The Unwavering Power of Self-Efficacy in Education

In our pursuit of improving student learning, we often focus on curriculum, technology, and pedagogy. While these are all critical components, we sometimes overlook one of the most powerful drivers of success in our schools: self-efficacy. It is that unwavering belief in our own ability to make a difference, to overcome challenges, and to ultimately impact student achievement. This is not just a feel-good concept; it is a research-backed imperative for every teacher and leader who is serious about creating a thriving learning culture. You can listen to more about this on my podcast Unpacking the Backpack. 

Self-efficacy, as defined by Albert Bandura, is the belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments. For educators, this translates to a deep-seated confidence in their ability to positively influence student outcomes. Research has consistently shown a strong correlation between teacher self-efficacy and student achievement. Teachers with a high sense of efficacy are more likely to try new instructional strategies, persist in the face of setbacks, and create a positive and engaging classroom environment (Jerrim & Tars, 2025).

But where does this powerful belief come from? It is not something we are born with; it is cultivated through experience, observation, and feedback. This is where the role of leadership becomes paramount. School leaders who actively develop a culture of trust, collaboration, and support can significantly impact teacher self-efficacy. When teachers feel that their leaders believe in them, they are more likely to believe in themselves. This is not just about providing resources; it is about creating a school climate where teachers feel empowered to take risks, to innovate, and to grow professionally (Liu & Hallinger, 2018).

Transformational leadership, in particular, has been shown to have a profound impact on teacher self-efficacy and, in turn, on their innovative behavior in the classroom (Zainal & Matore, 2021). When leaders inspire a shared vision, provide individualized support, and intellectually stimulate their staff, they create the conditions for self-efficacy to flourish. This is not about top-down mandates; it is about a collaborative partnership where leaders and teachers work together to achieve common goals. The research is clear: leadership behaviors have a statistically significant relationship with teachers' efficacy (Winn et al., 2021).

The concept of self-efficacy extends beyond the classroom to the leaders themselves. Leaders with a strong sense of self-efficacy are more likely to be effective in their roles, to inspire confidence in their staff, and to create a positive school culture (Paglis, 2010). They are the pedagogical leaders who are not afraid to roll up their sleeves, to be visible in classrooms, and to model the very behaviors they expect from their teachers. They understand that their own belief in their ability to lead is contagious and sets the tone for the entire school community.

So, how can we cultivate this essential quality in ourselves and in others? It starts with a commitment to continuous learning and professional growth. It involves seeking out opportunities to collaborate with colleagues, to observe best practices, and to receive constructive feedback. It means celebrating successes, learning from failures, and always maintaining a growth mindset. As leaders, it means creating a culture where it is safe to be vulnerable, to ask for help, and to take on new challenges. Below are some reflective questions to consider:

1. How does my personal belief in my ability to influence student outcomes change the way I respond to instructional challenges or setbacks? 
2. What specific actions am I taking to foster a culture of trust and collaboration that empowers my colleagues to take risks in their teaching? 
3. In what ways am I modeling a commitment to continuous professional growth and vulnerability to show others that learning is a lifelong process? 
4. How do our current professional learning and feedback structures prioritize the celebration of success and the mastery of new skills to increase our shared sense of capability? 

In the end, self-efficacy is the bedrock of effective teaching and leadership. It is the quiet confidence that allows us to navigate the complexities of our profession with grace and determination. It is the unwavering belief that we can, and will, make a difference in the lives of our students. Let us all commit to nurturing this powerful force within ourselves and within our schools. Our students deserve nothing less.

Jerrim, J., & Tars, E. (2025). Teacher self-efficacy, instructional practice, and student outcomes: Evidence from the TALIS Video Study. American Educational Research Journal, 62(2). 

Liu, S., & Hallinger, P. (2018 ). Principal instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher professional learning in China: Testing a mediated-effects model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(4), 501–528. 

Paglis, L. L. (2010 ). Leadership self-efficacy: Research findings and practical applications. Journal of Management Development, 29(9), 771–782. 

Winn, C. S., Cothern, T. L., Lastrapes, R., & Orange, A. (2021 ). Teacher self-efficacy and principal leadership behaviors. ICPEL Education Leadership Review, 22(1), 17–26.

Zainal, M. A., & Matore, M. E. E. M. (2021). The influence of teachers' self-efficacy and school leaders' transformational leadership practices on teachers' innovative behaviour. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(12), 6423. 

The Role of Human Interaction in Deep Learning

Do you like “shiny” things as much as I do? If so, don’t fret, as it is human nature.  We often find ourselves captivated by the latest digital tools, such as AI-driven platforms and virtual environments. While these innovations offer incredible potential to scale resources, they frequently miss the most critical component of the educational experience: the human element. Real learning, specifically the kind that supports disruptive thinking and deep cognitive engagement, does not happen in a vacuum of screens and algorithms. It happens through connection.

To truly transform student outcomes, we must shift our focus back to the power of human interaction. Deep learning is not a passive act of consumption; it is an active, social process. When we prioritize human-centered learning experiences, particularly through high-dosage, in-person tutoring, we move beyond simple content delivery and toward a model that prioritizes the whole child.

The Science of Connection and Cognitive Engagement

The importance of human interaction is grounded in more than just sentiment; it is backed by decades of rigorous research. Learning is fundamentally a social endeavor. When students interact with a mentor or tutor in person, they are not just receiving information. They are participating in a feedback loop that stimulates higher-order thinking.

Research has consistently shown that human interaction is the primary driver of academic growth. For instance, Nickow, Hull, and Ritter (2020) conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental evidence, concluding that tutoring programs consistently yield large positive effects on student learning outcomes across various subjects and grade levels. Their findings emphasize that the structured, personal nature of tutoring is significantly more effective than many other classroom-based interventions.

This effectiveness is rooted in the way humans engage cognitively. According to the ICAP framework, interactive learning, which occurs when students engage in dialogue and collaborative problem-solving with another person, leads to the highest levels of knowledge acquisition. Chi and Wylie (2014) argue that interactive activities are superior to constructive, active, or passive ones because they require students to co-construct knowledge through social mediation. In a virtual-only model, this social mediation is often diluted, resulting in lower cognitive depth.

In-Person vs. Virtual: The Need for Human-Centered Models

While virtual models provided a necessary bridge during the pandemic, the data now clearly shows a preference for the depth that in-person interaction provides. The difference lies in the nuance of communication: the ability of a tutor to read body language, sense frustration before it becomes a barrier, and pivot strategies in real-time. This level of responsiveness is difficult to replicate in a purely digital space.

Disruptive thinking requires a safe environment where students feel seen and supported, something I strongly emphasize in my book Personalize. High-impact, human-centered tutoring creates a space where "failure" is reframed as a necessary step toward mastery. This is particularly vital for students who have fallen behind. Guryan et al. (2023) demonstrated that intensive, in-person tutoring for adolescents can lead to substantial gains in academic performance. This proves that even for older students, the "human touch" can close gaps that traditional instruction struggles to reach.

When we integrate people, curriculum, and technology correctly, the results are transformative. The goal is not to abandon technology but to use it as a scaffold for human interaction. For example, using a proprietary, standards-aligned digital curriculum enables precise data tracking, but the true magic happens when a trained tutor sits beside a student to navigate it together. This hybrid approach, which puts pedagogy and people first and technology second, is what drives sustainable growth.

Evidence-Based Success: A Closer Look

The efficacy of this approach is reflected in recent performance data. During the 2024–2025 school year, students utilizing integrated in-person tutoring models from HeyTutor saw a 160% increase in those testing at or above grade level in Math and a 162% increase in ELA from the beginning to the end of their programs. The impact on English Learners was equally profound, with a 95% increase in Math and a 92% increase in ELA proficiency. 

These results align with the broader consensus on evidence-based reform. Slavin (2018) notes that for educational interventions to be truly effective and scalable, they must be grounded in proven methods that emphasize personalized, small-group instruction. This focus on evidence is why programs that prioritize in-person, small-group interventions such as HeyTutor have been recognized with honors like Stanford University’s National Student Support Accelerator Badge and the 2025 Tech and Learning Awards in Primary and Secondary Education.

A compelling example of this in action can be seen in the SUHSD Case Study, which highlights how the value of in-person learning provides insights that go far beyond what a dashboard can report. It is about the shift in student confidence and the ability to think critically and disruptively about the world around them.

Moving Forward: Prioritizing the Human Element

As we look toward the future of education, we must ensure that our "innovations" do not inadvertently isolate our students. The best solution for deeper student engagement and academic growth remains the intentional connection between a dedicated human being and a learner. By emphasizing in-person, small-group tutoring, we provide students with the social-emotional support and cognitive challenge they need to thrive.

We have the tools, the research, and the data. Now, we must have the leadership to prioritize the human connection in every classroom and every learning session. To see how these principles are being put into practice to drive record-breaking student growth, I encourage you to check out HeyTutor and join the movement toward human-centered educational excellence.

Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.

Guryan, J., Ludwig, J., Bhatt, M. P., Cook, P. J., Davis, J. M. V., Dodge, K., Farkas, G., Fryer, R. G., Jr., Mayer, S. E., Pollack, H. A., & Steinberg, L. (2023). Not too late: Improving academic outcomes among adolescents. American Economic Review, 113(3), 738-765.

Nickow, A., Hull, A. F., & Ritter, G. W. (2020). The effects of tutoring on education outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(3), 397-451.

Slavin, R. E. (2018). Evidence-based reform in education. European Journal of Education, 53(3), 301-312.

Stop Fixing, Start Developing: A Roadmap for High-Impact Coaching

Coaching has been in my blood since my teaching days.  When I got my first position, I was recruited into a freshman football role by one of my former coaches on the varsity staff.  While I was worried about the impact on me as a first-year teacher, those concerns never materialized.  A year later, I took on two additional positions: head varsity ice hockey coach and freshman lacrosse coach.  For me, I wanted to impact as many students as possible both in and out of the classroom. Little did I know that these experiences would profoundly shape me as I built my coaching consultancy many years later.  

In my work with schools across the globe, I have consistently seen that the most significant driver of student outcomes is not a new piece of technology or a trendy curriculum; it is the quality of teaching and leadership. However, effective practices do not happen in a vacuum. It requires a culture of support that moves beyond the traditional, often superficial, evaluative process. To truly move the needle on student learning, we must shift to a coaching culture.

In the latest episode of my podcast, Unpacking the Backpack, I explored the L.E.A.D model designed to guide the growth of effective coaching. By focusing on four specific pillars, we can empower educators to reach new heights of professional excellence.

The Foundation: Listening with Intent

Effective coaching is built on a foundation of trust. Without it, even the most brilliant pedagogical advice will go unheeded. This trust is earned through the practice of listening with intent. Many leaders fall into the trap of "fixing" a teacher's problems before fully understanding the classroom context.

True listening involves a deep engagement with the educator’s perspective. Research supports the necessity of this relational approach. For example, a study by Knight and van Nieuwerburgh (2012) finds that the success of instructional coaching largely depends on the quality of the relationship and the coach's ability to facilitate self-directed learning through empathetic listening. When we listen first, we validate the educator’s experience and create a safe space for the vulnerability that growth requires.

Building the Muscles: Developing Capacity

Once trust is established, the focus shifts to building capacity. In education, we often mistake doing what we are told for actual growth. Capacity, however, is the internal ability to make high-level decisions independently. The goal of coaching is to provide the scaffolding necessary for teachers and administrators to become their own best observers.

This process must be job-embedded and continuous. According to Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan (2018), the impact of coaching is significantly greater than that of traditional professional development because it provides sustained, individualized support directly applicable to the teacher's unique classroom environment. By investing in a shared vision, mission and set of goals, we help educators see not just where they are, but who they can become as practitioners.

The Mirror: Empowering Through Evidence

If capacity building is the "how" of growth, evidence is the "what." We must move away from feedback based on subjective opinions and move toward feedback grounded in objective data. This is where we truly empower our staff. When we use evidence, we are not making a judgment; we are providing a mirror.

Using artifacts such as student work samples, engagement data, or video reflections allows for a more rigorous analysis of practice. Desimone and Pak (2017) emphasize that instructional coaching is most effective when it is content-focused and supported by active learning through the examination of evidence. When an educator can see the direct correlation between their actions and student outcomes, they are more likely to take ownership of the necessary changes. It shifts the conversation from "Am I a good teacher? Am I an effective administrator?" to "Is this strategy working for my students? Is this benefiting my staff?"

The Compass: Aligning Actions

The final component involves ensuring that all moves are aligned with the school’s vision and goals. We have all seen the "initiative fatigue" that occurs when educators feel pulled in multiple directions. A coach serves as an alignment specialist, ensuring that daily practices are coherent and research-based. Alignment creates synergy that drives exponential growth. When the entire district or building is pulling in the same direction, leadership and teaching become more focused and sustainable. We must continually ask whether our coaching cycles directly serve our mission to improve students' lives.

Coaching is the engine of professional growth. By listening with intent, developing capacity, empowering through evidence, and aligning actions, we create a system that supports everyone in being their best. It is about human connection, belief in potential, and a relentless commitment to collective improvement.

Want to learn more about Aspire Change EDU’s L.E.A.D coaching model and how the process can support leaders and educators in your district, school, or organization? Reach out today to set up a complimentary thirty (30) minute Zoom meeting. 

Desimone, L. M., & Pak, K. (2017). Instructional coaching as high-quality professional development. Theory Into Practice, 56(1), 3–12. 

Knight, J., & van Nieuwerburgh, C. (2012). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40(1), 100–120. 

Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588. 

The Personalized Learning Empowerment Framework

I have been sharing on this blog insights on personalization for the past sixteen (16) years. During my years as a principal, we emphasized a shift from “what” to “who” to help students take greater ownership of their learning.  From using Poll Everywhere to amplify student voice, to flipped lessons in math, and creating the Academies at NMHS, our goal was to create experiences that our students valued and would ultimately improve outcomes, which it did. The journey, however, was anything but easy. 

Moving from a culture of compliance to one of empowerment is the greatest challenge and opportunity facing educational leaders today. For years, our systems have been designed for standardization, often treating students as passive recipients of information rather than active drivers of their own learning. However, as we discussed in our book Personalize, the shift toward personalized learning is not just about technology; it is about pedagogy and the intentional design of experiences that foster agency, mastery, and purpose. Below is our definition:

"Pesonalized learning is all students getting what they need when and where they need it to learn."

The Personalized Learning Empowerment Framework provides a roadmap for this transformation. It moves beyond the "what" of personalization and dives deep into the "how" by focusing on a continuous cycle of growth. By centering the learner, we can ensure that every student has the support they need to succeed in an ever-changing world.

1. Assess and Understand: The Foundation

Effective personalization begins with a deep understanding of who the learner is. We cannot tailor instruction if we do not first establish a clear picture of a student’s strengths, needs, and aspirations. This extends well beyond traditional standardized test data. We must utilize holistic diagnostics that account for social-emotional well-being, cognitive processing, and personal interests.

A critical component of this phase is creating a learner profile. When students document how they learn best, they begin to take ownership of their educational journey. This process is supported by continuous feedback loops that provide real-time insights into student progress. Research indicates that when assessment is used formatively to understand learner variability, it significantly enhances the teacher's ability to provide targeted support (Papadakis et al., 2021). By building this foundation, we move away from a one-size-fits-all diagnostic approach and toward a more human-centered understanding of excellence.

2. Plan and Tailor: The Strategy

Once the foundation is set, the focus shifts to strategic design. Planning in a personalized environment is a collaborative effort between the educator and the student. Co-constructed goals ensure learning objectives are relevant to the student while meeting rigorous academic standards. This partnership is essential for developing student agency, as it gives learners a voice in determining their path to mastery.

Tailoring the strategy requires a commitment to flexible pathways and varied pacing. Not every student needs the same amount of time to master a concept, nor should they all be required to demonstrate their learning in the same way. Providing multiple entry points and methods for demonstrating competency helps create a more equitable classroom environment. Evidence suggests that flexible learning pathways that prioritize student choice lead to higher levels of engagement and cognitive investment (Bernacki et al., 2021). At this stage, the teacher shifts from a dispenser of knowledge to an architect of learning experiences.

3. Engage and Facilitate: The Action

This is where the framework comes to life in the classroom. Engagement is not just about keeping students busy; it is about active learning that challenges students cognitively and keeps them physically engaged. Facilitation involves a delicate balance of targeted instruction, where the teacher works with small groups or individuals based on data, and the use of adaptive tools that provide personalized practice.

In a facilitated environment, the teacher monitors the room, providing "just-in-time" support rather than "just-in-case" lectures. This transition to active learning models encourages students to solve complex problems and collaborate with peers. Studies have shown that technology-enhanced personalized instruction, when combined with strong teacher facilitation, leads to improved outcomes in both literacy and mathematics (Major et al., 2021). The goal is to create a high-energy environment in which the "heavy lifting" of learning is shifted from the teacher to the student.

4. Reflect and Refine: The Growth Loop

The final, and perhaps most important, element of the framework is the growth loop. Learning is not a linear process with a fixed ending; it is a cycle of continuous improvement. Structured reflection enables students to review their work, identify what went well, and determine where they need to improve. This metacognitive practice is what ultimately leads to self-directed learning.

Refinement is also about data-driven adjustments. As students progress through competency-based pathways, they should advance only after demonstrating a genuine understanding of the material. This ensures that no student is left behind due to gaps in foundational knowledge. Research highlights that systematic reflection and the use of data to adjust instructional goals are vital for sustaining long-term academic growth in personalized settings (Walkington & Bernacki, 2020). By closing the loop, we prepare students not only for the next grade level but also for a lifetime of learning and adaptation.

The Personalized Learning Empowerment Framework is more than a conceptual model; it is a catalyst for a systemic shift toward a more human-centered, effective approach to education. By moving beyond the traditional barriers of "one-size-fits-all" instruction, this framework honors every student's unique identity and provides a scalable roadmap for developing true learner agency. When we commit to this continuous cycle of assessment, strategic planning, active facilitation, and purposeful reflection, we do more than just improve test scores. We cultivate the mastery and purpose students need to navigate a complex future. My hope is that this framework empowers educators to stop managing compliance and start inspiring the self-directed, lifelong learners our world desperately needs.

Bernacki, M. L., Greene, J. A., & Crompton, H. (2021). Mobile technology applications in contexts of formal and informal learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(6), 1437-1441.

Major, L., Francis, G. A., & Tsapali, M. (2021). The impact of technology-enhanced personalized learning on student outcomes: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 635-664.

Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Zaranis, N. (2021). Teaching mathematics with mobile devices and the Role of Cognitive Load and Individual Differences. Education and Information Technologies, 26(1), 257-292.

Sheninger, E. C., & Slaugh, N. (2024). Personalize: Meeting the needs of all learners. ConnectEDD Publishing.

Walkington, C., & Bernacki, M. L. (2020). Appraising evidence-based practices in personalized learning: A review of cognitive and social perspectives. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 156-171.