Exploring Pre-Service Teachers’ Self-Efficacy: The Impact of Community of Practice and Lesson Study

Abstract

Self-efficacy (SE) enables pre-service teachers to manage learning tasks and solve problems with confidence, which is essential for professional development and for addressing real-world teaching challenges. This study aimed to enhance SE through an integrated approach combining Lesson Study and Community of Practice (CoP plus LS) to better prepare pre-service teachers for classroom practice. Thirteen pre-service teachers in a teaching practicum were assigned to either an experimental group (CoP plus LS, n = 7) or a control group receiving conventional training (n = 6). A mixed-methods design was employed: SE was measured quantitatively using validated questionnaires at three time points (pre-test, post-test, and 8-week follow-up), and qualitative data were collected through semi-structured group interviews. Quantitative results showed that the CoP plus LS group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in SE compared to the control group. Within the CoP plus LS group, SE increased significantly from pre-test to post-test, with scores at follow-up remaining higher than baseline despite a slight decline. Qualitative findings revealed four themes: (1) enhanced classroom management and instructional design, (2) stronger professional identity and commitment, (3) recognition of real-world teaching challenges, and (4) growth through collaborative reflection and learning. Overall, the findings indicate that CoP plus LS effectively strengthens SE among pre-service teachers. Incorporating this approach into teacher education is recommended to enhance psychological readiness and foster sustainable professional growth.

1. Introduction

In today’s world, rapid and profound transformations driven by globalization, technological advancements, and socio-cultural changes are reshaping nearly every aspect of life (Schwab, 2016). These changes have a significant impact on social structures, public expectations, and how people access and interpret information. In the educational context, modern learners exhibit learning styles that differ greatly from previous generations—largely influenced by the digital age and their demand for immediate access to knowledge (Prensky, 2001; Siemens, 2005). Traditional teacher-centered approaches are increasingly misaligned with the needs of 21st-century learners, who have grown up in environments that emphasize participatory, flexible, and personalized learning experiences (Dede, 2010). As a result, educators must shift their roles from knowledge transmitters to learning facilitators by adopting teaching strategies that accommodate diverse and constantly evolving learning styles (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004). Approaches such as active learning, blended learning, and technology-enhanced learning have become essential for engaging learners effectively (Means et al., 2013). This transformation requires teachers to engage in ongoing professional development to keep pace with the changing educational demands (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). Teacher development must therefore be holistically designed—not only to enhance content knowledge, but also to foster psychological readiness and confidence in instructional delivery. Psychological growth is crucial, as research shows that teachers with high self-efficacy skills (Bandura, 1997) significantly impact the quality of teaching and learning (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). In rapidly changing educational settings, teachers must develop the capacity to plan, monitor, and adjust their teaching methods continuously (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2007). Teachers who believe in their abilities are better equipped to manage classrooms effectively and adapt to emerging challenges (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001).

Teacher Education is an important process in preparing candidates to be qualified, competent, and professional teachers. This development encompasses not only knowledge and skills but also self-efficacy (SE)—one of the most crucial psychological factors that directly impact the functioning of educators in their profession. SE refers to beliefs that people hold about their capabilities and is fundamental to teaching and learning. Educators who have high SE feel confident about their ability to design and manage learning activities, address challenges, and adapt to situations (Bandura, 1997). SE encourages individuals (teachers) who have high SE to persist longer and put in more effort when addressing challenges (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). Educators with strong SE are better able to take on instructional challenges and therefore are more likely to try many teaching strategies to satisfy students’ needs and pursuits—this is of utmost necessity for educators in a rapidly changing landscape today. Thus, psychological constructions such as SE are central to teacher education, not just academically preparing new teachers, but also psychologically preparing them for educational success and laying the groundwork for sustainable student learning.

The Community of Practice (CoP) and Lesson Study (LS) methods are viewed positively in modern education when focusing on professional development that is holistic. CoP and LS both contain a measure of value for differentiating SE, which is an important aspect of professional teaching emanating (Wenger, 1998; Lewis, 2002). The integration of CoP and LS creates a learning community where members engage in reflection, active listening, and collaborative problem solving while also experiencing how these processes unfold in real classroom settings. CoP and LS allow them to learn to set goals and make plans and be aware of self-regulation and assessment by tackling both emotional and cognitive processes, and to modify their plans and thinking (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2007; Zimmerman, 2002). Significant growth in pre-service teachers’ perception of their teaching competence occurs as LS provides opportunities for real practice and feedback from peers and mentors. The lesson becomes holistic in as much as they have the opportunity to reflect on what they have done and the significant value of input from the group, as well as to maintain a routine of consciously addressing how they can improve. The collaborative community-based approach as outlined by CoP also provides the field to continue learning together and exploring the roles as teachers. Their fluid social activity and learning space help to foster not only internal competencies but the establishment of a professional identity and therefore the likelihood that pre-service teachers could become confident reflective practitioners, able to respond to the complexity of behaviors expected of today’s classroom teachers.

Current research on teacher professional development continues to have overarching gaps especially in connecting CoP and LS as a focal point for developing SE for the pre-service teacher population. Although both CoP and LS are powerful and proven models as outlined above (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2007; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001; Xu & Pedder, 2014), many studies referenced only use one of these approaches in isolation or utilize both approaches without an in-depth discourse on their entangled mechanisms and mutuality (Vangrieken et al., 2017). This issue is even more pronounced in research specifically focused on Thailand. Most studies that benefit the direction of teaching involve little engagement with the psychological inner processes of a pre-service teacher’s attitudes, confidence, or levels of self-management, as opposed to improvements in academic achievement or observable teaching behaviors as the primary outcome. Moreover, there is little empirical evidence with respect to the impact of a CoP-LS approach, with research focused on longer-term impacts (beyond the practicum period) or research evaluating whether CoP-LS approaches build capacity for pre-service science educators, whose journey into the profession each other needs developmental support (Schipper et al., 2018). Where research has focused on evaluation, it has predominantly focused on short-term outcomes, never using robust experimental designs (such as a control group or follow-up to assess sustainability) to investigate the sustained impacts of changes in these practices compared to traditional teacher education models (Dudley, 2013). Ultimately, the evidence shows the importance of systematic research, which takes a CoP at LS approach with a direct focus on the teacher development aspects of SE. These psychological constructs are essential not only for immediate teaching success but also for long-term professional growth and resilience in an ever-evolving educational landscape.

The current study aims to fill this gap by employing a quasi-experimental design to assess the impact of a Community of Practice (CoP) enriched with Learning Study (LS) on the science pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy (SE). This study is guided by two overarching research questions: (1) To what extent does integrating LS within CoP enhance pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy? and (2) In what ways do pre-service teachers experience the development of self-efficacy when participating in a CoP integrated with LS? Given the research question, this study assumes that pre-service teachers who experience learning through CoP combined with LS will demonstrate significantly greater gains in SE than those within a traditional learning framework, as CoP-LS students benefit from working in a collaborative group focused on specific student learning objectives. Furthermore, it is assumed that these pre-service teachers will not only exhibit higher SE post-collaborative learning, but they will also demonstrate greater durability in sustaining SE over time. These findings may also help pre-service teachers build the capacity to think critically about how to support diverse learners in both their professional and personal development. Ultimately, such growth can improve their ability to create effective teaching practices that enhance student learning in the future.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Self-Efficacy (SE)

Self-efficacy (SE) is a fundamental component of Bandura’s (1997) social cognitive theory, referring to an individual’s belief in their ability to mobilize and execute the actions necessary to achieve specific outcomes. It has been demonstrated in educational research that students’ SE beliefs have a significant impact on behavior and accomplishment. Additionally, studies are showing that instructors’ SE affects both their instructional strategies and the motivation and academic success of their students (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). This construction is especially important during a transitional period when pre-service teachers are preparing to face real-world experiences (Bandura, 1997). Numerous studies have demonstrated that teachers with high levels of SE are more likely to manage classrooms effectively, motivate students, address behavioral challenges appropriately, and adapt instructional approaches to suit a wider variety of learners (Klassen & Chiu, 2010; Zee & Koomen, 2016). On the contrary, teachers with low SE face more challenges in the classroom, experience more stress at work (Betoret, 2006), and report lower job satisfaction (Zee & Koomen, 2016).

Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) represent a helpful framework that summarizes teacher SE into three main areas: (1) efficacy in student engagement, (2) efficacy in instructional strategies, and (3) efficacy in classroom management. The first of which, efficacy in implicit strategy, represents a teacher’s confidence in thinking through planning, designing, and enacting effective instruction. Teachers who are strong in this area can approach lesson planning systematically while also utilizing a wide range of teaching methods, often adapting flexibly to meet the needs of their students. For example, these teachers can utilize learner-centered methods, as well as technology, and increasingly incorporate techniques such as collaborative or problem-based learning, which often fosters students’ engagement and deepens their understanding. The second area, efficacy in classroom management, represents a teacher’s ability to keep order, regulate student behavior, and maintain a learning environment that is both structured and predictable. Teachers who demonstrate high SE in this category can state clear expectations and maintain discipline for desired behaviors in a way that reduces possible disruption while creating a positive atmosphere for learning in students, which in turn will positively impact students’ opportunities to engage meaningfully in the learning process (Zee & Koomen, 2016). The third area, efficacy in student engagement, refers to a teacher’s belief in their ability to successfully involve students in the learning process. When teachers have high SE for student engagement, they believe they can successfully capture students’ attention, encourage inquiry and dialogue, and create challenging activities linked to individual interests and abilities (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). Additionally, they can adapt their communication style, use motivational questions to engage students in the topics, and design challenging activities tailored to each learner’s ability and interests. Each component should be viewed as an essential indicator of a teacher’s ability to engage with the complex challenges of real-world classroom instruction.

Each of these components plays a critical role in equipping teachers to manage the multifaceted nature of teaching in real-world contexts. Furthermore, Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) identify four primary sources of SE beliefs—mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological and emotional states—which contribute to the development of teachers’ self-confidence in professional practice: (1) Mastery experiences based on actual results. (2) Vicarious experiences: Observing examples from successful mentors or colleagues who have succeeded. (3) Social persuasion from advice and encouragement, whether it is advice, appreciation, or encouragement from mentors. (4) Emotional arousal that needs to be managed appropriately, such as stress or anxiety before teaching. If these emotions can be handled appropriately, self-confidence will not be diminished (Bandura, 1997; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). This is one of the characteristics of professional teachers that can inspire and influence the long-term academic success of learners (Klassen & Chiu, 2010). Confidence in this area is also closely connected to the quality of teacher-student interactions, encompassing understanding, trust, and mutual acceptance, which lie at the heart of an effective learning environment.

2.2. Community of Practice (CoP) and Lesson Study (LS)

2.2.1. Community of Practice (CoP): A Collaborative Learning Space

A Community of Practice (CoP) refers to a group of individuals who come together around a shared interest or domain. According to Wenger et al. (2002), a CoP is more than just a casual gathering; it is a space where members regularly interact to exchange knowledge, share experiences, and develop expertise in a particular area. In the context of teaching, CoPs are formed by educators who come together to discuss classroom challenges, share instructional strategies, and collaboratively solve problems. When applied to teacher professional development, CoPs provide a valuable platform for teachers to exchange knowledge and share experiences. Educators can share best practices, address encountered challenges and explore solutions together—leading to mutual learning and improved teaching practices (Hefetz & Ben-Zvi, 2020; Sonsupap & Cojorn, 2024). Moreover, CoPs help foster a sense of belonging and collaboration. Being part of a professional community can create a sense of ownership and reduce feelings of isolation, as teachers realize they are not facing difficulties alone. This shared space fosters teamwork and collegial support (Fullan, 2016; Sonsupap & Cojorn, 2024).

Interaction within a CoP also stimulates reflective thinking, as teachers receive constructive feedback from peers and continuously improve their teaching effectiveness (Baker & Beames, 2016; Hefetz & Ben-Zvi, 2020; McDonald & Mercieca, 2021). Numerous studies have confirmed the effectiveness of CoPs in professional development. For instance, Desimone (2011) emphasized that effective professional development should be ongoing, collaborative, and closely linked to actual practice, all of which are characteristics fulfilled by CoPs. Similarly, Stoll et al. (2006) found that CoPs promote lifelong learning among teachers and lead to positive changes in instructional practice.

2.2.2. Lesson Study (LS): Deep Learning Through Practice

Lesson Study (LS), originating in Japan, is a widely adopted professional practice that is used around the world. It is a systematic process in which groups of teachers collaboratively design, implement, observe, reflect on, and refine lessons to enhance their quality (Lewis et al., 2006). The Lesson Study process typically involves four key steps:

• Collaborative Planning—Teachers work together to set learning objectives, design learning activities, and create instructional materials (Fernandez & Yoshida, 2004).
• Teaching and Observation—One teacher teaches the collaboratively planned lesson while colleagues observe the students’ learning behaviors and classroom interactions in detail.
• Reflection and Discussion—After the lesson, the teaching and observing teachers engage in structured reflection to discuss strengths, weaknesses, and possible improvements.
• Revision and Re-teaching (if necessary)—Feedback from the reflection session is used to revise the lesson plan, which may then be re-taught to test its improved effectiveness.

LS is widely recognized as a practical approach for teacher professional development, particularly in enhancing instructional quality and fostering reflective thinking (Cojorn & Sonsupap, 2022; Yoshida & Shinmachi, 1999). Additionally, Stigler and Hiebert (1999) noted that LS helps deepen teachers’ understanding of subject matter and student learning processes. Doig and Groves (2011) also found that it strengthens teacher collaboration and fosters a culture of learning within schools.

2.2.3. Integrating CoP and LS: A Transformative Force in Teacher Professional Development

When CoP and LS are integrated, the potential for teacher professional development increases significantly (Patton & Parker, 2017). CoP serves as a broad conceptual framework for cultivating learning communities, while LS provides a concrete, practice-oriented process that can be effectively embedded within CoP. This integration creates a synergistic force, enabling teachers to gain tremendous benefits, particularly in structured practical learning. LS offers a concrete structure for practical collaboration within a CoP. Teachers move beyond knowledge exchange into collective action, engaging in real classroom practice, experimentation, and systematic reflection (Eddy et al., 2022). This process facilitates the co-construction of knowledge as teachers collaboratively work through LS cycles within a CoP. Such collaborative work fosters the development of new pedagogical knowledge grounded in shared experiences and reflective practice, leading to the emergence of best teaching practices (Cheung & Wong, 2002).

Moreover, this integration promotes a culture of lifelong learning (Cojorn & Seesom, 2024). Rather than participating in one-off training sessions, teachers learn continuously from one another, fostering sustained professional growth. Cojorn and Seesom (2024) proposed a practical framework that integrates both CoP and LS, comprising four key phases:

• Eliciting—Forming groups of student teachers within the same school context who share similar teaching challenges. These groups share knowledge, experiences, and effective teaching techniques.
• Designing—Collaboratively designing lesson plans and learning activities through group discussions and the exchange of ideas.
• Implementing—Teachers implement the collaboratively designed activities in their classrooms, while peers observe and document teaching practices.
• Reflecting—Groups engage in critical reflection, analyzing teaching outcomes and refining their activities to enhance effectiveness.

This integrated model supports the development of teacher SE in various dimensions (Cojorn & Sonsupap, 2023). For instance, the process of collaborative lesson planning and reflection allows teachers to experience success firsthand. Seeing improvements in student learning resulting from their revised lesson plans increases teachers’ confidence in their instructional abilities (Guskey, 2002). Furthermore, observing peers successfully implement new instructional strategies enhances vicarious learning. Such experiences lead teachers to believe they can achieve similar success (Mizell, 2010). The emotional support within CoP—through encouragement, positive feedback, and collective problem-solving—also fosters resilience and confidence, particularly in challenging contexts (Hoy & Spero, 2005). Working collaboratively in LS further reduces anxiety and professional isolation. Teachers feel more confident in experimenting with innovative teaching methods and developing instructional innovations (Cojorn & Sonsupap, 2023; Hiebert et al., 2002). Research by Klassen and Chiu (2010) has shown that teacher SE significantly correlates with job satisfaction and student achievement. Thus, enhancing SE is crucial, and integrating CoP with LS presents a practical pathway toward this goal.

Therefore, the integration of CoP and LS is an auspicious approach to teacher professional development. This integration not only facilitates the exchange of knowledge and experiences between teachers but also is a powerful mechanism to enhance teachers’ SE. Engaging in systematic collaboration through CoPs, supported by real-world LS processes, allows teachers to feel more confident about their professional skills while enhancing critical skills for planning, monitoring, reflection, and refining their instruction with intention. All of this ultimately contributes to making teaching quality and learning outcomes sustainable.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design

The study employed a quasi-experimental research design, utilizing a two-group comparison with repeated measures. The participants were divided into an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group received instruction through CoP plus LS approach, while the control group received conventional instruction. A repeated measures design was utilized to assess the change in SE at three times: (1) pre-intervention (pre-test), (2) immediately post-intervention (post-test), and (3) two months after the intervention (follow-up). The repeated measures design allowed simultaneous evaluation of between-group differences and within-subject change.

3.2. Participants

The study employed a quasi-experimental research design, utilizing a two-group comparison with repeated measures. The population of this study consisted of 52 fourth-year pre-service teachers enrolled in the Bachelor of Education program in General Science at the Faculty of Education, Mahasarakham University, Thailand. At Mahasarakham University, the Bachelor of Education program spans four years, with pre-service teachers undertaking a full academic year of teaching practicum in schools, typically during their fourth year. All participants were enrolled in the Teaching Practicum I–II courses. From this population, 13 students were selected through cluster sampling based on their assigned supervisors. These participants were then divided into an experimental group (CoP plus LS, n = 7) and a control group receiving conventional training (n = 6). The experimental group implemented teaching activities using the CoP plus LS approach, which emphasized structured collaboration, reflective practice, and shared problem solving. The control group followed the conventional practicum model.

In both groups, pre-service teachers were responsible for designing and implementing learning activities in their assigned classes and conducting classroom-based research independently to address identified classroom challenges. Throughout the practicum, participants received ongoing support from school mentors and supervision from university lecturers, who conducted three visits per semester. The CoP plus LS approach provided additional opportunities for collaborative reflection, fostering professional learning and enhancing participants’ capacity for problem-solving and adaptive teaching within the school context.

3.3. Research Instruments

Quantitative Instrument: The study employed a self-efficacy (SE) questionnaire consisting of 12 items, rated on a 9-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (“Nothing”) to 9 (“A Great Deal”). The instrument was adapted from the framework of Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) to suit the Thai educational context, covering three dimensions: efficacy in student engagement, efficacy in instructional strategies, and efficacy in classroom management. Questionnaire items were modified to reflect locally relevant scenarios and teaching situations faced by pre-service teachers in Thailand. The content validity of the questionnaire was verified using the Content Validity Index (CVI), which demonstrated an acceptable value of 0.92.

Qualitative Instrument: A semi-structured interview protocol was used for group discussions, focusing on three main topics: (1) insights gained from participation in the CoP plus LS activities, (2) SE, and (3) challenges and obstacles encountered. The protocol was developed based on the study’s research objectives and the SE framework of Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001). The content was reviewed by five experts to ensure validity and clarity, followed by a pilot test with two pre-service teachers to confirm comprehension and appropriateness before formal data collection. Overall, the protocol was assessed for content suitability, receiving a score of 5.00.

3.4. Data Collection

The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of Mahasarakham University and was conducted in strict accordance with ethical guidelines. All participants were provided with detailed information about the study and gave their informed consent. Participation was voluntary, and confidentiality and anonymity were ensured. Participants could withdraw at any time without any negative consequences. The researchers explained the learning process, which followed the CoP plus LS approach, guided by the four-stage model proposed by Cojorn and Seesom (2024): Eliciting, Designing, Implementing, and Reflecting (see Figure 1).

In the Practicum I–II courses, pre-service teachers were required to engage in both teaching practice and classroom-based research aimed at improving instructional practices. The learning activities based on the CoP plus LS approach were carried out as follows:

• Eliciting: Pre-service teachers collaborated to establish learning goals and identify problems for classroom action research. They engaged in joint study, discussion, and knowledge sharing related to classroom research.
• Designing: The pre-service teachers co-designed learning activities and research procedures, drafted research proposals, and developed research instruments collaboratively.
• Implementing: The pre-service teachers applied their planned instructional activities and research tools in their own classrooms, with peer pre-service teachers providing classroom observation and support.
• Reflecting: The CoP group reconvened to reflect on the teaching outcomes and research findings, engaged in collaborative critique, and jointly prepared the research report. The process concluded with the formulation of shared best practices.

In conducting this research, the pre-service teachers were divided into two groups: one group participated in conventional learning, while the other engaged in learning through the CoP plus LS approach. Before the learning activities commenced, both groups underwent assessments measuring their SE. These assessments were administered again upon completion of the activities to evaluate any changes. Additionally, to gain in-depth insights into the pre-service teachers’ experiences and learning processes, focus group discussions were conducted. These discussions aimed to capture participants’ perspectives, feelings, and reflections on the learning and research processes they engaged in. The focus groups followed a semi-structured interview format, and the data collected were systematically analyzed using qualitative methods. Furthermore, for the group that participated in the CoP plus LS, a follow-up assessment was conducted 8 weeks after the completion of the activities to measure the long-term retention of learning outcomes. This follow-up evaluation confirmed the overall effectiveness and sustainability of this innovative learning approach.

3.5. Data Analysis

Quantitative Analysis: The descriptive data on SE are reported, including the mean and standard deviation (SD). The level of SE is classified into three categories based on the average score range: 1.00–3.99, indicating low SE; 4.00–6.99, indicating moderate SE; and 7.00–9.00, indicating high SE (Klassen & Chiu, 2010). Moreover, this study utilized non-parametric statistical methods for data analysis, as initial assumptions testing demonstrated no normal distribution of the data. Quantitative analysis was conducted using SPSS (version 26). Two main steps were undertaken:

(1)

The pre-service teachers in the conventional learning group, and the pre-service teachers in the CoP plus LS group, were compared with the Mann–Whitney U-test to determine if SE differed. The Mann–Whitney U-test is appropriate for comparing differences in central tendency between two independent groups when the outcomes are not normally distributed. Additionally, effect sizes (Cohen’s d) were calculated to assess the practical significance of differences.

(2)

The pre-service teachers who participated in the CoP plus LS had outcomes measured three times—pre-intervention, post-intervention, and an 8-week follow-up. To determine if the mean ranks differed among the repeated measures, the Friedman Test was used. When significant differences occurred, to determine which time points differed statistically, pairwise comparisons with the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test were conducted.

Qualitative Analysis: For qualitative data analysis, content analysis was employed to examine the content of the focus group discussions. A thematic analysis approach was used. Transcripts from group discussions were read repeatedly to gain familiarity, and initial codes were generated inductively, aligning with the research objectives and the SE framework of Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001). Codes were then organized into broader themes that represent patterns across the data. To ensure credibility, themes were reviewed by three researchers, and peer debriefing was conducted to refine the interpretations. This method provided deep insights into the pre-service teachers’ experiences, their perspectives, and the changes in their learning that occurred throughout the research process.

4. Results

The measurement of self-efficacy (SE) in both groups of pre-service teachers, the CoP plus LS learning group and the conventional learning group, indicated an overall moderate level of SE across all dimensions in the pre-test. Following the intervention, SE scores increased in both groups, with some dimensions reaching a high level, as detailed in

Table 1. SE of Pre-Service Teachers in the CoP plus LS and Conventional Groups Before and After the Intervention.

Self-Efficacy	Total	Conventional						CoP Plus LS
		Pre-Test			Post-Test			Pre-Test			Post-Test
		Mean	S.D.	Level	Mean	S.D.	Level	Mean	S.D.	Level	Mean	S.D.	Level
Student Engagement	9	5.63	0.92	Mo.	6.46	1.06	Mo.	5.86	0.71	Mo.	6.71	0.81	Mo.
Instructional Strategies	9	6.38	0.82	Mo.	6.63	1.20	Mo.	5.79	0.74	Mo.	7.04	1.23	Hi.
Classroom Management	9	6.25	0.85	Mo.	6.89	1.07	Mo.	5.57	0.74	Mo.	7.07	1.02	Hi.
Overall	9	6.08	0.91	Mo.	6.60	0.99	Mo.	5.73	0.73	Mo.	6.93	1.04	Mo.

Mo. = Moderate, Hi. = High.

.

The pre-test results indicate that, overall, the SE of pre-service teachers in both groups was at a moderate level across all dimensions. Considering overall SE, the conventional group had a mean of 6.08 (SD = 0.91), while the CoP plus LS group had a mean of 5.73 (SD = 0.73), with both groups classified at a moderate level.

Post-test results show that the overall SE mean score of pre-service teachers in CoP plus LS was 6.98 (SD = 1.04), which falls within the moderate SE range. Among the three subscales, the highest mean was observed in Classroom Management (M = 7.07, SD = 1.02), followed by Instructional Strategies (M = 7.04, SD = 1.23), and the lowest was Student Engagement (M = 6.71, SD = 0.81). Meanwhile, the conventional learning group had a mean score of 6.60 (SD = 0.99), which falls within the moderate range of SE. Across the three subscales, Classroom Management recorded the highest mean (M = 6.89, SD = 0.99), followed by Instructional Strategies (M = 6.63, SD = 1.20), while Student Engagement showed the lowest mean (M = 6.46, SD = 1.06).

The study comparing the SE of student teachers between the group learning through the CoP plus LS approach and the conventional learning group revealed a difference, as detailed in

Table 2. Comparison of SE Between Pre-Service Teachers in the CoP plus LS Group and the Conventional Group After Intervention.

	Intervention	N	Mean Rank	Sum of Ranks	U	W	Z	p	Cohen’s d
Pre-test	Conventional	6	8.58	51.50	11.50	39.50	−1.38	0.166	-
	CoP plus LS	7	5.64	39.50
Post-test	Conventional	6	4.58	27.50	6.50	27.50	−2.10	0.036 *	0.33
	CoP plus LS	7	9.07	63.50

* p < 0.05.

.

As shown in Table 2, the pre-test SE scores of the conventional group and the CoP plus LS group were compared using the Mann–Whitney U test. The results revealed no significant difference between the two groups (U = 11.50, z = –1.38, p = 0.166). In contrast, the post-test results indicated that the mean rank of the CoP plus LS group was higher than that of the conventional group (U = 6.50, z = –2.10, p = 0.036). This finding demonstrates a statistically significant difference at the 0.05 level, suggesting that pre-service teachers who participated in the CoP plus LS approach had significantly higher SE than those in the conventional group. Moreover, the calculated effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.33) suggests a small to medium practical significance, indicating that participation in the CoP plus LS approach had a meaningful impact on pre-service teachers’ SE.

Table 3. Results of the Friedman Test Comparing SE at Pre-test, Post-test, and Follow-up of Pre-Service Teachers in the CoP plus LS Group.

Intervention	N	Mean Rank			df	χ2	p
		Pre-Test	Post-Test	Follow-Up
CoP plus LS	7	1.00	3.00	2.00	2	14.00	0.001 *

* p < 0.05.

presents the results of the Friedman Test comparing SE scores of pre-service teachers in the CoP plus LS group across three time points: Pre-test, Post-test, and Follow-up. The mean ranks of self-efficacy were 1.00 for the Pre-test, 3.00 for the Post-test, and 2.00 for the Follow-up. The Friedman Test yielded a chi-square value (χ²) of 14.00 with 2 degrees of freedom (df = 2) and a p-value of 0.001, indicating a statistically significant difference at the 0.05 level.

These results demonstrate that the SE of pre-service teachers significantly improved after participating in the CoP plus LS intervention. The highest mean rank observed at the Post-test suggests the greatest SE was achieved immediately after the intervention. Although there was a slight decline at the Follow-up stage, the mean rank remained higher than the Pre-test, reflecting sustained improvement over time.

The analysis using the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test to compare the SE levels of pre-service teachers in the CoP plus LS group across three time points—Pre-test, Post-test, and Follow-up—revealed statistically significant differences at the 0.05 level, as shown in

Table 4. Comparison of SE Scores between Pre-test, Post-test, and Follow-up using the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test of Pre-Service Teachers in the CoP plus LS Group.

Comparison	N	Mean Rank	Sum of Ranks	Z	p
Pretest-Posttest	7	−4.00	−28.00	−2.371	0.018 *
Pretest-Follow-up	7	−4.00	−28.00	−2.375	0.018 *
Post test-Follow-up	7	4.00	28.00	−2.401	0.016 *

* p < 0.05.

.

The comparison between the Pre-test and Post-test showed that the mean rank was −4.00, the sum of ranks was −28.00, Z = −2.371, and p = 0.018, indicating that the SE of pre-service teachers significantly increased after learning with the CoP plus LS approach compared to before the intervention.

Similarly, the comparison between the Pre-test and Follow-up found a mean rank of −4.00, a sum of ranks of −28.00, Z = −2.375, and p = 0.018, demonstrating that the pre-service teachers maintained a higher level of self-efficacy in the follow-up period compared to the pre-test, reflecting the sustainability of the learning outcomes.

However, the comparison between the Post-test and Follow-up showed a mean rank of 4.00, a sum of ranks of 28.00, Z = −2.401, and p = 0.016, indicating a statistically significant decrease in self-efficacy at the follow-up compared to the Post-test, although the level remained higher than that of the Pre-test.

In conclusion, the results demonstrate that pre-service teachers who learned through the CoP plus LS approach significantly increased their SE after the intervention and were able to maintain this enhanced level over time. Although there was a slight decrease at the follow-up stage, their SE remained clearly higher than before learning, reflecting the effectiveness of the instructional approach used.

Through qualitative data analysis using the Content Analysis method based on focus group discussions with pre-service teachers who participated in the CoP plus LS approach, five key themes emerged. These themes reflect the experiences and transformations of the pre-service teachers during their professional teaching practicum. The four major themes are as follows:

Theme 1: Self-Efficacy. Pre-service teachers reflected that they had developed greater confidence in managing instruction and designing learning activities. In particular, they reported improvements in classroom management, decision making, and adjusting their teaching roles to better suit the needs of their students.

Theme 2: Professional Identity and Commitment. Pre-service teachers expressed that, despite facing various challenges in teaching, many of them continued to feel inspired and committed to pursuing a career in education. They recognized their self-worth and took pride in their emerging roles as teachers.

Theme 3: Real-World Teaching Challenges. Pre-service teachers recognized the gap between what they had learned in university coursework and the realities of actual classroom settings. This was especially evident in areas such as student behavior, classroom diversity, and the expectations set by mentor teachers.

Theme 4: Collaborative Reflection and Learning. Working collaboratively with peers and mentor teachers through the CoP plus LS approach enabled pre-service teachers to systematically reflect on their own teaching practices, recognize personal changes, and become aware of their ongoing professional development.

The details are presented in

Table 5. Summary of Content Analysis from Focus Group Discussions of the CoP plus LS Pre-service Teacher Group.

Theme	Category	Subcategory	Example Quotes
1. Self-Efficacy	Confidence in instructional management	- Increased confidence in student communication - Enhanced classroom management Skills	“At first, I didn’t dare to discipline the students, but as I got to know them better, I became more comfortable giving instructions and speaking up.” “The students were quiet and didn’t respond at first, so I tried using simpler questions. Once they started answering, I became much more confident.” “At the beginning, I was afraid of making mistakes while teaching, but after several lessons, I felt that my communication improved, and the students started to respond better.”
	Appropriate activity design	- Adapting activities to meet learners’ needs - Selecting context-appropriate teaching strategies	“When I realized that students did not like lectures, I adapted my teaching by incorporating games and more visuals. This increased their interest, and I felt more confident in my teaching.” “Initially, I taught through lectures, but when students showed little interest, I shifted to group activities, which encouraged greater student participation.” “Sometimes I use Kahoot, which excites the students and made me understand the importance of finding ways to make lessons enjoyable.” “At first, when I lectured, students rarely responded. Then, I tried pairing them to exchange ideas, and this increased their engagement.” “I always design activities with embedded games because they keep students alert and facilitate learning.” “Occasionally, I use Kahoot to review lessons, and students find it more enjoyable and participatory than traditional Q&A sessions.”
	Classroom management	- Classroom atmosphere management to facilitate learning - Strategies for managing disruptive and unengaged students - Establishing rules and clear communication	“In some classrooms, I have to use a firm tone because students talk too much. Without controlling it, the class becomes disorderly.” “When students are inattentive, I stop and look at them, then ask their names. This makes them aware that I am watching.” “I set rules with the students from the first day, such as raising hands to ask questions, and they gradually understand the classroom norms.”
2. Professional Passion & Identity	Experiencing a sense of pride and accomplishment	- Observing student progress - Receiving praise	“A student thanked me for tutoring and said they passed the exam. I felt very happy and thought the effort was worthwhile.” “When students ask me additional questions after class, I feel they value my teaching, which reassures me that I’m on the right track.” “I feel encouraged when a student says, ‘I understand because the teacher explains clearly.’”
	Commitment to the teaching profession	Perseverance in pursuing a teaching career despite challenges	“Some days are very tiring, but I still don’t want to change careers. I enjoy being with the students.” “Even though I’m very tired, the more I teach, the more confident I become that I truly want to be a teacher.” “Before the practicum, I thought teaching would be exhausting, but after experiencing it, despite the fatigue, I feel it is meaningful.”
3. Classroom Reality Challenges	Discrepancies between theory and practice	Differences between learned concepts and real-world situations	“Some students are very attentive, while others are stubborn and refuse to comply, so different motivation techniques are necessary.” “Most of what I learned focused on lesson planning, but in reality, students don’t always listen, so quick adjustments are essential.” “During teaching practice, I realized that nothing goes exactly as planned; everything must be adaptable at all times.”
	Learner diversity	Diverse student needs require continuous adaptation	“Some students learn quickly, while others are much slower, so I prepare two levels of worksheets for them to choose from.” “Some classrooms are very quiet, others are very noisy; I have to use different approaches even when teaching the same content.” “Despite thorough preparation, when students are inattentive, I feel discouraged and have cried alone in the teacher’s lounge.” “Some classes go well, while others are disruptive; I need to adjust my lesson plans to fit the students.”
	Expectations from mentor teachers and school context	Pressure from the role of a full-fledged teacher	“The mentor teacher wanted me to start teaching right away, but the students were uncooperative, so I was very stressed at first.” “The mentor expected me to be able to do everything. I felt a lot of pressure and had to train myself a lot.” “Sometimes the mentor teacher criticized me harshly, but when I thought about it later, it was true and something I needed to fix.”
4. Collaborative Reflection and Co-Learning	Learning from peers and mentors	- Incorporating constructive feedback - Engaging in collaborative dialogue	“After teaching, my mentor teacher discusses what went well and what needs improvement. I take notes and apply them in the next lesson.” “My peers in the practicum observe my teaching and provide feedback on what worked and what should be adjusted. I find this very helpful.” “Sometimes, just talking with others who face the same challenges makes me feel less alone.”
	Professional growth through situational learning	- Learning from direct experience - Awareness of personal growth	“My development is shown in my ability to adapt to different students; I realize that one method cannot work for all.” “At first, I was hesitant to teach and discipline students, but now I feel much more confident.”
	Peer reflection within the Community of Practice (CoP)	- Sharing experiences collaboratively - Collective learning analysis	“During meetings with peers in the CoP, I observed different problem-solving approaches and tried applying them myself.” “Regular discussions within the CoP group made me feel supported, knowing I’m not solving problems alone and have multiple strategies to try.” “After teaching observations, peers in the group collaboratively provide feedback, and I have adjusted my methods based on their suggestions several times.”

.

The analysis reveals that the CoP plus LS approach fosters deep learning, self-development, and professional growth among pre-service teachers through continuous participation, reflection, and engagement with real classroom situations. It also highlights the interconnectedness between practical experience, reflective thinking, and the internal development of pre-service teachers, encompassing their emotions, cognition, and motivation to become teachers. Active involvement in reflection, collaboration with peers, and learning from direct classroom experience significantly contribute to authentic professional development and the formation of a genuine teacher identity.

Overall, integrating quantitative and qualitative findings provides a comprehensive understanding of how the CoP plus LS approach enhanced pre-service teachers’ SE. The quantitative improvements in SE are complemented by rich qualitative descriptions of professional growth, reflective practices, and adaptive teaching strategies, demonstrating that the intervention not only increased confidence but also supported meaningful professional development.

5. Discussion

Based on the findings of this study, the CoP plus LS learning approach improved SE among both preservice teachers when compared to conventional instruction. The pre-service teachers in the CoP plus LS approach had higher levels of SE compared to the pre-service teachers taught using conventional methods. This indicates the connection between participants in the CoP plus LS learning approach and that the learning model fostered the pre-service teachers’ confidence in their teaching practices when reflecting on their practice. The findings of this research study align with previous research highlighting the impact of taking part in a CoP as a supportive and relevant learning community contributing to professional competence, self-perception, and critical reflection (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998). Similarly, the findings were congruent with the work of Vangrieken et al. (2016) highlighting how CoP can enhance knowledge sharing and increase teachers’ professional confidence, especially when utilized alongside other collaborative professional development practices. Additionally, the integration of LS into the CoP model enhanced the participants’ knowledge and reflective components related to pedagogical knowledge through shared collaboration, classroom observation, and problem-solving (Dudley, 2013; Lewis et al., 2006).

The significant improvement in SE can be explained through the opportunities provided by the CoP plus LS learning approach, which includes mastery experiences, vicarious learning through peer observation, and constructive feedback—all of which are identified by Bandura’s SE Theory (Bandura, 1997) as key sources of efficacy beliefs. In parallel, the cyclical process of planning, implementing, and reflecting promoted the use of metacognitive thinking (Schunk & Greene, 2017; Zimmerman, 2002). This finding echoes the work of Cajkler et al. (2014), who demonstrated that LS not only enhances instructional knowledge but also strengthens teacher confidence through collaborative reflection.

Beyond improving teaching competencies, the CoP plus LS learning approach provided pre-service teachers with opportunities to engage in professional self-exploration and to develop a deeper understanding of their own values, goals, and learning processes. This self-exploration enabled them to design more meaningful learning activities, make informed instructional decisions, and effectively monitor their own progress—skills essential for becoming lifelong learners and fostering intrinsic motivation (Korthagen, 2017; Mezirow, 1997). Through repeated cycles of collaborative inquiry and reflection, participants gained a stronger sense of professional identity, self-awareness, and the agency necessary to take ownership of their learning and teaching practices.

These findings underscore the importance of embedding collaborative inquiry and reflective teaching practices into teacher education programs. Such approaches not only enhance the technical competencies of pre-service teachers but also foster the cognitive, emotional, and motivational processes necessary for sustained professional growth (Boud et al., 2013; Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). By providing authentic learning experiences where pre-service teachers can explore themselves, set goals, design their own learning paths, and monitor their progress, the CoP plus LS approach emerges as a powerful tool for developing reflective, resilient, and lifelong professional educators.

The findings of this study reveal that pre-service teachers who participated in the learning process based on the CoP plus LS demonstrated statistically significant improvements in SE when comparing their scores before and after the intervention, as well as at the 8-week follow-up. These results highlight the effectiveness of the CoP plus LS learning approach in enhancing pre-service teachers’ confidence in their own capabilities and fostering essential self-directed learning. Such development can be explained by the learning process that provided opportunities for participants to experience mastery experiences through authentic practice, learn vicariously by observing and exchanging ideas with peers, and receive constructive, positive feedback on a continuous basis. These factors are recognized as central sources for building and enhancing SE, as outlined by Bandura (1997), who emphasized that direct experiences of success and social validation are key to self-belief development. These outcomes align with prior research showing that learning through CoP, which emphasizes collaborative knowledge sharing, mutual support, and reflection within authentic contexts, significantly enhances teachers’ competencies and motivation (Lewis et al., 2006; Wenger, 1998). Sustained interaction with peers in such professional communities not only strengthens pedagogical knowledge but also bolsters teachers’ confidence and adaptive capabilities for ongoing self-improvement.

Nevertheless, when examining the follow-up results at 8 weeks post-intervention, it was found that SE scores significantly declined compared to the immediate post-intervention scores. This suggests that the positive effects of the intervention may not be sustainably maintained in the long term without ongoing support, opportunities for collaborative learning, and regular reflective practice. This phenomenon can be explained by the context in which, after completing the CoP plus LS learning approach, pre-service teachers entered the phase of preparing for national teacher licensing examinations and public service recruitment exams—an outcome-oriented learning phase requiring intense self-directed preparation, including planning, reviewing content, and practicing test-taking skills, without the collaborative learning environment they previously experienced. This shift in learning goals—from professional growth and shared learning to competitive exam success—would have had an impact on their intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and reflective practice (Schön, 2017). The absence of collaborative reflection, peer contact, and mentoring opportunities at this time may have contributed partially to the decline in SE observed. These findings are consistent with the work of Vrieling et al. (2012) and Cho and Rathbun (2013), who noted that SE skills decline when they are not continuously reinforced and practiced, especially when individuals face increased pressure or a change in context.

However, despite this decline, SE scores remained higher than pre-intervention levels, indicating that the deep learning processes generated by the CoP plus LS had a positive residual impact on the participants’ confidence and self-management skills. This can be taken to imply that the pre-service teachers could apply these skills to other tasks or difficulties, even in diverse contexts. These findings also suggest that the attitudes, knowledge, and competencies acquired through collaborative learning and reflective practice within the CoP plus LS framework may not be sustainable in the long term without similar ongoing reinforcement, structured opportunities for practice, and a supportive professional context. This aligns with the theoretical perspectives of Korthagen (2017) and Panadero (2017), who emphasize that authentic professional identity development and self-regulatory abilities, to be lasting, require ongoing reflection and collaborative learning within the teaching profession. The findings also confirm those of Vrieling et al. (2012) and Daniel et al. (2013), which emphasized that self-efficacy must be grown and reinforced regularly to prevent reduction, especially when experiencing new and higher pressures within environments.

Therefore, this study reinforces the importance of designing teacher education curricula and professional development processes that must ensure sustained support systems to establish opportunities for collaborative learning, reflection and professional growth, rather than a focus on academic skill development, or simply preparing for an exam. Not only does this study emphasize the significance of sustained support systems, it suggests that while the CoP plus LS model is an effective way of increasing SE in the short term, in order to create sustainable change, it is plausible to add continued follow-up sessions, collective reflection opportunities, and collaborative learning experiences as part of the teacher preparation process for professional learning. This would support effective and sustainable professional learning, as well as ongoing professional development and competence, for new educators.

6. Conclusions

The findings of this study indicate that the CoP plus LS approach makes a significant contribution to the development of SE in pre-service teachers. The CoP plus LS approach should become a core aspect of teacher education programs to help develop preservice teachers’ capacity and confidence to carry out their teaching roles. The formation of learning communities in the form of CoPs that emphasize collaborative reflection and knowledge sharing is an essential vehicle for enabling preservice teachers’ learning through observation and ongoing problem-solving in a collaborative context. To support the successful implementation of the CoP plus LS approach, learning institutions should support and develop professional learning for teacher educators in systematically designing and facilitating CoP plus LS approach. However, this study was conducted with a small sample size and within a relatively specific context. To enhance the generalizability of the findings, future research should involve larger participant groups and be carried out across diverse educational contexts. Another limitation is that the 8-week follow-up assessment coincided with the exam preparation period, which may have influenced participants’ responses. Future studies should consider scheduling follow-up assessments at less academically demanding times to reduce such confounding effects. Moreover, subsequent research could adapt and integrate the CoP plus LS approach for pre-service teachers in other disciplines or settings to further evaluate its effectiveness in different teaching and learning environments. Additionally, future research should adapt and integrate the CoP plus LS approach for pre-service teachers in other discipline areas or educational contexts to evaluate the efficacy of the approach in various understandings of teaching and learning. Future research could also consider further dimensions of learning outcomes, such as communication, collaboration and creativity, in order to broaden the understanding of the development of pre-service teachers. In sum, this study establishes proof of concept for the CoP plus LS approach. While preliminary, the findings provide a strong foundation for larger-scale investigations and future implementation efforts, both within Thailand and in broader international contexts.