferred. Future studies could consider a more diverse sample that includes teachers from private schools and different educational levels, such as preschool and high school. Furthermore, it would be valuable to explore how some additional factors, such as burnout, mental health, moral values, and social capital (community, family, school, peers), influence teachers’ prosocial behavior. It is also considered relevant that further research should focus on exploring how teachers’ self-efficacy, resilience, and prosociality may influence the effectiveness of inclusive schools.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.S.-G., K.P.-L., S.D.-L. and M.M.-C.; methodology, S.S.-G., S.D.-L. and J.L.G.-N.; software, S.S.-G., S.D.-L., M.M.-C. and J.L.G.-N.; validation, S.S.-G., M.M.-C., S.D.-L. and K.P.-L.; formal analysis, S.S.-G., S.D.-L. and J.L.G.-N.; investigation, S.S.-G., M.M.-C. and K.P.-L.; resources, S.S.-G.; data curation, S.S.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S.-G., K.P.-L., S.D.-L., J.L.G.-N. and M.M.-C.; writing—review and editing, S.S.-G., K.P.-L., S.D.-L., J.L.G.-N. and M.M.-C.; visualization, S.S.-G., K.P.-L., S.D.-L., M.M.-C. and J.L.G.-N.; supervision, S.S.-G., M.M.-C., K.P.-L. and J.L.G.-N.; project administration, S.S.-G.; funding acquisition, S.S.-G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo, ANID, FONDECYT Projects 1210551.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of Universidad de La Frontera (File No 053_21; Study Protocol Page No 019/21).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are not available because they are confidential data.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Falk, D.; Shephard, D.; Mendenhall, M. “I Always Take Their Problem as Mine”—Understanding the relationship between Teacher-Student Relationships and Teacher-Being in Crisis Contexts. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 2022, 95, 102670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Rancher, C.; Moreland, A.D. Adverse Childhood Experiences, Stress, and Resilience among Early Teachers. Early Child. Res. Q. 2023, 62, 186–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Liu, Y.; Ngai, S.-y. The Impact of Social Capital, Self-Efficacy, and Resilience on the Prosocial Involvement of Adolescents from Families with and without Economic Disadvantages. Child. Indic. Res. 2019, 12, 1735–1757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Salinas-Falquez, S.; Roman-Lorente, C.; Buzica, M.; Álvarez, J.; Gutiérrez, N.; Trigueros, R. Teachers’ Mental Health and Their Involvement in Educational Inclusion. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Moreno-Lucas, J.L.; Martínez-Ramón, J.P.; Morales-Rodríguez, F.M.; Ruiz-Esteban, C.; Méndez, E.I. Stress, Burnout, and Resilience: Are Teachers at Risk? Int. J. Ment. Health Promot. 2023, 25, 207–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Caprara, G.; Steca, P. Prosocial Agency: The Contribution of Values and Self-Efficacy Beliefs to Prosocial Behavior across Ages. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 2007, 26, 218–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sánchez-Pujalte, L.; Mateu, D.N.; Etchezahar, E.; Gómez Yepes, T. Teachers’ Burnout during COVID-19 Pandemic in Spain: Trait Emotional Intelligence and Socioemotional Competencies. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Collie, R.J. Social-emotional Need Satisfaction, Prosocial Motivation, and Students’ Positive Behavioral and Well-being Outcomes. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 2022, 25, 399–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Wei, B.; Zhang, X.; Xiao, X.; Li, Y. The Effect of Different Types of Social Norms on Children’s Sharing Behavior: The Roles of Parents, Teachers, and Peers. Social. Dev. 2023, 32, 1023–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Da Silva, P.R.; Jardim, J.; de Sousa Lopes, M.C. The Soft Skills of Special Education Teachers: Evidence from the Literature. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sheridan, L.; Coleman, B.; Durksen, T.L. Important Non-Academic Attributes in Australian Initial Teacher Education. Aust. Educ. Res. 2022, 49, 387–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Van Wingerden, J.; Poell, R.F. Meaningful Work and Resilience among Teachers: The Mediating Role of work Engagement and Job Crafting. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0222518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jennings, P.A.; Brown, J.L.; Frank, J.L.; Doyle, S.; Oh, Y.; Davis, R.; Rasheed, D.; DeWeese, A.; DeMauro, A.A.; Cham, H.; et al. Impacts of the CARE for Teachers Program on Teachers’ Social and Emotional Competence and Classroom Interactions. J. Educ. Psychol. 2017, 109, 1010–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mascia, M.L.; Langiu, G.; Bonfiglio, N.S.; Penna, M.P.; Cataudella, S. Challenges of Preadolescence in the School Context: A Systematic Review of Protective/Risk Factors and Intervention Programmes. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Salvo-Garrido, S.; Vargas, H.M.; Urra, O.V.; Gálvez-Nieto, J.L.; Miranda-Zapata, E. Resilient Students in the Area of Mathematics: Examining Protective and Risk Factors in an Emerging Country. Rev. Iberoam. Diagn. Eval. Psicol. 2020, 55, 43–57. [Google Scholar]
  16. Murillo, F.J.; Garrido, C.M. La Ségrégation Sociale Dans Les Écoles Publiques et Privées En Amérique Latine. Educ. Soc. 2017, 38, 727–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Murillo, F.J.; Duk, C.; Garrido, C.M. Evolución de La Segregación Socioeconómica de Las Escuelas de América Latina. Estud. Pedagógicos 2018, 44, 157–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Murillo, F.J.; Martínez-Garrido, C.; Graña, R. School Segregation by Socioeconomic Level in Primary Education in Latin America and the Caribbean. REICE. Rev. Iberoam. Sobre Calid. Efic. Cambio Educ. 2023, 21, 87–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kaveri, G.; Hu, A.; Almeida, S.C.; Gomes, J. Crisis and Adaptability: A Model of Early Childhood Teacher resilience across Five Countries. Early Years 2022, 44, 314–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Maitland, J.; Glazzard, J. Finding a Way through the Fog: School Staff Experiences of the COVID-19. Camb. J. Educ. 2022, 52, 555–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Quijada Lovatón, K.Y.; Gómez-Nashiki, A. Resiliencia: Convergencia de Emociones y Experiencias Docentes En La Educación a Distancia En Tiempos de La COVID-19. Sinéctica Rev. Electrónica Educ. 2022, 59, e1410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Yang, M.; Oh, Y.; Lim, S.; Kim, T. Teaching with Collective Resilience during COVID-19: Korean Teachers and Collaborative Professionalism. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2023, 126, 104051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Sunbul, A.; Gordesli, A. Psychological Capital and Job Satisfaction in Public-School Teachers: The Mediating Role of Prosocial Behaviours. J. Educ. Teach. 2021, 47, 147–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ramolale, M.; Malete, L.; Ju, U. Mediational Role of Mental Toughness on the Relationship Between Self-Efficacy and Prosocial/Antisocial Behavior in Elite Youth Sport. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 745323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Soininen, V.; Pakarinen, E.; Lerkkanen, M.K. Reciprocal Associations among Teacher–Child Interactions, Teachers’ Work Engagement, and Children’s Social Competence. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2023, 85, 101508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hart, R.; Hart, D. Untying the Text: Organizational Prosociality and Kindness. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Caprara, G.V.; Steca, P.; Zelli, A.; Capanna, C. A New Scale for Measuring Adults’ Prosocialness. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2005, 21, 77–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Fink, E.; de Rosnay, M. Examining Links between Affective Empathy, Cognitive Empathy, and Peer Relationships at the Transition to School. Soc. Dev. 2023, 32, 1208–1226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Soliman, D.; Frydenberg, E.; Liang, R.; Deans, J. Enhancing Empathy in Preschoolers: A Comparison of Social and Emotional Learning Approaches. Educ. Dev. Psychol. 2021, 38, 64–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ozbal, G.O.; Gonen, M. An Experimental Study of the Development of Empathy and Prosocial Behavior among Preschool Children. Egit. Bilim-Educ. Sci. 2023, 48, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Li, M.; Li, W.; Yang, Q.; Huang, L. Altruistic Preferences of Pre-Service Teachers: The Mediating Role of Empathic Concern and the Moderating Role of Self-Control. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 999105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Eroshenkova, E.I.; Isaev, I.F.; Irkhina, I.V.; Irkhin, V.N. Prosocial Needs and Experience of Future Physical Education Teachers in the Process of Professional Education at the University. Teor. Prakt. Fiz. Kult. 2022, 2022, 109–110. [Google Scholar]
  33. Wu, G.; Zhang, L. Longitudinal Associations between Teacher-Student Relationships and Prosocial Behavior in Adolescence: The Mediating Role of Basic Need Satisfaction. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Khan, M.E.I. EFL Teachers’ Prosocial Behaviors at the Secondary Level in Bangladesh. Univers. J. Educ. Res. 2020, 8, 3734–3741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhu, J.; Yin, X.; Li, X.; Dong, X.; Zou, S.; Li, Y. Social Avoidance and Social Adjustment in Chinese Preschool Migrant: The Moderating Role of Teacher-Child Relationships. Front. Psychiatry 2023, 14, 1149319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Wang, C.; Li, B.; Zhang, L.; Liu, Y.; Xu, P. Prosocial Behavior and Teachers’ Attitudes towards Bullying on Peer Victimization among Middle School Students: Examining the Cross-Level Moderating Effect of Classroom Climate. Sch. Psych. Rev. 2022, 51, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nalls, A.; Wickerd, G. The Jigsaw Method: Reviving a Powerful Positive Intervention. J. Appl. Sch. Psychol. 2022, 39, 201–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Wikman, C.; Allodi, M.W.; Ferrer-Wreder, L.A. Self-Concept, Prosocial School Behaviors, Well-Being, and Academic Skills in Elementary School Students: A Whole-Child Perspective. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Maksimović, J.; Jevtic, B.; Stošić, L. Teachers’ Personality Traits and Students’ Motivation: Study of Social Outcomes in Serbia. J. Educ. Teach. 2022, 50, 45–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Braun, S.S.; Schonert-Reichl, K.A.; Roeser, R.W. Effects of Teachers’ Emotion Regulation, Burnout, and Life Satisfaction on Student Well-Being. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2020, 69, 101151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Olivier, E.; Archambault, I. Hyperactivity, Inattention, and Student Engagement: The Protective Role of Relationships with Teachers and Peers. Learn. Individ. Differ. 2017, 59, 86–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Yang, Y.; Li, G.; Su, Z.; Yuan, Y. Teacher’s Emotional Support and Math Performance: The Chain Mediating Effect of Academic Self-Efficacy and Math Behavioral Engagement. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 651608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Bandura, A. Self-Referent Thought: A Developmental Analysis of Self-Efficacy. In Social Cognitive Development: Frontiers and Possible Futures; Flavell, J.H., Ross, L., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1981; pp. 200–239. [Google Scholar]
  44. Bandura, A. Recycling Misconceptions of Perceived Self-Efficacy. Cogn. Ther. Res. 1984, 8, 231–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency. Am. Psychol. 1982, 37, 122–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Downes, P.E.; Crawford, E.R.; Seibert, S.E.; Campbell, E.M. Referents or Role Models? The Self-Efficacy and Job Performance Effects of Perceiving Higher Performing Peers. J. Appl. Psychol. 2021, 106, 422–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Hoang, T.; Wyatt, M. Exploring the Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Vietnamese Pre-Service Teachers of English as a Foreign Language. System 2021, 96, 102422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tschannen-Moran, M.; Woolfolk Hoy, A. Teacher Efficacy: Capturing an Elusive Construct. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2001, 17, 783–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mahmoodi, M.H.; Hosseiniyar, S.; Samoudi, N. EFL Teachers’ Classroom Management Orientation, Self-Efficacy, Burnout, and Students’ L2 Achievement. Profile Issues Teach. Prof. Dev. 2022, 24, 29–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Woodcock, S.; Sharma, U.; Subban, P.; Hitches, E. Teacher Self-Efficacy and Inclusive Education Practices: Rethinking Teachers’ Engagement with Inclusive Practices. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2022, 117, 103802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Opoku, M.P.; Nketsia, W.; Mohamed, A.H. The Self-Efficacy of Private School Teachers toward the Implementation of Inclusive Education in Ghana: A Mixed-Methods Study. Front. Educ. 2022, 7, 985123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Yada, A.; Tolvanen, A.; Savolainen, H. Teachers’ Attitudes and Self-Efficacy on Implementing Inclusive Education in Japan and Finland: A Comparative Study Using Multi-Group Structural Equation Modelling. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2018, 75, 343–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Moll Riquelme, I.; Bagur Pons, S.; Rosselló Ramon, M.R. Resilience: Conceptualization and Keys to Its Promotion in Educational Centers. Children 2022, 9, 1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Zhang, M. EFL/ESL Teacher’s Resilience, Academic Buoyancy, Care, and Their Impact on Students’ Engagement: A Theoretical Review. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 731859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Sisto, A.; Vicinanza, F.; Campanozzi, L.L.; Ricci, G.; Tartaglini, D.; Tambone, V. Towards a Transversal Definition of Psychological Resilience: A Literature Review. Medicina 2019, 55, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Zhang, H.; Tang, H.; Zhang, M.; Wang, F. Factors Influencing Students’ Attitudes toward Bullying: A Multilevel from Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taipei. Psychol. Sch. 2023, 60, 3787–3802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Russo-Netzer, P.; Moran, G. Positive Growth from Adversity and beyond: Insights Gained from Cross-Examination of Clinical and Nonclinical Samples. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 2018, 88, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Saavedra, E.; Villalta, M. Medición de Las Características Resilientes, Un Estudio Comparativo En Personas Entre 15 y 65 Años. LIBERABIT 2008, 14, 31–40. [Google Scholar]
  59. Ainsworth, S.; Oldfield, J. Quantifying Teacher Resilience: Context Matters. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2019, 82, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Denckla, C.A.; Cicchetti, D.; Kubzansky, L.D.; Seedat, S.; Teicher, M.H.; Williams, D.R.; Koenen, K.C. Psychological Resilience: An Update on Definitions, a Critical Appraisal, and Research Recommendations. Eur. J. Psychotraumatol. 2020, 11, 1822064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Forján, R.; Morelatto, G. Estudio Comparativo de Factores de Resiliencia En Docentes de Contextos Socialmente Vulnerables. Psicogente 2018, 21, 277–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zhang, S.; Luo, Y. Review on the Conceptual Framework of Teacher Resilience. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1179984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Pino Montoya, J.W.; Restrepo Segura, Y.C.; Tobón Gómez, L.A.; Arroyave Taborda, L.M. El Maestro Como Formador En Resiliencia Para La Primera Infancia: Un Aporte Desde La Escuela En La Construcción de Habilidades Sociales. Cult. Educ. Soc. 2020, 11, 55–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Xiang, X.P.; Wang, J.; Tian, G.X.; Ungar, M.; Han, L.L. Risk, Resilience, and Chinese Youth’s Psychosocial Adjustment: The Role of Social Services. J. Soc. Serv. Res. 2023, 49, 147–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Silveira, S.; Hecht, M.; Adli, M.; Voelkle, M.C.; Singer, T. Exploring the Structure and Interrelations of Time-Stable Psychological Resilience, Psychological Vulnerability, and Social Cohesion. Front. Psychiatry 2022, 13, 804763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Davis, A.; Martin-Cuellar, A.; Luce, H. Life Events and Prosocial Behaviors among Young Adults: Considering the Roles of Perspective Taking and Empathic Concern. J. Genet. Psychol. 2019, 180, 205–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Zhang, L. Reviewing the Effect of Teachers’ Resilience and Wellbeing on Their Foreign Language Teaching Enjoyment. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1187468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Admiraal, W.; Veldman, I.; Mainhard, T.; van Tartwijk, J. A Typology of Veteran Teachers’ Job Satisfaction: Their Relationships with Their Students and the Nature of Their Work. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 2019, 22, 337–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ellison, D.W.; Woods, A.M. Physical Education Teacher Resilience in High-Poverty School Environments. Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev. 2019, 25, 1110–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Gu, Q. (Re)conceptualising Teacher Resilience: A Social-Ecological Approach to Understanding Teachers’ Professional Worlds; Wosnitza, M., Peixoto, F., Beltman, S., Mansfield, C.F., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  71. Milatz, A.; Lüftenegger, M.; Schober, B. Teachers’ Relationship Closeness with Students as a Resource for Teacher Wellbeing: A Response Surface Analytical Approach. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Davis, A.N.; Clark, E.S.; Streit, C.; Kelly, R.J.; Lardier, D.T., Jr. The Buffering Role of Community Self-Efficacy in the Links between Family Economic Stress and Young Adults’ Prosocial Behaviors and Civic Engagement. J. Genet. Psychol. 2022, 183, 527–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Gómez Tabares, A.S. Prosocialidad. Estado Actual de La Investigación En Colombia. Rev. Colomb. Cienc. Soc. 2018, 10, 188–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Eisenberg, N.; Guthrie, I.K.; Cumberland, A.; Murphy, B.C.; Shepard, S.A.; Zhou, Q.; Carlo, G. Prosocial Development in Early Adulthood: A Longitudinal Study. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 82, 993–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Bandura, A.; Pastorelli, C.; Barbaranelli, C.; Caprara, G. Self-Efficacy Pathways to Childhood Depression. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1999, 76, 258–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Patrick, R.B.; Bodine, A.J.; Gibbs, J.C.; Basinger, K.S. What Accounts for Prosocial Behavior? Roles of Moral Identity, Moral Judgment, and Self-Efficacy Beliefs. J. Genet. Psychol. 2018, 179, 231–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Peak, R.M.; McGarty, C. HOPEFUL: Helping Others Promotes Engagement and Fulfillment. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 2024, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Romero-García, C.; Buzón-García, O.; Marcano, B. Socio-Emotional Competence and Self-Efficacy of Future Secondary School Teachers. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Sökmen, Y.; Sarikaya, İ. The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy between Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction of Primary School Teachers. Rev. Eur. Psychol. Appl. 2022, 72, 100779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Burić, I.; Macuka, I. Self-Efficacy, Emotions and Work Engagement among Teachers: A Two Wave Cross-Lagged Analysis. J. Happiness Stud. 2018, 19, 1917–1933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Tseng, F.C.; Kuo, F.Y. A Study of Social Participation and Knowledge Sharing in the Teachers’ Online Professional Community of Practice. Comput. Educ. 2014, 72, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Givens Rolland, R. Synthesizing the Evidence on Classroom Goal Structures in Middle and Secondary Schools: A Meta-Analysis and Narrative Review. Rev. Educ. Res. 2012, 82, 396–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Herman, K.C.; Prewitt, S.L.; Eddy, C.L.; Savale, A.; Reinke, W.M. Profiles of Middle School Teacher Stress and Coping: Concurrent and Prospective Correlates. J. Sch. Psychol. 2020, 78, 54–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Zee, M.; de Jong, P.F.; Koomen, H.M.Y. Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Relation to Individual Students with a Variety of Social-Emotional Behaviors: A Multilevel Investigation. J. Educ. Psychol. 2016, 108, 1013–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Klassen, R.M.; Perry, N.E.; Frenzel, A.C. Teachers’ Relatedness with Students: An Underemphasized Component of Teachers’ Basic Psychological Needs. J. Educ. Psychol. 2012, 104, 150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Kim, Y.K.; Sax, L.J. The Effects of Student–Faculty Interaction on Academic Self-Concept: Does Academic Major Matter? Res. High. Educ. 2014, 55, 780–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Micari, M.; Pazos, P. Connecting to the Professor: Impact of the Student–Faculty Relationship in a Highly Challenging Course. Coll. Teach. 2012, 60, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Zumbrunn, S.; McKim, C.; Buhs, E.; Hawley, L.R. Support, Belonging, Motivation, and Engagement in the College Classroom: A Mixed Method Study. Instr. Sci. 2014, 42, 661–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Granziera, H.; Perera, H.N. Relations among Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Engagement, and Work Satisfaction: A Social Cognitive View. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2019, 58, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Shu, K. Teachers’ Commitment and Self-Efficacy as Predictors of Work Engagement and Well-Being. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 850204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Hajovsky, D.B.; Chesnut, S.R.; Jensen, K.M. The Role of Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs in the Development of Teacher-Student Relationships. J. Sch. Psychol. 2020, 82, 141–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Wettstein, A.; Ramseier, E.; Scherzinger, M. Class- and Subject Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Emotional Stability and Students’ Perceptions of the Teacher–Student Relationship, Classroom Management, and Classroom Disruptions. BMC Psychol. 2021, 9, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zee, M.; de Jong, P.F.; Koomen, H.M.Y. From Externalizing Student Behavior to Student-Specific Teacher Self-Efficacy: The Role of Teacher-Perceived Conflict and Closeness in the Student–Teacher Relationship. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2017, 51, 37–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Lazarides, R.; Watt, H.M.G.; Richardson, P.W. Teachers’ Classroom Management Self-Efficacy, Perceived Classroom Management and Teaching Contexts from Beginning until Mid-Career. Learn. Instr. 2020, 69, 101346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. González Moreno, A.; Molero Jurado, M.d.M. Prosocial Behaviours and Resilience in School Coexistence: Implications of Creative Self-Efficacy and Stress in Adolescents. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Gratacós, G.; Mena, J.; Ciesielkiewicz, M. The Complexity Thinking Approach: Beginning Teacher Resilience and Perceived Self-Efficacy as Determining Variables in the Induction Phase. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2023, 46, 331–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Heng, Q.; Chu, L. Self-Efficacy, Reflection, and Resilience as Predictors of Work among English Teachers. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1160681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Yada, A.; Bjorn, P.M.; Savolainen, P.; Kyttala, M.; Aro, M.; Savolainen, H. Pre-Service Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Implementing Inclusive practices and Resilience in Finland. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2021, 105, 103398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. García-Álvarez, D.; Soler, M.J.; Cobo-Rendon, R.; Hernandez-Lalinde, J. Teacher Professional Development, Character Education, and Well-Being: Multicomponent Intervention Based on Positive Psychology. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Akdag, B.; Ege, D.; Goksuluk, D.; Ipekten, F.; Erdogan, A.; Onder, A. The Parental COVID-19 Anxiety and Emotional Exhaustion in Healthcare: Exploring the Roles of Resilience, Prosocialness, and Optimism. Curr. Psychol. 2023, 42, 20042–20051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Bandura, A. On the Functional Properties of Perceived Self-Efficacy Revisited. J. Manag. 2011, 38, 9–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Cirimele, F.; Pastorelli, C.; Favini, A.; Remondi, C.; Zuffiano, A.; Basili, E.; Thartori, E.; Gerbino, M.; Gregori, F. Facing the Pandemic in Italy: Personality Profiles and Their Associations with Adaptive and Maladaptive Outcomes. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 805740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Scheaffer, R.; Mendenhall, W.; Ott, R.L. Elementos de Muestreo; Grupo Editorial Iberoamérica: Mexico City, México, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  104. Gálvez-Nieto, J.L.; Salvo-Garrido, S.; Domínguez-Lara, S.; Polanco-Levicán, K.; Mieres-Chacaltana, M. Psychometric Properties of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale in a Sample of Chilean Public School Teachers. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1272548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Salvo-Garrido, S.; Polanco-Levicán, K.; Dominguez-Lara, S.; Mieres-Chacaltana, M.; Gálvez-Nieto, J.L. Psychometric Properties of the SV-RES60 Resilience Scale in a Sample of Chilean Elementary School Teachers. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Mieres-Chacaltana, M.; Salvo-Garrido, S.; Denegri-Coria, M. Evaluación de La Escala de Prosocialidad de Caprara, Steca, Zelli y Capanna En Estudiantes Universitarios Chilenos. Rev. Iberoam. Diagnóstico Evaluación Avaliação Psicol. 2020, 56, 21–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Finney, S.; DiStefano, C. Nonnormal and Categorical Data in Structural Equation Models. In A Second Course in Structural Equation Modeling; Hancock, G.R., Mueller, R.O., Eds.; Information Age: Charlotte, NC, USA, 2013; pp. 339–342. [Google Scholar]
  108. Satorra, A.; Bentler, P.M. Corrections to Test Statistics and Standard Errors in Covariance Structure Analysis. In Latent Variables Analysis: Applications for Developmental Research; von Eye, A., Clogg, C.C., Eds.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994; pp. 399–419. [Google Scholar]
  109. Bagheri, A.; Saadati, M. Generalized Structural Equations Approach in the of Elderly Self-Rated Health. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 1863, 012041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Bovaird, J.A.; Koziol, N.A. Measurement Models for Ordered-Categorical Indicators. In Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling; Hoyle, R.H., Ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 495–511. [Google Scholar]
  111. Li, C.H. Confirmatory Factor Analysis with Ordinal Data: Comparing Robust Maximum Likelihood and Diagonally Weighted Least Squares. Behav. Res. Methods 2016, 48, 936–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Li, C.H. The Performance of MLR, USLMV, and WLSMV Estimation in Structural Regression Models with Ordinal Variables. Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  113. Schumacher, R.; Lomax, R. A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: New Jersey, NJ, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  114. Gouveia, V.V.; de Moura, H.M.; Santos, L.C.d.O.; Mesquita do Nascimento, A.; De Oliveira Guedes, I.; Veloso Gouveia, R.S. Escala de Autorrelato de Trapaça-Admissão: Evidências de Validade Fatorial e Precisão. Rev. Colomb. Psicol. 2018, 27, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Dueber, D.M. Bifactor Indices Calculator: A Microsoft Excel-Based Tool to Calculate Various Indices Relevant to Bifactor CFA Models. Available online: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/edp_tools/1/ (accessed on 9 September 2021).
  116. Miranda-Zapata, E.; Lara, L.; Navarro, J.J.; Saracostti, M.; de-Toro, X. Modeling the Effect of School Engagement on Attendance to Classes and School Performance. Rev. Psicodidact. 2018, 23, 102–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Muthén, L.K.; Muthén, B.O. Mplus User’s Guide, 8th ed.; Muthén & Muthén: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  118. Chesak, S.S.; Khalsa, T.K.; Bhagra, A.; Jenkins, S.M.; Bauer, B.A.; Sood, A. Stress Management and Resiliency Training for Public School Teachers and Staff: A Novel Intervention to Enhance Resilience and Positively Impact Student Interactions. Complement. Ther. Clin. Pract. 2019, 37, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Neumann, M.M.; Tillott, S. Why Should Teachers Cultivate Resilience through Mindfulness? J. Psychol. Couns. Sch. 2022, 32, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Ferreira, M.; Reis-Jorge, J.; Olcina, G.; Fernandes, R. El Aprendizaje Socioemocional En La Educación Primaria: Una Investigación Sobre Las Concepciones y Las Prácticas de Los Maestros En El Aula. Rev. Colomb. Educ. 2023, 87, 37–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Cook, C.R.; Miller, F.G.; Fiat, A.; Renshaw, T.; Frye, M.; Joseph, G.; Decano, P. Promoting Secondary Teachers’ Well-Being and Intentions to Implement Evidence-Based Practices: Randomized Evaluation of the Achiever Resilience Curriculum. Psychol. Sch. 2017, 54, 13–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Behavsci 14 00678 g001
Figure 1. Theoretical and adjusted model of the impact of self-efficacy and resilience on prosocial behavior.
Figure 1. Theoretical and adjusted model of the impact of self-efficacy and resilience on prosocial behavior.
Behavsci 14 00678 g001
Table 1. Descriptive statistics based on items by scale.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics based on items by scale.
Mean ItensSDg1g2
ScaleMinMaxTotalMinMaxTotalMinMaxMinMax
Self-Efficacy 3.784.344.070.760.960.84−0.36−0.92−0.03−0.57
Resilience3.994.654.410.71.050.81−1.01−2.810.639.61
Prosocial behavior3.294.714.160.71.160.88−0.17−1.75−0.03−3.3
Notes. Standard deviation (SD), skewness (g1), kurtosis (g2).
Table 2. Standardized factor loadings of observed variables on latent constructs.
Table 2. Standardized factor loadings of observed variables on latent constructs.
Scale[0.570–0.697][0.710–0.798][0.801–0.898]Total
Self-Efficacy 42024
Resilience9242760
Prosocial behavior39416
Total123751100
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Salvo-Garrido, S.; Polanco-Levicán, K.; Dominguez-Lara, S.; Mieres-Chacaltana, M.; Gálvez-Nieto, J.L. Relationships between Resilience and Self-Efficacy in the Prosocial Behavior of Chilean Elementary School Teachers. Behav. Sci. 2024, 14, 678. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14080678

AMA Style

Salvo-Garrido S, Polanco-Levicán K, Dominguez-Lara S, Mieres-Chacaltana M, Gálvez-Nieto JL. Relationships between Resilience and Self-Efficacy in the Prosocial Behavior of Chilean Elementary School Teachers. Behavioral Sciences. 2024; 14(8):678. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14080678

Chicago/Turabian Style

Salvo-Garrido, Sonia, Karina Polanco-Levicán, Sergio Dominguez-Lara, Manuel Mieres-Chacaltana, and José Luis Gálvez-Nieto. 2024. "Relationships between Resilience and Self-Efficacy in the Prosocial Behavior of Chilean Elementary School Teachers" Behavioral Sciences 14, no. 8: 678. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14080678

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop