Microsoft Word - 11-Surana (1)d www.jsser.org Journal of Social Studies Education Research SosyalBilgilerEğitimiAraştırmalarıDergisi 2021:12 (2),260-279 Teacher Self-and Collective Efficacy in Teaching Javanese: A Study of Indonesian Urban and Suburban Teachers Surana1 Abstract This study aimed to reveal Indonesian urban and suburban teachers’ self- and collective efficacy in teaching Javanese, to look at the difference between them, and to know the possible influential factor in predicting their self- and collective efficacy. This quantitative research used cross- sectional survey with 200 teachers who taught Javanese in urban and suburban high school level in East Java Province, Indonesia, as the research respondents. Data were collected using Javanese Teacher’s Efficacy Scale with six-point Likert’s scaling method (α = .97). The obtained data were analyzed using descriptive statistics analysis, MANOVA, and hierarchical multiple regression. Results showed that Indonesian teacher self- and collective efficacy in teaching Javanese were in a high category, of 72.74% and 72.19% respectively. Moreover, there was a significant with large difference between urban and suburban TSE and CTE. In this case, urban teachers perceived higher TSE and CTE than suburban teachers. Another finding showed that teaching motivation was the most significant predictive source that affected the formation of high TSE (β = .241) and CTE (β = .247). Keywords: Teacher self-efficacy, teacher collective efficacy, urban, suburban, Javanese teaching Introduction Among other factors, teacher’s quality becomes a prominent aspect in establishing a well- accredited educational institution. This is due to the fact that the aspect also participates in determining school’s performance, students’ achievement, and social trustworthiness. In 2009, Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) indicated that teacher’s function is more than to transfer knowledge, rather, it engages multilayers of cultural backgrounds, develops suitable students’ learning needs, promotes informative and technological awareness, considers proper learning strategy, and deals with parent involvement (Organization for Economic Co- operation and Development, 2009). In America, teachers are obligatory to promote leadership skills besides transferring knowledge and enabling students to master required competences. Moreover, they cannot resist pockets of professional development as mandates issued in the recent American education policy (Jaquith, Mindich, Wei & Darling-Hammond, 2010; Lucey, 2021). 1Dr. Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Indonesia; Email: surana@unesa.ac.id Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 That is, the presence of teachers has been considered crucial and meaningful since it deals with diverse scopes that include both their professional and institutional developments. In coping with European context, Toom & Husu (2016) describe varied Finnish teachers’ roles as well as their tasks in dealing with administrative and pedagogical decision-making processes, developing individual and institutional professionalism, and managing institutions by high- respected collaborative works among stakeholders in charge, i.e. the Principal, administration officers and other teachers. To contrast with American and Finnish teachers’ roles, Indonesian teachers are asked to deal with some predominant mandates. First, it deals with numbers of professional developments, i.e. the presence of teachers’ qualification test, demands of conferences or workshops and publications (Indonesia Ministerial Regulation Number 35 Year 2010), and teachers’ certification. Another mandates put Indonesian teachers in interlinked works dealing with school administration, colleague, and personal responsibility related to any matters of pedagogical problems (Zulfikar, 2009; Ma'arif, 2018). Thus, by seeing the diverse lenses of teacher’s roles in different settings, it can be concluded that teachers indeed play a salient figure in succeeding school’s goals (Agostinelli & McQuillan, 2020; Gairola, 2019; Idowu et al., 2020; Lee & Lee, 2020; Moody, 2020; Shrestha, 2019; Waychunas, 2020). At the heart of the issue of teacher’s presence, it is also important to consider kinds of threat possibly faced that may hamper teachers in performing their roles. A school location could become a special challenge for teachers, yet the Government Education Office in approaching with budgeting allocation, rapid distribution, monitoring, and other infrastructure supports (Liaw, 2017). Henceforth, it is indeed important to see teachers’ challenge by disseminating their school locations; urban schools or those in metropolitan areas (OECD, 2013), and suburban ones or those in suburbs (Tefera, Frankenberg, Siegel-Hawley & Chirichigno, 2011), where the criteria of metropolitan areas refer to Indonesian Law Number 26 Year 2007 about Spatial Planning. As unequivocal differences, teachers of urban schools may get easier access to fulfil their roles, involving the vast accessibility of information and technology (IT), learning aids, and community development (Liaw, 2017; Goddard & Goddard, 2001; OECD, 2013; Tahili et al., 2021). Conversely, those in suburban ones may face difficulties in multifarious problems, such as transportation, IT access, authentic materials, appropriate learning sources and many more (Liaw, 2017). Thus, working in either urban or suburban schools could be another outside factor interfering how well teachers perform (Solikhah & Budiharso, 2019). Surana 262 To provide with practical evidences related to the unequivocal distinction between urban and suburban schools in Indonesia, there were only 5.5% from 268,734 total schools which were categorized as urban schools (Indonesia Ministry of Education and Culture, 2016; Indonesia Ministry of Education and Culture, 2017; Indonesia Ministry of Home Affairs, 2015). On the contrary, 94.5% of them, or about 253,873 schools, were categorized in suburban (Indonesia Ministry of Education and Culture, 2016; Indonesia Ministry of Education and Culture, 2017; Indonesia Ministry of Home Affairs, 2015). The data basically shows that the numbers of suburban teachers are distinctly higher than those in urban ones. Consequently, there are still numbers of Indonesian teachers who deal with multifarious problems mentioned by Liaw (2017). That is, it is important to see the spread of schools and numbers of teachers in both urban and suburban settings to get distinctive teachers’ roles as well as their challenges in order for them to perform better. Regarding hard and diverse roles and challenges, yet in coping with effort to overcome them, teachers need to possess good efficacy, of which further is known as teacher self-efficacy (TSE). At glance, Bandura (1977) explains that perceived self-efficacy means one’s belief in carrying particular tasks out to achieve the best outcome, by that, TSE can be meant as teacher’s beliefs in executing courses of action to enable their students to get the best achievement (Gibson & Dembo, 1984; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). TSE is much to do with teacher’s self-ability rather than the teacher’s actual level of competence (Bandura, 2006; Tschannen-Moran, Hoy & Hoy, 1998; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010). It is “an important distinction, because people regularly overestimate or underestimate their actual abilities, and these estimations may have consequences for the courses of action they choose to pursue” (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy & Hoy, 1998:211). Moreover, its domains diverse across various activity settings, levels of demands within the activity settings, and environmental settings to enable performances (Bandura, 1977). That is, good TSE contributes an important point in dealing with teachers’ roles and challenges, involving on determining the results of their performance. In addition, another type of teacher efficacy that also takes part in influencing teacher roles and challenges is so-called collective teacher efficacy (CTE). This type has occurred since more than a decade due to the wider growth of TSE up to engaging a faculty scope dealing with other stakeholders at school and self-belonging to the institution (Goddard & Goddard, 2001; Klassen, 2010; Kurz & Knight, 2004; Parker, 1994; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007; Tschannen-Moran & Barr, 2004; Versland & Erickson, 2017; Voelkel & Chrispeels, 2017). Donohoo (2017) defines CTE as Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 both perceptions and judgments addressed to a group of teachers or educational instructors based on their capabilities to enhance student performance. Since many studies have verified that CTE is interlinked with student achievement (Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2000; Tschannen-Moran & Barr, 2004), it seems also being interfered by variations of teacher self-efficacy (TSE) which contributes to the successful negotiation in a conjoint share to carry on courses of action (Bandura, 1997 in Tschannen-Moran, Hoy & Hoy, 1998; Zonoubi, Rasekh, &Tavakoli, 2017; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007; Kurz & Knight, 2004; Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2000; Goddard & Goddard, 2001; Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2004). Henceforth, good CTE also yields better results in accomplishing teacher roles and challenges. Assuming both TSE and CTE are prominent at the issue of teachers performing their roles and facing challenges (Kurz & Knight, 2004; Pratama et al, 2018), there must be factors affecting the success level of TSE and CTE. To cope with that, there are two models generated from Bandura (1977) namely TSE cyclical model (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy & Hoy, 1998) and CTE cyclical model (Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2000) that mostly reveals the sources of information of both types of efficacy. The two models basically exhibit similar four factors namely mastery experience, vicarious experience, social persuasion, and emotional state (Bandura, 1977; Bandura, 1986; Tschannen-Moran, Hoy & Hoy, 1998). The difference of the two models lays on the referent used in the instruments; self-referent mode for TSE and group-referent for CTE (Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2004). A self-referent mode is usually known as “I-referent” model that makes personal efficacy inside out (Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2004). Meanwhile, “We-referent” model is used in CTE to reveal how an individual gives an attempt to organizational works for the sake of a conjoint share (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy & Hoy, 1998; Goddard, Hoy & Hoy, 2004). Thus, the two models indeed very helpful in determining the level of TSE and CTE. Unfortunately, in coping with Javanese language teaching in Indonesia, there are still lacks of information in accordance with Indonesian teacher self- and collective efficacy in teaching Javanese. Such information is vital since Javanese teachers should not only cope with Javanese instruction planning, but they are also demanded to deal with school administration, many extracurricular responsibilities, and even foreign language mastery. The unavailable information raise difficulty for those in charge of providing professional developments (e.g. seminar, training, and workshop) as they do not know how efficacious Indonesian Javanese teachers deal with their responsibilities (Solikhah & Budiharso, 2019). Thus, providing the profiles of Indonesian TSE and Surana 264 CTE in Javanese teaching is essential to enhance their personal and institutional developments. Even there are some previous studies investigating on TSE and CTE (Hallinger, Hosseingholizadeh & Kouhsari, 2017; Voelker & Chrispeels, 2017), but mostly they could not provide information of TSE and CTE in Javanese teaching in urban and suburban settings. For instance, Basikin (2006) investigated TSE in Indonesian ESL context, of which it is different research scope. Moreover, Sugiana & Former (2015) and Lailiyah & Cahyono (2017) deal with TSE only in an Early Childhood Education field and in using technology which are extraneous to Javanese teaching context. The information given by some current scholars regarding TSE and CTE in Javanese teaching, specifically in Indonesia urban and suburban schools, are still limited (Ma’arif, 2021). Therefore, this study aims to reveal Indonesian urban and suburban teachers’ self- and collective efficacy in teaching Javanese. Methods The present study was in a form of cross-sectional survey research that aims to measure a wide range of varieties of unobservable data such as self- and collective efficacy (Battacherjee, 2012). There were 200 teachers who voluntarily participated as the research respondents representing both urban and suburban schools in East Java Province. The respondents were selected without considering their teaching experience, school status, and also the grade they taught since those aspects were extraneous to the present study focus. However, the information regarding their ages, teaching experience, genders, school’s accreditation status, and school types (e.g. public or private schools) were important in portraying the demographic data. (Table 1). Data were collected using Javanese Teacher’s Efficacy Scale (JTES) in which its content and face validities along with the reliability test had been carried out during the primary research (α = .97). To get the data, the questionnaire was administered through online (N = 167) and offline (N = 33) forms. JTES has 7 items consisting of 30 items revealing five sub-skills of efficacy namely Efficacy to accomplish teaching responsibilities, Efficacy to do student advisory, Efficacy to use Javanese for classroom communication, Efficacy to create Javanese milieu, and Efficacy to accomplish institutional tasks and 7 items revealing seven possible factors influencing the shape of TSE and CTE in Javanese teaching namely mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, emotional state, personality characteristics, perceived IT competency, and teaching motivation. The questionnaire was in a form of closed-ended format with six-point Likert’s Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 summative scaling method from strongly disagree to strongly agree without anchors to reduce scaling confusion. There was no neutral option because participants might have a tendency to choose being neutral when they were unwilling to finish the questionnaire. The obtained data were then analyzed using SPSS software under the process of descriptive statistics, MANOVA, and hierarchical multiple regression. Table 1 Demographic Data of the Respondents Information School Location Categories Percentage (%) Gender Urban Male teachers Female teachers 39% 61% Suburban Male teachers Female teachers 38.9% 61.1% Education Degree Urban Undergraduate Master 87.6% 12.4% Suburban Undergraduate Master 97.9% 2.1% University Status Urban Public University Private University 89.5% 10.5% Suburban Public University Private University 85.3% 14.7% Teaching Experience Urban Less than 5 years 5 to 10 years 10 to 20 years More than 20 years 41.9% 20% 19.1% 19% Suburban Less than 5 years 5 to 10 years 10 to 20 years More than 20 years 34.7% 30.6% 17.9% 16.8% School Accreditation Urban A B Others 88.6% 6.6% 4.8% Suburban A B C Others 70.5% 19% 1% 9.5% School Status Urban Public School Private School 55.2% 44.8% Suburban Public School Private School 55.8% 44.2% Surana 266 Results and Discussion Classic Assumption Results In this research, there are 2 types of data processing used, namely Manova and Hierarchical Multiple Regression, so that the researcher grouped 2 types of classical assumptions. In the classical Manova assumption test, the normality test uses the mahalanobis distance test and the homogeneity test uses the Box's M test. In the classical Hierarchical Multiple Regression assumption test, the normality test uses the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the multicollinearity test uses the VIF test, and the heteroscedasticity test uses the Glejser test. See table 2. Table 2 Classic Assumption Results Classic Assumption Type Value Label Manova Normality test Mahalanobis distance test 9.676 Fulfilled Homogeneity test Box's M test All sig > 0.05 Fulfilled Hierarchical Multiple Regression Normality test Kolmogorov-smirnov All sig. > 0.05 Fulfilled Multicollinearity test VIF All < 10 Fulfilled Heteroscedastisity test Glejser Test All sig > 0.05 Fulfilled Preliminary assumption was first conducted to check for multivariate normality and homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices, and equality of variance. This study conducted multivariate normality test using Mahalanobis distance. This study suggested that the data were normal and no multivariate outliers because the Mahalanobis distance value (9.676) was smaller than the critical value applied for two dependent variables (13.82). Based on the homogeneity test, it is known that the results of the Box's M test show that if all significance values are above 0.05, it can be said that the data is homogeneous. The results of the classical assumption test for Hierarchical Multiple Regression note that all the Kolmogorov-Smirnov significance values are above 0.05 or the normality test is fulfilled, the multicollinearity test shows that all VIF values for each independent variable are below 10 so it can be said that there is no multicollinearity or multicollinearity test. Fulfilled, and the heteroscedasticity test using the Glejser test, it is known that all significant results of the absolute regression residuals have no value below 0.05, so it can be said that the heteroscedasticity test is fulfilled. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 Descriptive Statistic Test Results The Profiles of Indonesian Teacher Self- and Collective Efficacy in Teaching Javanese Before portraying the profiles, the obtained mean scores were needed to be transferred into Swanson’s leveling method to look at the exact efficacy level. Both TSE and CTE are measured based on five indicators as follows: 1). Efficacy to accomplish teaching responsibilities 2). Efficacy to do student advisory 3). Efficacy to use Javanese for classroom communication 4). Efficacy to create Javanese milieu 5). Efficacy to accomplish institutional task Each mean score of TSE, CTE, and every sub-skill was divided by the maximum TSE, CTE, and sub-skill scores and the results were multiplied with 100% to get Swanson’s percentages that consisted of three different categories namely very low ( < 25%), low (25%-50%), high (50%- 75%), and very high ( > 75%). Diagram 1 and diagram 2 show the results of the profiles of TSE and CTE, including each sub-skill followed of urban teacher and sub-urban teachers. Diagram 1. TSE of Urban Teacher (N=100) Diagram 2 indicates TSE of suburban teachers. Data show that Indonesian teacher self- and collective efficacy were in a high category based on Swanson’s leveling method. There were several differences in the efficacy sub-skills portrayed by TSE and CTE. For instance, efficacy to do student advisory showed high level in TSE (74.89%)and depicted very high level in CTE (76.21%), of which the difference was only 2%. This means that teachers were more confident to conduct student advisory when they committed to work with their colleagues at Surana 268 the faculty level. Another interesting finding was that efficacy to accomplish institutional task was in a very high level for TSE (76.89%), whereas, was in a high level for CTE (66.97%) with the difference of 10%. Diagram 2. TSE of Suburban Teacher (N=100) Furthermore, the teachers conveyed good self-beliefs especially in accomplishing teaching responsibilities, performing student advisory, using Javanese for classroom communication, creating Javanese milieu, and accomplishing institutional task. Their belief was indeed very high in accomplishing their teaching responsibilities regardless coping with personal or collective matters. Diagram 3. CTE of Urban Teacher (N=100) In diagram 3, we look at the CTE of urban teachers. It displays that the CTE is achieved as the following: Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 1). Efficacy to accomplish teaching responsibilities (88.26%) 2). Efficacy to do student advisory (87.83%) 3). Efficacy to use Javanese for classroom communication (73.69%) 4). Efficacy to create Javanese milieu (73.16%) 5). Efficacy to accomplish institutional task (72.80%). Compared to sub-urban teachers, CTE of urban teachers is better. As indicated in diagram 4, the following is the display of CTE of the sub-urban teachers. 1). Efficacy to accomplish teaching responsibilities (77.27%) 2). Efficacy to do student advisory (78.60%) 3). Efficacy to use Javanese for classroom communication (67.61%) 4). Efficacy to create Javanese milieu (65.07%) 5). Efficacy to accomplish institutional task (66.36%). Diagram 4. CTE of Sub-urban teacher (N=100) Results of comparison of skills and sub-skills as well as competence indicators appear in table 3 below. Table 3 Sub-skills in teaching Javanese No Sub-skills Urban Sub-Urban Average Average 1 Sub-skill 1: Accomplishing teaching responsibilities 95% 90% 2 Sub-skill 2: Conducting student advisory 88% 80% 3 Sub-skill 3: Using Javanese for Classroom Communication 92% 88% 4 Sub-skill 4: Creating Javanese Milieu 90% 90% 5 Sub-skill 5: Accomplishing institutional task 95% 90% Total 460 438 Mean 92% 87.6% Surana 270 As table 3 suggests, of five sub-skills Javanese teachers required, urban teachers surpass than sub- urban teachers. The average achievement of urban teachers is 92% and the sub-urban teachers are 87.6%. The elaboration of sub-skill competence is indicated in table 4. The indicators present 10 competences each of which represents the skills in caring Javanese during teaching and in social interaction with students. Data on table 4 shows that the average competence of urban teachers is 90.2% that is very high, and the sub-urban teacher achieve 87.8% (high). This means that urban teachers are better than sub-urban teachers both on accomplishment of 5 skills competence and in its 10 indicators of teaching performance. Table 4 Competence to accomplish teaching Javanese of urban and sub-urban teachers No Indicators of sub-skills Urban Sub-Urban Average Average 1 Personal characteristics 92% 90% 2 Perceived IT competency 90% 88% 3 Teaching motivation 95% 90% 4 Awareness to use media 88% 80% 5 Perceived IT competency 85% 80% 6 Awareness to serve personal guidance 90% 90% 7 Mastery experience 90%% 92% 8 Vicarious experience 90% 90% 9 Verbal persuasion 95% 90% 10 Emotional state 87% 88% Total 902 878 Mean 90.2% 87.8% Hypothesis Testing The Difference between Indonesian Urban and Suburban Teacher Self-and Collective Efficacy in Teaching Javanese Henceforth, this study could proceed to conduct MANOVA analysis. The analysis results showed that there was a significant difference between urban and suburban teachers on the administered dependent variables named TSE and CTE, F (1, 197) = 77.275, p = .000; Pillai’s Trace = .000; ηp2 = .440. Since the partial eta squared showed .440, there was a large difference (Pallant, 2010:210). Meaning that, the urban teachers showed higher confident in accomplishing teaching responsibilities than the suburban teachers. When the results for the dependent variables were considered separately, both TSE, F (1, 198) = 147.874, p = .000, ηp2 = .428, and CTE, F (1, 198) Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 = 148.745, p =.000, ηp2= .429, contributed to reach statistical difference, using Benferonni adjusted α value of .025. Further inspection of the mean scores indicated that urban teachers perceived higher TSE (M = 75.048, SD = 9.163) than suburban teachers (M = 54.88, SD = 14.01). Moreover, urban teachers also perceived higher CTE (M = 74.98, SD = 9.07) than suburban teachers (M= 53.91, SD = 14.918). In regard to Swanson’s level, urban teacher self- and collective efficacy was in the highest quartile, or known as a very high efficacy level, with percentage values of 83.38% and 83.30% respectively. However, the suburban teachers were in the third quartile known as a high efficacy level with percentage values of 60.97% for TSE and 59.89% for CTE. The statistical data of the mean scores also proved that urban teachers showed higher TSE and CTE in teaching Javanese. In other words, they had better self- and collective belief regarding to accomplishing their responsibilities. The Predictive Sources of Information in Affecting Indonesian Teacher Self- and Collective Efficacy in Teaching Javanese In accordance with Table 5, teaching motivation became the most predictive source of information in affecting the teacher self-efficacy (β = .241). It also became the most predictive source of information for TSE eventhough the four Bandura’s (1997) sources of information had been included as a control. Similar phenomena occurred in the administered five TSE sub-skills in which teaching motivation became the most predictive source (βsub-skill 1 = .205, βsub-skill 2 = .204, βsub-skill 3 = .256, βsub-skill 4 = .225, βsub-skill 5 = .236). Moreover, the source showed significance for sub-skill 3 and 5 (p < .005). Another important result was the fact that mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and emotional state only conveyed small contributions of 1.7% to the formation of Indonesian Javanese teacher self-efficacy. Meaning, eventhough the inspection was conducted for each TSE sub-skill, the four Bandura’s source of information still did not show significant changes to predict the formation of TSE. At last, Table 5 implies that teaching motivation became the most predictive source of information, then respectively followed by perceived IT competency, emotional state, personal characteristics, vicarious experience, mastery experience, and verbal persuasion. Surana 272 Table 5 Results of Hierarchical Multiple Regression for TSE Dependent Variables Model R2 Change Statistics Β ΔR2 F Change Accomplishing teaching responsibilities (Sub-skill 1) 1 - Personal characteristics - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation 2 - Personal characteristics - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation - Mastery experience - Vicarious experience - Verbal persuasion - Emotional state .172 .193 .172 .021 13.571* 1.235 .166 .096 .225 .190 .101 .205 .065 -.085 .023 -.132 Conducting student advisory (Sub-skill 2) 1 - Personal characteristics - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation 2 - Personal characteristics - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation - Mastery experience - Vicarious experience - Verbal persuasion - Emotional state .147 .160 .147 .013 11.247* .750 .071 .135 .236 .074 .123 .204 .071 -.054 .057 -.098 Using Javanese for Classroom Communication (Sub-skill 3) 1 - Personal characteristics - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation 2 - Personal characteristics - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation - Mastery experience - Vicarious experience - Verbal persuasion - Emotional state .180 .201 .180 .021 14.331* 1.255 .037 .171 .273 .068 .183 .256* .087 -.113 .005 -.117 Creating Javanese Milieu (Sub-skill 4) 1 - Personal characteristics - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation 2 - Personal characteristics .125 .135 .125 .011 9.308 .584 .015 .141 .240 .037 Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 Dependent Variables Model R2 Change Statistics Β ΔR2 F Change - Perceived IT competency - Teaching motivation - Mastery experience - Vicarious experience .152 .225 .074 -.110 In coping with the first question related to the profiles of Javanese teacher self- and collective efficacy, the findings suggest that Javanese teachers in Indonesia have already perceived high TSE and CTE. Meaning that, they are confidently able to accomplish their teaching responsibilities. Skaalvik & Skaalvik (2017) confirm that teachers with high level of self-belief will see the responsibilities as challenges, not as fear arousals. By interconnecting the assertion with the findings here, Indonesian Javanese teachers are supposed to get every single job done because they see the tasks as challenges, not as threats. Kurz & Knight (2004) convey that teachers with high TSE and CTE might perceive a positive mindset and motivation in regard to achieving a better accomplishment or performance (Kurz & Knight, 2004). Efficacy and motivation cannot be separated due to the tight bond between them (Dybowski, Sehner & Harendza, 2017; Jungert, 2009); the higher one’s motivation, the higher the efficacy. Accordingly, if teachers with high TSE and CTE are put in a particular circumstance of a working suppression, they could feel motivated and confident to complete the works regardless the task types assigned. Therefore, high TSE and CTE always benefit Indonesian Javanese teachers in dealing with Javanese teaching responsibility. Furthermore, the findings of the present study show that there is a significant with large difference between urban and suburban teacher self- and collective efficacy. The difference of teacher efficacy level can be caused by the condition of the school areas. For instance, urban schools are located in the city center with all accessible supporting facilities such as private courses, extracurricular communities, and vice versa (Goddard & Goddard, 2001; OECD, 2013). Moreover, the teachers who teach urban students tend to have a high demand given by parents to provide better learning experience (ACDP, 2014). Consequently, the teachers are obligatory to provide more innovative learning process and more conducive learning atmosphere compared to those of suburban (Kaikai & Barker, 2016). In addition, the societies surrounding the school might have certain influence how the school determines regulation for the whole members, including but not limited to their teachers. In other words, there is a social influence affecting the formation of Surana 274 teacher efficacy (Yulia, 2013). Therefore, those factors might be considered influential in determining the level of teacher efficacy, i.e. TSE and CTE. At last, there are seven sources of information used in the present study; mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, emotional state, personality characteristics, perceived IT competence, teaching motivation (Gibson & Dembo, 1984; Bandura, 2006; Bandura, 1997; Johnson, 2017; Oh, 2011; Lailiyah & Cahyono, 2017). Among others, teaching motivation becomes the most predictive source in affecting Indonesian teacher self- and collective efficacy in Javanese teaching. The findings suggest that teacher’s teaching motivation most influences the level of teacher efficacy; the higher their teaching motivation, the higher the efficacy. Dybowski et al (2017) convey that motivation and efficacy are both interconnected yet influential between one another. Higher teaching motivation triggers teacher’s confidence and belief in executing all responsibilities so that the teacher could attain better teaching performance. Conclusion This study concludes that Indonesian teacher self- and collective efficacy in teaching Javanese are considered high to slightly very high. There is a significantly large different between TSE and CTE perceived by urban and suburban teachers. Besides, their high efficacy level is conceived as they perceive high teaching motivation as one of their main responsibilities. Such findings could be the fact that Javanese teachers are still motivated to teach and promote Javanese even if their students are comprised into the hype of mastering international language. Moreover, even if burden of mastering foreign language is also addressed to Javanese teachers for the sake of professional development, these teachers seemed to face that as challenges, not as threats. This present study has portrayed that Javanese teachers still fight for preserving the local languages as well as conducting their professional duties. Thus, this study suggest that the results of this study might become a concern for those in charge in creating teacher training program to develop appropriate development program for Javanese teachers. Moreover, this study invites further research to look for the efficacy level of teachers who teach native languages in different regions. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 References Agostinelli, A., & McQuillan, P. (2020). How Preservice Content Teacher Background Qualities Influence Their Attitude and Commitment to Supporting Multilingual Learners. Journal of Curriculum Studies Research, 2(2), 98-121. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcsr.2020.12 Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership (ACDP). (2014). Study on Teacher Absenteeism in Indonesia. Jakarta: Education Sector ACDP. Bandura, A. & Adams, N. E. (1977). Analysis of Self-Efficacy Theory of Behavioral Change. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1(4), 287-310. Bandura, A. (1971). Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. Bandura, A. (1986a). Social Foundation of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bandura, A. (1986b). The Explanatory and Predictive Scope of Self-Efficacy Theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359-373. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and Functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-Efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran, Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: WH Freeman and Company. Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for Constructing Self-Efficacy Scales. In F. Pajares& T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents (pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., Hardy, A. B., & Howells, G. N. (1980). Test of the Generality of Self- Efficacy Theory. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4(1), 39-66. Basikin. (2006). Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs and the Development of ESL Autonomous Teachers in Indonesia. Presented Paper in the TEFLIN Conference, Satyawacana University, Salatiga. Battacherjee, A. (2012). Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices, 2nd edition. Open Access Textbooks. Book 3. Surana 276 Donohoo, J. (2017). Collective Teacher Efficacy Research: Implications for Professional Learning. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 2(2). Gairola, R. (2019). Attitudes of secondary teacher trainees towards entrepreneurial education. Research in Educational Policy and Management, 1(1), 44-54. https://doi.org/10.46303/repam.01.01.4 Gibson, S. & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher Efficacy: A Construct Validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569-582. Goddard, R. D. (1998). The Effects of Collective Teacher Efficacy on Student Achievement in Urban Public Elementary Schools (Doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University). Goddard, R. D., & Goddard, Y. L. (2001). A Multilevel Analysis of the Relationship between Teacher and Collective Efficacy in Urban Schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 807-818. Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning, Measure, and Impact on Student Achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479-507. Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, W. (2004). Collective Efficacy Beliefs: Theoretical Developments, Empirical Evidence, and Future Directions. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 3-13. Hallinger, P., Hosseingholizadeh, R., Hashemi, N., &Kouhsari, M. (2017). Do Beliefs Make a Difference? Exploring How Principal Self-Efficacy and Instructional Leadership Impact Teacher Efficacy and Commitment in Iran. Educational Management Administration & Leadership (EMAL), 1-20. Idowu, S., Ifedayo, T., & Idowu, E. (2020). Assessing the Career Conflict Options of Senior Secondary School Students of Ado-Odo Ota Local Government, Ogun State, Nigeria. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 5(3), 55-77. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.03.3 Indonesia Ministry of Education and Culture. (2016). Indonesia Educational Strategies in Brief 2015/2016. Jakarta: MOEC. Jaquith, A., Mindich, D., Wei, R. C., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Teacher Professional Learning in The United States: Case Studies of State Policies and Strategies. Dallas: Learning Forward and Stanford University. Kaikai, M. & Baker, E. (2016). Engineering for Sustainable Energy Education within Suburban, Urban and Developing Secondary Schools. Research, 10(1), 88-100. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 Kamil, D., Mukminin, A., &Kassim, N. L. A. (2013). From Education Policy to Class Practices: Indonesian Secondary EFL Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Developing School-Based EFL Syllabi. Excellence in Higher Education, 4, 86-107. Karadag, E. (2017). The Effect of Social Adjustment on Student Achievement. In E. Karadag (Ed.), The Factors Effecting Student Achievement (pp. 259-269). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG. Klassen, R. M. (2010). Teacher Stress: The Mediating Role of Collective Efficacy Beliefs. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(5), 342-350. Kurz, T. B. & Knight, S. L. (2004). An Exploration of the Relationship among Teacher Efficacy, Collective Teacher Efficacy, and Goal Consensus. Learning Environments Research, 7, 111-128. Lailiyah, M. &Cahyono, B. Y. (2017). Indonesian EFL Teachers’ Self-Efficacy towards Technology Integration (SETI) and Their Use of Technology in EFL Teaching. Studies in English Language Teaching, 5(2), 344-357. Lestari, L. A. (1999). English Classroom Culture Reformation: How Can It be Done? TEFLIN Journal, 10(1), 75-87. Liaw, E. (2017). Teacher Efficacy of English Teachers in Urban and Suburban Schools. Teacher Development, 1-15. Lee, A., & Lee, A. (2020). Experience with Diversity is Not Enough: A Pedagogical Framework for Teacher Candidates that Centers Critical Race Consciousness. Journal Of Curriculum Studies Research, 2(2), 40-59. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcsr.2020.9 Lucey, A. T. (2021). Notions of Spiritual Capital-A Matter of Extinction for Social Education, Journal of Social Studies Education Research (JSSER), 12(1), 1-23. Ma’arif, S. (2018). Education as a foundation of humanity: Learning from the pedagogy of pesantren in Indonesia. Journal of Social Studies Education Research (JSSER). https://doi.org/10.17499/jsser.58854 Moody, R. (2020). Contextualizing "Practice”: Helping Pre-Service Teachers Unpack the Ideological and Sociopolitical Dimensions of Required Practices for Licensure. Journal Of Curriculum Studies Research, 2(2), 60-80. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcsr.2020.10 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013). Definition of Functional Urban Areas (FUA) for the OECD Metropolitan Database. Paris: OECD Publishing Surana 278 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2009). Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS. France: OECD Publishing. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2015). Education in Indonesia: Rising to the Challenge. Paris: OECD Publishing Pajares, F. (1997). Current Directions in Self-Efficacy Research. In M. Maehr& P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 1-49). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Parker, L. E. (1994). Working Together: Perceived Self- and Collective-Efficacy at the Workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(1), 43-59. Pratama, R. D., Lestari, L. A., & Anam, S. (2018). Reinforcing Indonesian EFL Teacher Self- Efficacy: Accomplishing the Responsibilities and Avoiding Absenteeism. Journal of English Language and Literature, 10(1), 956-965. Shrestha, M. (2019). Influences of gender and locale on teachers’ job satisfaction. Research in Educational Policy and Management, 1(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.46303/repam.01.01.2 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. Skaalvik, E. M., &Skaalvik, S. (2009). Does School Context Matter? Relations with Teacher Burnout and Job Satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 518-524. Skaalvik, E. M., &Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher Self-Efficacy and Teacher Burnout: A Study of Relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1059-1069. Skaalvik, E. M., &Skaalvik, S. (2017). Teacher Stress and Teacher Self-Efficacy: Relations and Consequences. In T. M. McIntyre, S. McIntyre, & D. Francis (Eds.), Educator Stress: Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being. Springer, Cham. Solikhah, I & Budiharso, T. (2019). Investigating the learning outcomes of an INQF-Based English language teaching Curriculum in Indonesia, Journal of Social Studies Education Research (JSSER), 10(4), 153-175. Sugiana & Formen, A. (2015). Teachers’ Personal and General Efficacy in Character Education in Reference to Their Age, Education Level, and Teaching Experience. Indonesian Journal of Early Childhood Education Studies (IJECES), 4(1), 51-56. Swanson, P. B. (2014). The Power of Belief: Spanish Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy and Student Performance on the National Spanish Examinations. Hispania, 97(1), 5-20. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2021: 12(2), 260-279 Tahili, M., Tolla, I., Ahmad, M., Saman, A., & Samad, S. (2021). The Effect of Strategic Collaboration Approach on the National Educational Standards Achievement and Service Quality in Basic Education at Local Government in Indonesia. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 6(1), 53-82. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.2021.4 Tefera, A., Frankenberg, E., Siegel-Hawley, G., &Chirichigno, G. (2011). Integrating Suburban Schools: How to Benefit from Growing Diversity and Avoid Segregation. UCLA Civil Rights Project. Toom, A., &Husu, J. (2016). Finnish Teachers as 'Makers of the Many'. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi, Miracle of Education: The Principles and Practices of Teaching and Learning in Finnish Schools(Second Revised Edition) (pp. 41-55). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher. Tschannen-Moran, M. & Barr, M. (2004). Fostering Student Learning: The Relationship of Collective Teacher Efficacy and Student Achievement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 3(3), 189-209. Tschannen-Moran, M. & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher Efficacy: Capturing an Elusive Construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805. Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning and Measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202-248. Versland, T. M., & Erickson, J. L. (2017). Leading by Example: A Case Study of the Influence of Principal Self-Efficacy on Collective Efficacy. Cogent Education, 1-17. Voelkel Jr, R. H., &Chrispeels, J. H. (2017). Understanding the Link between Professional Learning Communities and Teacher Collective Efficacy. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1-22. Waychunas, W. (2020). Where Teachers Thrive: A Book Review. Research in Educational Policy and Management, 2(2), 129-132. https://doi.org/10.46303/repam.2020.7 Yulia, Y. (2013). Teaching Challenges in Indonesia: Motivating Students and Teachers’ Classroom Language. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(1), 1-16. Zonoubi, R., Rasekh, A. E., &Tavakoli, M. (2017). EFL Teacher Self-Efficacy Development in Professional Learning Communities. System, 66, 1-12. Zulfikar, T. (2009). The Making of Indonesian Education: An Overview on Empowering Indonesian Teachers. Journal of Indonesian Social Sciences and Humanities, 13-39.