Teachers’ motivational orientations: Associations between teachers' self-efficacy, self-regulation, empathy, and interventions in bullying

Introduction Teachers must have sufficient intervention competence to intervene successfully in bullying situations. In addition to knowledge and beliefs, motivational orientations are considered important components in teacher competence models (Kunter et al., 2013). Motivation can include all aspects that influence if, with which intensity, and how people act. In the context of bullying intervention, this includes self-efficacy, empathy, and self-regulation. However, while self-efficacy is one of the most investigated motivational aspects of teachers (Fischer et al., 2020; Kunter, 2013, Lauermann et al., 2020), the other aspects – self-regulation and empathy – have only been seldomly investigated in the context of student bullying (Berkovich, 2020; Fischer & Bilz, 2019). Method Based on findings from published single studies as well as unpublished analyses, the associations between teachers’ motivational orientations (self-efficacy, self-regulation, empathy) and their likelihood of intervention (reported by teachers and students) as well as their students’ bullying experiences (as bullies, victims, and bully-victims) will be presented. All analyses are based on a study that was conducted in Germany with more than 2,000 students and 556 teachers at 24 schools. Teachers’ likelihood of intervention was assessed in bullying situations that have been reported retrospectively by students and teachers. Logistic regression analyses (multilevel analyses when appropriate) have been conducted. Results Findings show that teachers’ self-efficacy was associated with teachers’ likelihood of intervention from the teachers’ perspectives. Also, students whose teachers reported higher self-efficacy and a higher tendency to reflect their behaviours thoroughly and choose wisely (a component of self-regulation) reported fewer bullying experiences. The students’ perspective on the teachers’ likelihood of intervention was associated with experiences as bullies, bullied, and bully-victims, but could not be explained by teachers’ motivational orientations. Conclusion Possible underlying pathways and areas requiring further research as well as practical and theoretical implications will be discussed.