Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Influence of Teacher’s Self- Efficacy on the Quality

of Learning: The Mediating Role of Mobile Learning
Readiness among Criminology Students
Jayson U. Gerona
Master of Science in Criminal Justice
The University of Mindanao
Davao City, 8000

Abstract: The main focus of this research attempted to up by monitoring progress and reviewing the benefits as an
measure the mediating effect of M-learning readiness on outcome that helps indicate the level of students' satisfaction,
the relationship between teacher`s self-efficacy and such as effective curriculum design, collaborative learning
quality of learning. The study was conducted out using and feedback, effective assessment of learning, and
non-experimental quantitative research methodology understanding of teaching methods; and an initiative that
employing the descriptive-correlational approach using aims to enhance teamwork between teachers, goal-setting and
Mean, Pearson r, Regression, and Sobel z-test as course plans in order to improve student achievement (Ajang,
statistical tools. Mediation analysis was used as an 2016).
approach in data analysis. This research used a mediation
model to find and explain the mechanism or process that Whenever faced with increased accountability
underlying an observed connection between independent expectations, teachers' and students' professional
variables which is the teacher`s self-efficacy and a development will be the most important factors in the success
dependent variable which is the quality of learning by of school reform projects, especially as administrators fight
introducing a third explanatory variable, known as a to improve the present teaching workforce. Teacher efficacy,
mediator variable which is the M-learning readiness. The according to research, is an essential characteristic in teacher
questionnaires utilized in the research were customized effectiveness that is consistently associated to teacher actions
and appropriate to the needs of the current study. The and student outcomes, including student achievement.
information was gathered using a stratified sampling According to this study, the framework for teacher
approach, with 300 criminology students from a private professional development should incorporate self-efficacy as
institution serving as respondents. The study found a a theoretically sound focus of training designs targeted at
substantial association between teacher self-efficacy and enhancing teacher competence and, therefore, improving
student learning quality. Likewise, M-learning readiness student outcomes as a theoretically good focus of training
also show significant role. It was also revealed that there designs (Bates & Clark, (2003).
is mediating effect of M-learning readiness of students on
the relationship between teacher`s self-efficacy and Finally, a greater and better amount of research is
quality of learning, partial mediation occurred on this urgently necessary in order to improve the quality of
study. undergraduate education while simultaneously increasing the
number of students who complete their studies. In order to
Keywords:- M-learning readiness, teacher`s self-efficacy, create better methods for schools to evaluate student learning,
quality of learning, correlational design, mediating effect, not just for critical thinking and writing, but also for other
Philippines. objectives of undergraduate education, more research must be
done in this area.
I. INTRODUCTION
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
What do you mean by high-quality teaching and
learning? Since a significant debate took place in higher The study used the descriptive-correlational research
education about what quality means roughly 20 years ago, design. Descriptive research describes the attitudes and
opinions on what quality is and how it should be acquired behaviors observed during the investigation, while
continue to diverge. Quality in education may never have an correlational research involves identifying statistical
answer that is obvious and unambiguous, but there seems to relationships between two variables (Vanderstoep&
be a pragmatic agreement in practice that quality implies Johnston, 2009). A descriptive design is used when a
"fitness for purpose". Given the wide range of viewpoints and researcher is just concerned with explaining the circumstance
approaches to the concept of quality, the subject of what or subject under investigation. It is indeed a theory-based
constitutes quality in education is still of critical importance. design process that is formed via the collection, analysis, and
(Wittek& Habib, 2013). presentation of data. This enables a researcher to give out
information into the why or how of study as well as the results
Some students regard quality teaching as an outcome obtained. The use of descriptive design aids in the
process, and others as an initiative. When it comes to quality understanding of the research's intention by others. It is
teaching as an outcome process, it includes identifying gaps possible to do exploratory research if the research problem is
in performance, seeking new approaches to make not well defined.
improvements, analyzing the process of others, and following

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 262

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Also, co relational design is a non-experimental method it focused only to the criminology students. This meant that
for establishing a link between two closely related variables. the universal sample that utilized for this study which will
When examining a connection between two distinct include three hundred (300) criminology students of Saint
variables, no assumptions are made, and statistical analysis Francis Xavier College.
procedures determine the link between them. The goal of this
research was to ascertain the degrees of instructor self- Teacher`s Self-Efficacy Questionnaire developed by
efficacy, M-learning preparedness, and student learning Guenzler, A. M. (2016) will be used which was modified to
quality. Additionally, the mediating influence of M-learning fit the study and subjected to the validation of the experts. The
preparation on the connection with teacher self-efficacy and teacher’s self-efficacy questionnaire had the two (2)
student learning quality was examined. indicators. First is the Student Engagement which refers to
students' levels of interest, curiosity and enthusiasm while
To avoid responses based on speculations, the study studying or being taught, as well as their level of drive to learn
employed the stratified sampling technique in determining and grow in their education, are referred to as their level of
the sampling population. The participants of the study are the engagement. Second is Instructional strategies refers that
criminology students of Saint Francis Xavier College instructor utilize to aid students in evolving into identity,
including male and female from 1st year to 4th year level. The strategic learners are referred to as instructional strategies.
study excluded other students from different department since

In evaluating teacher`s self-efficacy, the five orderable classifications of will be utilized in the following manner, together with
their associated ranges of means and descriptions.:

Range of Descriptive Interpretation

Means Level
4.20 – 5.00 Very High This means that teacher`s self-efficacy is felt at all times
3.40 – 4.19 High This means that teacher ‘s self-efficacy is oftentimes felt.
2.60 – 3.39 Moderate This means that teacher ‘s self-efficacy is sometimes felt
1.80 – 2.59 Low This means that teacher ‘s self-efficacy is seldom felt.
1.00 – 1.79 Very Low This means teacher ‘s self-efficacy is never felt at all.

The questionnaire for quality of learning will be adapted from Chadha (2009). It was modified to fit in to the study and
subjected to the validation of the experts.

In evaluating quality of learning, the following range of means with its descriptions will be used.

Range of Descriptive Interpretation

Means Level

4.20 – 5.00 Very High This means that quality of learning is affected at all times.
3.40 – 4.19 High This means that quality of learning is oftentimes affected.
2.60 – 3.39 Moderate This means that quality of learning is sometimes affected.
1.80 – 2.59 Low This means that quality of learning is seldom affected.
1.00 – 1.79 Very Low This means that quality of learning is never affected at all.

The M-learning readiness questionnaire will be adapted from Barnes, (2018). It was modified to fit in to the study and subjected
to the validation of the experts.

In evaluating the M-learning readiness, the following range of means with its descriptions will be used.

Range of Descriptive Level Interpretation

Means Level

4.20 – 5.00 Very High This means that M-learning readiness is affected at all times.
3.40 – 4.19 High This means that M-learning readiness is oftentimes affected.
2.60 – 3.39 Moderate This means that M-learning readiness is sometimes affected.
1.80 – 2.59 Low This means that M-learning readiness is seldom affected.
1.00 – 1.79 Very Low This means that M-learning readiness is never affected at all.

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 263

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
The initial draft of the survey instrument will be given teacher’s self-efficacy and quality of learning of student to
to the research advisor for comments, ideas, and ensure 100 percent retrieval of the questionnaire. The
recommendations on how to enhance its presentation and researcher conducted the survey not less than 1 week after he
incorporate the changes. The final copy will be refined by a gather all the data, the researcher may easily collect the data,
group of specialists. The final draft will include errors, as well since the respondents are his students where he works
comments, and recommendations offered by professional for. Then, a Certificate of Appearance was secured from the
validators prior to the data collection. Before the Guidance Office and from the College Dean concerned to
administration of the questionnaires, they were piloted to 40 vouch that the researcher honestly collected the data from the
respondents and the reliability of the items was computed research respondents of the study. Consequently, the data that
whose result shows an overall Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.886 or gathered has been tallied, tabulated, analyzed and interpreted
high reliability. With the approval of the researcher’s adviser, statistically.
the questionnaires were administered to the identified
respondents of the study. III. RESULTS

In the collection of data, the researcher asked A. Teacher`s Self-Efficacy

permission from the Schools President Roselyn P. Carlos, Illustrated in Table 1 are the views of respondents on their
asking for her kind approval. Immediately after the approval degree of teacher`s self-efficacy indicated a mean score that
of the President, the researcher submitted the endorsement ranges from 4.21 to 4.16 with an overall mean score of 4.18,
letters to the Guidance Office and consequently ask describe as high with an overall standard division of 0.49
permission from the Dean of the Criminal Justice Education which mean that teacher`s self-efficacy is oftentimes felt.
to distribute research instrument to 300 criminology students. Scrutinizing the individual results of the indicator revealed
that instructional strategies have the highest mean score of
Upon the approval, the researcher was personally visited 4.21, described as very high with a standard division of 0.52.
the institution to orient student respondents about the study's Student engagement obtain the lowest mean of 4.16,
objective and importance. The researcher was personally described as high with a standard division of 0.52.
distributed and administered the research instrument on
Indicators SD Mean Descriptive Level
Student Engagement 0.52 4.16 High
Instructional Strategies 0.52 4.21 Very High
Overall 0.49 4.18 High
Table 1: Level of Teacher`s Self-Efficacy

B. Quality of Learning of 4.33 and standard division of 0.52, Global Course and
Reflected in table 2 are the answers of respondents on Instructor Quality Scale with a mean score of 4.28 and
their degree of quality of learning by the students indicated a standard division of 0.58. Also, Activation Scale with a mean
mean score that ranges from 4.40 to 4.06 with total mean score of 4.26 and standard division of 0.57, Demonstration
score of 4.26, describe as very high with a total standard Scale with a mean score of 4.25 and standard division of 0.53,
division of 0.45, which means that quality of learning is Application Scale with a mean score of 4.22 and standard
always affected. Academic Learning Time with a mean score division of 0.62 and Integration Scale with a mean score of
of 4.24 and with a standard division of 0.54, Learning 4.26 and standard division of 0.52. Authentic problem scale
Progress Scale with a mean score of 4.40 and standard has a mean ration of 4.06 or high with a standard division of
division of 0.58, Student Satisfaction Scale with a mean score 0.62, got the lowest score.

Indicator SD Mean Descriptive Level

Academic Learning Time 0.54 4.24 Very High
Learning Progress Scale 0.58 4.40 Very High
Student Satisfaction Scale 0.52 4.33 Very High
Global Course and Instructor Quality Scale 0.58 4.28 Very High
Authentic Problem Scale 0.62 4.06 High
Activation Scale 0.57 4.26 Very High
Demonstration Scale 0.53 4.25 Very High
Application Scale 0.62 4.22 Very High
Integration Scale 0.52 4.26 Very High
Overall 0.45 4.26 Very High
Table 2: Level of Quality of Learning
C. M-learning Readiness of Students

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 264

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Level of M-learning readiness is reflected in Table 3. It a standard division of 0.86, Improving my communication
can be seen in the table that the total mean score is 4.04. The with a mean grade of 4.10 with a standard division of 0.80,
overall mean score was described to be a high level of M- Enhancing my ability to access knowledge source with a
learning readiness, which means that M-learning readiness mean rating of 4.18 with a standard division of 0.75.
are oftentimes affected to the students.
In support, Enhancing my attitude to want learning with
There were 30 items of M-learning readiness of students a mean rating of 3.93 with a standard division of 0.86, Being
in this study. However, 27 items were described as high level, well supported by my school’s technical infrastructure and
three items were described as very high level. Connecting me wireless network with a mean rating of 3.79 with a standard
to my teachers got the highest mean rating of 4.38, or very division of 1.03, Being conducive to me having my own
high with a standard division of 0.69. Playing an important technology with a mean number of 3.91 with a standard
role in my education with a mean of 4.33, or very high and a division of 0.78, Enhancing the job performance of my
standard division of 0.82.Bringing new opportunities for my teacher with a mean score of 4.00 with a standard division of
learning with a mean rating of 4.28 with a standard division 0.83, Making my teacher more effective at work with a mean
of 0.80. Increasing my learning flexibility with a mean rating value of 3.98 with a standard division of 0.87, Enhancing my
of 4.12 with a standard division of 0.82, Helping me improve teacher’s creativity and productivity with a mean point of
my traditional literacy with a mean score of 4.09 and standard 4.07 with a standard division of 0.79
division of 0.79.
Similarly, Making the teaching strategies of my teacher
In addition of the, Allowing to improve my 21st century more interesting with a mean rating of 4.07 with a standard
skills with a mean rating of 4.13 with a standard division of division of 0.82, Improving my learning as it allows me to
0.78, Leveling the playing field for special education students access learning content anytime and anywhere with a mean
with a mean rating of 4.05 with a standard division of 0.82, value of 4.10 with a standard division of 0.77, Being useful in
Enhancing my learning support from teachers with a mean my field of study with a mean score of 4.18 with a standard
rating of 4.17 with a standard division of 0.78, Helping me division of 0.76, Being easy to use with a mean value of 4.08
focus in my classes with a mean grade of 3.87 with a standard with a standard division of 0.80.
division of 0.92, Making me more motivated to learn with a
mean grade of 3.91 and standard division of 0.92, Increasing Lastly, allowing me to interact with other people across
my confidence to participate in every classroom discussion the globe with a mean rating of 4.04 with a standard division
with a mean rating of 3.94 with a standard division of 0.93. of 0.81, Making learning easy and fun with a mean grade of
3.90 with a standard division of 0.91, Being cost effective with
However, Making me more engaged in the classroom a mean of 4.03 with a standard division of 0.80. Being
with a mean grade of 3.90 with a standard division of 0.86, supported by my school administration has a mean ration of
Allowing me to own my learning pace and ways with a mean 3.68 or high with a standard division of 1.13, got the lowest
score of 3.95 with a standard division of 0.84, Allowing me to score.
develop my personal activities with a mean rating of 3.98 with

Item SD Mean Descriptive Level

Playing an important role in my education. 0.82 4.33 Very High
Bringing new opportunities for my learning. 0.80 4.28 Very High
Connecting me to my teachers. 0.69 4.38 Very High
Increasing my learning flexibility. 0.82 4.12 High
Helping me improve my traditional literacy. 0.79 4.09 High
Allowing to improve my 21st century skills. 0.78 4.13 High
Leveling the playing field for special education students. 0.82 4.05 High
Enhancing my learning support from teachers. 0.78 4.17 High
Helping me focus in my classes. 0.92 3.87 High
Making me more motivated to learn. 0.92 3.91 High
Increasing my confidence to participate in every classroom discussion. 0.93 3.94 High
Making me more engaged in the classroom 0.86 3.90 High
Allowing me to own my learning pace and ways 0.84 3.95 High
Allowing me to develop my personal activities. 0.86 3.98 High
Improving my communication. 0.80 4.10 High
Enhancing my ability to access knowledge source 0.75 4.18 High
Enhancing my attitude to want learning. 0.86 3.93 High

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 266

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Being well supported by my school’s technical infrastructure and wireless network 1.03 3.79 High
Being conducive to me having my own technology. 0.78 3.92 High
Being supported by my school administration 1.13 3.68 High
Enhancing the job performance of my teacher. 0.83 4.00 High
Making my teacher more effective at work. 0.87 3.98 High
Enhancing my teacher’s creativity and productivity. 0.79 4.07 High
Making the teaching strategies of my teacher more interesting. 0.82 4.07 High
Improving my learning as it allows me to access learning content anytime and
0.77 4.10 High
anywhere.
Being useful in my field of study. 0.76 4.18 High
Being easy to use. 0.80 4.08 High
Allowing me to interact with other people across the globe 0.81 4.04 High
Making learning easy and fun. 0.91 3.90 High
Being cost effective 0.80 4.03 High
Overall 0.60 4.04 High
Table 3:Level of M-learning Readiness of Students.

Quality of Learning
Self-efficacy
ACT LPC SSS GIS APS ACS DES APS INS Overall
Student .532** .547** .646** .563** .545** .573** .661** .661** .578** .733**
Engagement .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Instruction .545** .508** .658** .593** .595** .666** .716** .656** .601** .765**
Strategies .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
.573** .561** .693** .615** .606** .659** .732** .700** .626** .797**
Overall
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Table 4: Significance on the Relationship between Teacher Self-Efficacy and Quality of Learning

D. Significance on the Relation with Teacher`s Self-Efficacy result: Academic learning time correlated with view of
and Quality of Learning student engagement and instructional strategies yielded and
Data outputs of the link between tests between teacher`s overall r= .537 at p-value ≤ 0.05. Learning progress
self-efficacy and quality of learning are displayed in Table 4. correlated with view of student engagement and instructional
The overall coefficient of correlation is .712 with a p-value of strategies yielded and overall r= .561 at p-value ≤ 0.05.
.000, described as a effective degree of correlation because Student satisfaction correlated with view of student
the p-value is less than the value of 0.05 at the threshold of engagement and instructional strategies yielded and overall
statistical significance in the study. r= .693 at p-value ≤ 0.05. Global course and instructor
quality correlated with view of student engagement and
The indicators of teacher`s self-efficacy correlated with instructional strategies yielded and overall r= .615 at p-value
the indicators of quality of learning yielded the following ≤ 0.05.

Quality of Learning
M-Learning Readiness
ACT LPC SSS GIS APS ACS DES APS INS Overall
.509** .453** .520** .468** .541** .480** .569** .517** .575** .639**
Overall
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Table 5: Significance on the connection with M-learning Readiness and Quality of Learning of Students
Furthermore, authentic problems correlated with view ≤ 0.05. Integration correlated with view of student
of student engagement and instructional strategies yielded engagement and instructional strategies yielded and overall
and overall r= .606 at p-value ≤ 0.05. Activation correlated r= .626 at p-value ≤ 0.05.
with view of student engagement and instructional strategies
yielded and overall r= .659 at p-value ≤ 0.05. Demonstration Moreover, the correlation test of the indicators of
correlated with view of student engagement and instructional teacher`s self-efficacy and quality of learning yielded the
strategies yielded and overall r= .732 at p-value ≤ 0.05. following: Student Engagement linked with academic
Application correlated with view of student engagement and learning time, global course and instructor quality,
instructional strategies yielded and overall r= .700 at p-value demonstration, academic learning time, authentic problems,

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 266

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
application, student satisfaction, activation, integration with learning readiness is significantly related to quality of
an overall r= .733 at p-value ≤ 0.05. Instructional Strategies learning.
linked with academic learning time, global course and
instructor quality, demonstration, academic learning time, ACT - academic learning time; GIS - global course and
authentic problems, application, student satisfaction, instructor quality scale; DES - demonstration scale; LPC -
activation, integration with an overall r= .765 at p-value ≤ learning progress scale; APS - authentic problems scale; APS
0.05. - application scale; SSS - Student satisfaction scale; ACS -
activation scale; INS - integration scale.
ACT - academic learning time; GIS - global course and
instructor quality scale; DES - demonstration scale; LPC - F. Significance of the connection between Teacher`s Self-
learning progress scale; APS - authentic problems scale; APS Efficacy and M-learning Readiness
- application scale; SSS - Student satisfaction scale; ACS - Table 6shows the result of the significant correlation
activation scale; INS - integration scale. between teacher`s self-efficacy and M-learning readiness.
The data in the table reveals that the indicators of teacher`s
E. Significance of the M-learning readiness and quality of self-efficacy such as student engagement and instructional
learning strategies is importantly correlate with M-learning
Table 5 contains the effective connection between M- readiness. As a result, teacher`s self-efficacy when
learning readiness and quality of learning. Among the 9 correlated with M-learning readiness yielded an overall r =
indicators of quality of learning, all of these are efficiently .536 with p-value ≤ .05. Therefore, the two variables are
related to M-learning readiness with a p-value ≤ 0.05. Results significantly related to each other.
yielded an overall r= .639 with p-value ≤ .05, therefore M-

Teacher Efficacy
M-Learning Readiness
.480**
Student Engagement
.000
.528**
Instructional Strategies
.000
.536**
Overall
.000
Table 6: Significance on the relation with Teacher Self-Efficacy and M-learning Readiness

G. Mediation Analysis of the Three Variables either by mediator (M-learning readiness), while the
A linear regression technique was used to examine the remaining portions are either directly or indirectly mediated
data, and the results were used as input for a mediation study by variables not included in the model. In this particular
utilizing the route approach. In the mediation approach instance, as revealed in step 4 (designated as c'), the effect of
proposed by Baron and Kenny (2001), a third variable teacher self-efficacy on quality of teaching and learning was
mediates the link between two variables by exerting a observed to reduce after being influenced by M-learning
mediating influence on the first two variables. There are four readiness, indicating that partial mediation occurred because
requirements that must be completed in order for a third the impact was discovered to be significant at the 0.05 level.
variable to operate as a mediator.
The findings of the calculation of the effect size in the
Table 5 categorizes them as stages 1 through 4 mediation test, which was done between the three variables,
according to their sequence. In step 1, the independent are also shown in the diagram. A measure of the indirect
variable (IV) of teacher self-efficacy was shown to be a route's influence on student learning quality, the impact size
significant predictor of the quality of student learning, which reflects much of the impact of teacher self-efficacy on student
was the dependent variable of this research (DV). In step 2, learning quality may be attributable to the indirect way. It is
the teacher's self-efficacy is shown to be a significant the beta of a teacher's self-efficacy in improving the quality
predictor of students' M-learning preparedness, which is the of learning that has a total impact value of 0.735. In the
mediator variable (M). In step 3, students' M-learning regression, the beta of teacher's self-efficacy toward quality
preparedness is shown to be a strong predictor of the quality of learning was found to be 0.588, and M-learning readiness
of their learning. It is necessary to do further mediation was included as a covariate in the regression. The indirect
analysis by path analysis to determine the importance of the effect value of 0.660 represents the amount of the original
mediation impact since the three steps (paths a, b, and c) are beta between teacher's self-efficacy and quality of learning
significant. Fully mediated analysis will be accomplished that has been redirected and via M-learning readiness to
when both independent and dependent variables' effects on quality of learning (a * b, in which "a" refers to the path
each other become non-significant at the conclusion of the between TSe and MLR and "b" refers to the path between
process of statistical analysis. It implies that the mediator MLR and QoL), as calculated in the original beta equation.
variable is responsible for all of the effects.
It is possible to calculate the ratio index by reducing the
As a result, even if the regression coefficient is indirect influence by the overall effect; for example, 0.660
significantly reduced at the final step but still significant, only divided by 0.735 = 0.898. It appears that approximately 89.8
partial mediation is acquired, which means that only a portion percent of the total effect of teacher self-efficacy on quality
of the independent variable (teacher's self-efficacy) is linked of learning passes through the M-learning readiness variable,

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 267

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
and approximately 10.2 percent of the overall impact would
either be immediate or mediated by other variables that are
not included in model, according to the findings.

Step Path Beta Standard Error Beta

(Unstandardized) (Standardized)
Step 1 c .735 .035 .797
Step 2 a .660 .060 .536
Step 3 b .223 .028 .297
Step 4 c’ .588 .035 .637
Table 7 : Regression results on the variables in the four criteria of the presence of mediating effect

IV. DISCUSSION Lastly, it was discovered that the students were

substantially pleased when they were engaged in their studies
A. Level of Teacher`s Self-Efficacy and that it was tough for them to separate themselves from
The high level of teacher`s self-efficacy is due to the high school. Knowing that students are committed to improve their
rating given by the respondents on student engagement. performance via a variety of methods, I am confident in my
These indicators registered an overall high rating which was ability to help them. (Gittens, 2018).
the product of the high score rated by the students.
C. Level of M-learning Readiness
The result shows that desirable teacher`s self-efficacy The overall result of a high level of M-learning readiness
was always manifested. Student engagement tells us the is as a result of the very high level provided by respondents
degree that while educating or being taught, students for playing a vital part in my educational work, bringing new
demonstrate a degree of motivation that enables them to learn opportunities for my learning and connecting me to my
and advance in their educational endeavors. Instructional teachers. This suggests that the students' adoption of M-
Strategies provides us with information on the strategies that learning preparedness is on a somewhat positive trajectory.
instructors employ to help pupils become autonomous,
strategic learners. This means that there is no conflict arising To discuss in details, it could be argued that educational
between them or if there is any, it is settled immediately. institutions and administrators will be required to provide the
necessary support for mobile technologies, pedagogical
Consequently, it is as a result of this that it is necessary approaches, infrastructure, and wireless networking in order
to comprehend student behavior and teacher self-efficacy in for effective implementation of M-learning to take place
the classroom, in order to fulfill the academic and behavioral throughout the school system. With mobile technology, many
expectations of the future global economy. There’s a need to students are ready to use M-learning in order to gain
understand how student behavior impacts a teacher's self- information, motivate, and engage the various kinds of
efficacy to fulfill the academic and behavioral expectations learning in the classroom, regardless of whether a
of the future. (Medina, 2017). conventional or blended learning model is being used in their
schools. (Barnes, 2018).
As a result, teacher self-efficacy has an impact on
teacher classroom practice, job happiness, and overall career Moreover, because mobile technology is designed to
length. It indicates that a teacher's views about his or her accommodate people's increasingly mobile lifestyles,
competence in the classroom may have a greater impact on mobility is often regarded as a key benefit of mobile learning
classroom practices than the subject knowledge gained that distinguishes it from conventional education methods
throughout the preparation process (Mongillo, 2011). such as computer-based learning. Learners may get access to
education without being restricted by geography or time
B. Level of Quality of Learning constraints by using mobile technologies. (Liu, Han & Li,
The level of quality of learning obtained a very high level. 2010).
As indicated by this indicator, students are willing to try new
things and take risks when applying strategies to solve D. Correlation Between Measures
problems in both traditional and creative ideas, are involved The test on relationship of the study confirmed that there
in the design of their task and facilitate the learning process, is a link between the levels of teacher`s self-efficacy and
think in their own capacity to study, and are ready to quality of learning. As a result, the null hypothesis is rejected.
communicate and reflect on their own learning. The findings suggested that the self-efficacy of the instructor
is associated with the quality of learning. This implies that the
Moreover, students make connections between what quality of learning has an impact on the teacher's sense of
they have learned or experienced in the past and what they self-efficacy.
will learn or do in the future; They also are exposed to distinct
instances of what they will study or accomplish in the The result agrees in the study of Coronado, 2016 which
hereafter; and that they are able can apply that knowledge claims that "Teacher's self-efficacy for teaching—their views
with their own personal life when they have completed their of their own skills to promote students' learning and
studies. Additionally, teachers must satisfy a set of criteria engagement—has proven to be an essential teacher attribute
and adhere to a set of procedures that will help them be more frequently associated with good student and teacher results".
successful in the classroom. (Chadha, 2009).

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 268

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Lastly, this result is consistent with the findings of De multitasking and students' perceived deep and intimate
La Rosa (2017), It is important to provide students with connection with their mobile devices.
feedback that informs them of their progress, expose students
to understand environments that promote and enhance their E. Mediating Effect of M-Learning Readiness of Students on
life experience in highlighting the ways that make clear the Relationship between Teacher`s Self-Efficacy and
theoretical gaps, and instill students’ confidence that this is Quality of Learning
possible to win in a criminology class, among other things. The aim of this research was to make a contribution to the
literature by identifying a possible indirectly, intervening
In this study of mediation, the first step of Baron and variables for the association between teacher self-efficacy
Kenny’s (1986) procedure that there is a connection between and the quality of learning in the classroom. Distinctively, M-
the independent variable, teacher`s self-efficacy to the learning readiness were studied as a possible mediating
dependent variable, quality of learning was established. concept to explain the way in which a teacher's self-efficacy
impacts the quality of student learning. In this study, while no
The results of the overall analysis of the association complete mediation was observed, substantial and significant
between variables indicated that there is a statistically direct effects were discovered, which may aid in the
significant link between M-learning preparedness and the improvement of current studies on teacher self-efficacy and
quality of student learning. As a result, the null hypothesis is the quality of learning in schools.
ruled out. According to the findings, M-learning readiness is
associated with higher levels of learning quality. This implies Subsequently, these authors' studies focus on the
that students' M-learning readiness has an impact on the relation between teacher self-efficacy and learning quality
overall quality of their learning. they are relevant to the findings of the study by Roche (2013)
which found that M-learning readiness can be used as a
This result supports the study of Andersen, (2019), as mediator to improve teacher self-efficacy, which was
shown by the fact of mobile learning is described as learning discovered to be critical to the overall success of the
that is facilitated by mobile technologies, with the elements institution and lead to exceptional results. Current research
of mobility and ubiquity introduced, allowing learners to shows that M-learning readiness is an important and positive
engage with m-learning applications, educational content and partial mediator of teacher self-efficacy and student learning
materials, and the learning community at any time, from any quality, which fulfilled the criteria set out in the study
location, and while on the go. conducted by Baron and Kenny (in 1986).
The result also supports the study of Barnes, (2016) The findings demonstrated that a teacher's self-efficacy
which claims that M-learning takes place via social and is a strong predictor of the quality of learning and the
content exchanges, allowing students to establish connections propensity to engage in M-learning. Furthermore, students'
while studying whenever and wherever they want to. For M- M-learning preparedness has a major impact on the overall
learning to be sustainable, educational institutions and quality of their learning. The findings revealed that M-
administrators will need to make substantial time and learning preparedness has a mediating influence on the self-
financial expenditures in mobile technology, initiative efficacy of teachers as well as the quality of learning for
programs and the professional development of instructors in students. This suggests that M-learning preparedness has an
order to support it. Lastly, the result supports the impact on the teacher's self-efficacy, which in turn has an
study of Al-Shahrani, (2016) According to him, student impact on the quality of learning for students. As a result of
acceptance develops at various rates when new technology is this intervention, there was a convergence in the relationship
introduced. If we are serious about incorporating M-learning between teacher self-efficacy and learning quality. This
into our educational processes, it is critical that we ensure that suggests that by using M-learning readiness styles, instructors
our students are comfortable with and capable of integrating will be able to produce high levels of teacher self-efficacy,
M-learning into their learning environments. which will translate into high levels of student learning
quality.
The test on relationship of the study showed that there
is a huge relation with the levels of teacher`s self-efficacy and The result agrees the theory of Baron, et al (1986) which
M-learning readiness. As a result, the null hypothesis is ruled states that a mediator causes the outcome and not vice versa.
out. The findings suggested that a teacher's self-efficacy is It has been observed that the effect of teacher`s self-efficacy
associated with their preparation for M-learning. This means to quality of learning is through M-learning readiness but
that M-learning readiness does affect the teacher`s self- does not reverse the direction.
efficacy.
V. CONCLUSION
The result supports the study of Triplett, (2018) which
states that advantages of M-learning include cost reductions Finally, conclusions are reached in this part after taking
found in cloud-based services, quick feedback, access to rich into account the outcome of the research. The outcomes of
media and real-time contact with many students backed by this research unequivocally support the hypotheses
social networks or apps that enable anytime, anywhere, concerning the mediating influence of students' M-learning
anytime learning. communication was out that students readiness on the association between teacher self-efficacy and
increasingly demand educational institutions to correspond the quality of learning. The findings are interpreted as a
with their characteristics, such as the frequency with which general acceptance of this assumption. Hence, the findings
they use their smartphones and tablets, propensity for provide evidence that the consideration of teacher`s self-
efficacy is relevant for research on quality of learning of

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 269

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
students; teacher`s self-efficacy and M-learning readiness; [8.] Carver, E. H. (2015). The use of peer video via M-
and M-learning readiness and quality of learning. The learning to teach essential nursing skills (Order No.
respondents are agreeable with the idea that teacher`s self- 10023279). Available from ProQuest Central.
efficacy is important in quality of learning. In effect, the (1768694407). Retrieved from
respondents exhibit a high level of teacher`s self-efficacy, https://search.proquest.com/docview/1768694407?acco
very high level on quality of learning and high level on M- untid=31259
learning readiness. [9.] Chadha, R. (2009). Dependability of college student
ratings of teaching and learning quality (Order No.
The findings were in support of the anchored theory 3380155). Available from ProQuest Central.
self-efficacy propounded by Albert Bandura (1986), Social (304899597). Retrieved from
Cognitive Theory of Maddux (1993), and lastly, the Self- https://search.proquest.com/docview/304899597?accou
Determination Theory by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan ntid=31259
(1985). For this reason, M-learning readiness is significantly [10.] Charkhabi, Morteza & Abarghuei, Mohsen & Hayati,
mediates the link between teacher`s self-efficacy and quality David. (2013). The association of academic burnout
of learning. The theory cited above discuss the association with self-efficacy and quality of learning experience
among the variables used in the study. Thus, these theories among Iranian students. Springer Plus. 2. 677.
are contradicted in the present investigation since it deals with 10.1186/2193-1801-2-677.
the mediating effect of M-learning readiness of students on [11.] Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M., & Song, J. (2012). An
the relation between teacher`s self-efficacy and quality of investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher
learning. education based on the theory of planned
behavior. Computers & education, 59(3), 1054-1064.
REFERENCES [12.] Clark, N. B., & Bates, R. (2003). Self-Efficacy Beliefs
and Teacher Effectiveness: Implications for
[1.] Ajang, J. A. (2016). The impacts of quality teaching on
Professional Development.
student satisfaction in higher education in south
[13.] Coronado, D. M. (2016). Teacher's sense of self efficacy
sudan (Order No. 10143305). Available from ProQuest
and grit and its relationship to student
Central. (1824678313). Retrieved from
achievement (Order No. 10152948). Available from Pro
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1824678313?acco
Quest Central. (1835845591). Retrieved from
untid=31259
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1835845591?acco
[2.] Al-Shahrani, H. (2016). Investigating the determinants
untid=31259
of mobile learning acceptance in higher education in
[14.] Damon, P. J. (2016). Professional relationships: An
saudiarabia (Order No. 10123528). Available from
interpretive phenomenological analysis of professional
ProQuest Central. (1795554296). Retrieved from
development experiences and teacher's self-
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1795554296?acco
efficacy (Order No. 10194283). Available from
untid=31259
ProQuest Central. (1861964630). Retrieved from
[3.] Andersen, K. (2019). Perceived user experience
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1861964630?acco
associated with m-learning: An exploratory case
untid=31259
study (Order No. 27671132). Available from ProQuest
[15.] Douglas, C. B. (2011). The relationship between faculty
Central. (2338040600). Retrieved from
gender, student understanding of biblical gender roles,
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2338040600?acco
and perceived quality of learning experience in southern
untid=31259
baptist affiliated seminaries (Order No. 3454185).
[4.] Aydemir, Hasan & Duran, Munise & Kapidere, Metin
Available from ProQuest Central. (868502652).
& Kaleci, Devkan & Aksoy, Numan. (2014). Self-
Retrieved from
efficacy of Teacher Candidates Intended Teaching
https://search.proquest.com/docview/868502652?accou
Profession. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.
ntid=31259
152. 161-166. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.174.
[16.] Dungy, K. (2018). M-learning: A qualitative study of
[5.] Barnes, J. A., Jr. (2018). Teachers' perceptions of
characteristics that lead to Knowledge/Skill attainment
implementing M-learning using pedagogical
using mobile devices (Order No. 10973161). Available
approaches (Order No. 10787846). Available from
from ProQuest Central. (2130169542). Retrieved from
ProQuest Central. (2051358066). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2130169542?acco
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2051358066?acco
untid=31259
untid=31259
[17.] Gao, Y. (2011). Secondary history/social studies
[6.] Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–
teachers' self-efficacy regarding geography
mediator variable distinction in social psychological
teaching (Order No. 3487455). Available from
research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical
ProQuest Central. (913076080). Retrieved from
considerations. Journal of personality and social
https://search.proquest.com/docview/913076080?accou
psychology, 51(6), 1173.
ntid=31259
[7.] Berry, B. (2018). A quantitative study of optimistic
[18.] Gittens, N. (2018). Leadership practices that affect
explanatory style as a theoretical pathway to teacher
student achievement: Facilitating high-quality learning
self-efficacy (Order No. 10975924). Available from
experiences for students (Order No. 10788013).
ProQuest Central. (2134107719). Retrieved from
Available from ProQuest Central. (2037183606).
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2134107719?acco
Retrieved from
untid=31259

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 270

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2037183606?acco Retrieved from
untid=31259 https://search.proquest.com/docview/902585583?accou
[19.] Guenzler, A. M. (2016). Teacher leadership and teacher ntid=31259
efficacy: A correlational study comparing teacher [29.] Mulder, S. L. (2010). Exploring the relationships
perceptions of leadership and efficacy and teacher between teachers' self-efficacy and teachers'
evaluation scores from the north Carolina educator multicultural self-efficacy (Order No. 3492794).
evaluation system (Order No. 10119014). Available Available from ProQuest Central. (919062648).
from ProQuest Central. (1805168678). Retrieved from Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1805168678?acco https://search.proquest.com/docview/919062648?accou
untid=31259 ntid=31259
[20.] Guo, Ying & Dynia, Jaclyn & Pelatti, Christina & [30.] O'Toole, M. (2002, Jan). No free lunch on the internet:
Justice, Laura. (2014). Self-efficacy of early childhood Technology and quality learning [quality learning
special education teachers: Links to classroom quality symposium]. Teach, , 23-25. Retrieved from
and children's learning for children with language https://www.proquest.com/magazines/no-free-lunch-
impairment. Teaching and Teacher Education. 39. 12– on-internet-technology-quality/docview/214500139/se-
21. 10.1016/j.tate.2013.11.005. 2?accountid=31259
[21.] Hamann, D. (2015). The construction and validation of [31.] Rinelli, K. (2013). Overcoming K–12 teacher resistance
an M-learning framework for online and blended to technology and learning using M-learning (Order No.
learning environments (Order No. 3700118). Available 3558879). Available from ProQuest Central.
from ProQuest Central. (1680014899). Retrieved from (1352758473). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1680014899?acco https://search.proquest.com/docview/1352758473?acco
untid=31259 untid=31259
[22.] Hassen, A. M. (2016). A comprehensive framework for [32.] Roche, A. J. (2013). M-learning: A psychometric study
design and evaluation of M-learning of the mobile learning perception scale and the
applications (Order No. 10100924). Available from relationships between teachers' perceptions and school
ProQuest Central. (1785357921). Retrieved from Level/Technology skill level (Order No. 3589927).
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1785357921?acco Available from ProQuest Central. (1430897145).
untid=31259 Retrieved from
[23.] Kailin, D. C. (2002). Quality of learning in primary https://search.proquest.com/docview/1430897145?acco
care: A social systems inquiry (Order No. 3056557). untid=31259
Available from ProQuest Central. (275790252). [33.] Sherley, B. (2015). Investigating the relationship
Retrieved from between a school principal's transformational leadership
https://search.proquest.com/docview/275790252?accou style and a teacher's sense of self-efficacy (Order No.
ntid=31259 3673029). Available from ProQuest Central.
[24.] Kerr, M. B. (2013). Teacher stress and administrative (1651954180). Retrieved from
support as predictors of teachers' self-efficacy for https://search.proquest.com/docview/1651954180?acco
special education teachers in California’s central untid=31259
valley (Order No. 3567289). Available from ProQuest [34.] Skaalvik, E. M., &Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-
Central. (1420345326). Retrieved from efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1420345326?acco relations. Teaching and teacher education, 26(4), 1059-
untid=31259 1069.
[25.] Liu, Y., Han, S., & Li, H. (2010). Understanding the [35.] Strachan, S. M. (2005). An identity theory and social
factors driving m-learning adoption: A literature review. cognitive theory examination of the role of identity in
Campus - Wide Information Systems, 27(4), 210-226. health behaviour and behavioural regulation (Order No.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650741011073761 NR12163). Available from ProQuest Central.
[26.] Medina, L. G. (2017). The effects classroom (305392837). Retrieved from
experiences and student conduct have on a teacher's https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-
self-efficacy in schools with positive behavior theses/identity-theory-social-cognitive-examination-
interventions and supports (PBIS) (Order No. role/docview/305392837/se-2?accountid=31259
10274447). Available from ProQuest Central. [36.] Sweet, S. N. (2011). Self-determination theory and self-
(1895098612). Retrieved from efficacy theory: Can they work together to predict
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1895098612?acco physical activity in cardiac rehabilitation? (Order No.
untid=31259 NR98228). Available from ProQuest Central.
[27.] Messinger, J. (2011). M-learning: An exploration of the (1399182450). Retrieved from
attitudes and perceptions of high school students versus https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/self-
teachers regarding the current and future use of mobile determination-theory-efficacy-can-they-
devices for learning (Order No. 3487951). Available work/docview/1399182450/se-2?accountid=31259
from ProQuest Central. (914201229). Retrieved from [37.] Tobery-Nystrom, J. (2011). An exploration of self-
https://search.proquest.com/docview/914201229?accou efficacy in a teacher-educator's practice (Order No.
ntid=31259 3434607). Available from ProQuest Central.
[28.] Mongillo, M. B. (2011). Exploring the development of (847384999). Retrieved from
novice teachers' self-efficacy (Order No. 3480845). https://search.proquest.com/docview/847384999?accou
Available from ProQuest Central. (902585583). ntid=31259

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 271

Volume 6, Issue 11, November – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[38.] Triplett, J. (2018). Student attitudes regarding M-
learning in higher education: A case study of mobile
device use (Order No. 10830505). Available from
ProQuest Central. (2063405386). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2063405386?acco
untid=31259
[39.] Urrea, L. M. (2010). K–6 teacher's self-efficacy: Their
past experiences with their own K–12 teachers as a
source of influence (Order No. 3422100). Available
from ProQuest Central. (755303507). Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/755303507?accou
ntid=31259
[40.] Wittek, A. L., & Habib, L. (2013). Quality teaching and
learning as practice within different disciplinary
discourses.

IJISRT21NOV195 www.ijisrt.com 272