Conference Program

Over the past decades, the teaching profession has become increasingly complex. Classrooms are more heterogeneous in terms of educational needs and migrant backgrounds; digital technologies have become pervasive; and opportunities for professional development remain limited. In this context, teachers’ self-efficacy represents a crucial professional resource. In line with Bandura’s (1991) social cognitive theory, teacher self-efficacy refers to teachers’ beliefs in their capability to teach effectively, engage students, and foster learning (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). International research shows that higher teacher self-efficacy is associated with greater job satisfaction, stronger professional commitment, lower burnout, and improved student outcomes. In the Italian context, data from the OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (2025) indicate levels of self-efficacy above the OECD average, despite limited mentoring, career pathways, and professional feedback mechanisms. It is therefore important to better understand how perceived self-efficacy is distributed among Italian teachers in order to design effective organizational interventions.
Using data from the Fourth Survey on the Living and Working Conditions of Italian Teachers, this study analyzes a representative sample of teachers across all educational levels (n = 9680) through latent profile analysis. Self-efficacy is measured through a 20-item four-point Likert scale articulated into four subdimensions: efficacy in student engagement, instructional strategies, classroom management, and influencing the school context. The study has a twofold objective: first, to examine which teacher characteristics (socio-demographics, working conditions, and teaching level) are associated with the four profiles identified; second, to investigate the relationship between self-efficacy and organizational resources within schools—such as professional development opportunities, peer relations, organizational hierarchies, and teachers’ inclusion in decision-making processes—as well as outcomes highlighted in the literature, including work-related stress, job satisfaction, and other indicators of professional well-being. This framework helps identify resources “within reach” of schools that may improve teachers’ working conditions and the quality of teaching.
Four distinct profiles of teachers’ perceived self-efficacy emerged from the latent profile analysis. The first profile (management-struggling teachers) was characterized by very low classroom management efficacy alongside slightly above-average levels of instructional strategies and student engagement. This group included relatively more younger and substitute teachers, as well as teachers working in upper secondary education and support roles. The second profile (moderately confident teachers) showed balanced levels of self-efficacy across all domains, generally close to the sample average, and a composition similar to that of the overall sample. The third profile (highly confident teachers) reported above-average self-efficacy across all dimensions and included relatively more experienced teachers, teachers working in primary education, and a higher proportion from southern regions. Finally, the fourth profile (management-oriented teachers) showed very high classroom management efficacy but lower levels in the other domains, particularly in influencing the school context, and included more tenured and older teachers working in upper secondary schools.
Regression analyses based on the proposed framework provide further insights into the organizational and professional factors associated with different patterns of teacher self-efficacy.