Recording of Job-Related Self-Concepts of Prospective Teachers (ERBSE-L)

1. Abstract

The Recording of Job-Related Self-Concepts of Prospective Teachers (German: Erfassung des berufsbezogenen Selbstkonzepts von Lehramtsstudierenden, abbreviated as ERBSE-L) is a multidimensional, standardized psychometric questionnaire developed to assess self-beliefs regarding core professional competence domains among pre-service teacher candidates. Grounded in the structural competency standards established by the German Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs (Kultusministerkonferenz [KMK]) and aligned with the overarching model of professional competence advanced by Baumert and Kunter (COACTIV model), ERBSE-L addresses a critical gap in educational psychometrics by distinguishing domain-specific self-concepts rather than relying solely on omnibus measures of generalized teacher self-efficacy.

The instrument comprises 20 positively formulated items structured across six distinct subscales: Subject-Matter Self-Concept (SK Fach, 3 items), Educational / Classroom Management Self-Concept (SK Erziehung, 4 items), Diagnostic Self-Concept (SK Diagnostik, 4 items), Counseling Self-Concept (SK Beratung, 3 items), Media / Educational Technology Self-Concept (SK Medien, 3 items), and Innovation Self-Concept (SK Innovation, 3 items). All items are evaluated on a 4-point Likert response format ranging from 1 (trifft überhaupt nicht zu / strongly disagree) to 4 (trifft völlig zu / strongly agree). The psychometric validation of the ERBSE-L was established within the longitudinal German national research project PaLea (Panel zum Lehramtsstudium), drawing on initial exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) in an exploratory cohort ($N = 484$) and large-scale confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in a cross-sectional and longitudinal cohort ($N = 5,802$ pre-service teachers). Across studies, internal consistency estimates (Cronbach’s $\alpha$) range from .71 to .88, demonstrating satisfactory to excellent reliability for short scales. The scale demonstrates rigorous construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity, alongside robust measurement invariance across biological sex, degree tracks, and longitudinal study phases.

2. Keywords

ERBSE-L, teacher self-concept, pre-service teacher education, professional competence, diagnostic competence, educational counseling, classroom management, instructional media, teacher professionalization, educational psychometrics, PaLea panel, confirmatory factor analysis.

3. Authors

The ERBSE-L was developed by a team of educational psychologists and psychometricians at the Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (IPN) and Kiel University (Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel), Germany, in connection with the nationwide research consortium Panel zum Lehramtsstudium (PaLea):

• Jan Retelsdorf (Primary Investigator & Corresponding Author) — Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (IPN), Kiel, Germany; currently Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Hamburg. Contact: [email protected].
• Jordi Bauer — Department of Educational Research, Kiel University, Germany.
• Susanne Gebauer — Department of Educational Research, Kiel University, Germany.
• Gisela Kauper — Department of Educational Research, Kiel University, Germany.
• Jens Möller — Professor of Educational Psychology, Department of Educational Psychology, Kiel University, Germany.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the ERBSE-L is the economic, psychometrically sound, and differentiated assessment of professional self-concepts among teacher candidates during initial teacher education. For decades, empirical research into teachers’ professional cognitions has been heavily dominated by the construct of teacher self-efficacy, popularized by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy. However, while self-efficacy typically captures prospective, goal-oriented beliefs about an individual’s capability to orchestrate specific actions under challenging future scenarios, the self-concept construct captures past-oriented, evaluated knowledge and cognitive-affective representations of one’s own abilities within defined domains.

Self-concept research within educational psychology (e.g., Marsh’s Internal/External Frame of Reference model) has established that human ability self-concepts are inherently multidimensional, hierarchical, and domain-specific. The professional demands of contemporary educators are notoriously heterogeneous, encompassing far more than didactic instruction. A teacher might feel highly competent in academic subject-matter mastering yet experience profound self-doubt regarding disruptive classroom behavior, psychological counseling with distressed parents, or the technical orchestration of digital educational media. An undifferentiated or global self-concept measure inevitably masks these distinct psychological profiles.

ERBSE-L was constructed specifically to address these theoretical and empirical demands in higher education and teacher training research. Its practical and clinical applications include:

• Higher Education Program Evaluation: Monitoring how university coursework, practical school internships (Schulpraktika), and preparatory service (Referendariat) systematically alter distinct sub-dimensions of student teachers’ professional self-appraisals.
• Large-Scale Educational Panels: Providing an economical 20-item battery suitable for time-restricted multi-cohort longitudinal panels (such as PaLea) examining career transitions, university attrition, and entry into the teaching workforce.
• Advising and Professional Development: Generating empirical domain profiles to inform reflective pedagogical mentoring, enabling prospective teachers to identify specific competence areas (e.g., diagnostic assessment vs. parental counseling) that necessitate deeper pedagogical intervention. It should be noted, however, that ERBSE-L was explicitly validated for socio-scientific group-level research and program evaluation, rather than high-stakes individual diagnostic selection (Einzelfalldiagnostik).

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct operationalized by ERBSE-L is job-related self-concept in prospective teachers (berufsbezogenes Selbstkonzept von angehenden Lehrkräften). Grounded in social-cognitive theory and self-concept research, professional self-concept represents a person’s structured, evaluative self-perception regarding their own job-specific competences, formed through experiential interactions with their professional environment, social comparisons with peers, and internal comparisons across distinct cognitive performance domains.

Drawing on the core professional competence standards codified by the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder in the Federal Republic of Germany (KMK: Unterrichten [Instruction], Erziehen [Educating], Beurteilen [Assessment/Diagnostics], and Innovieren [Innovating]), ERBSE-L divides the overarching professional construct into six empirically corroborated subscales:

1. Subject-Matter Self-Concept (SK Fach)

This subscale evaluates the pre-service teacher’s cognitive appraisal of their subject-specific academic knowledge, conceptual mastery, and content-related intellectual agility across their designated instructional subjects. Subject-matter knowledge (content knowledge [CK]) forms the indispensable foundation of teacher expertise. Example item focus: feeling competent to master complex subject content and resolve subject-specific academic problems with ease.

2. Educational / Classroom Management Self-Concept (SK Erziehung)

Focusing on the pedagogical task of social education, classroom climate regulation, and behavioral leadership, this dimension reflects candidate self-confidence in connecting with heterogeneous student cohorts, establishing structured behavioral boundaries, resolving pupil conflicts, and maintaining composure during discipline breakdowns. It taps into socio-emotional competence and authoritative classroom management capabilities.

3. Diagnostic Self-Concept (SK Diagnostik)

This subscale captures perceived proficiency in evaluating pupil learning prerequisites, accurately gauging academic achievement, uncovering underlying etiologies of individual learning impediments, and identifying targeted remedial support needs. In contemporary heterogeneous and inclusive schooling, pedagogical diagnostic competence is paramount for adaptive teaching.

4. Counseling Self-Concept (SK Beratung)

Teachers continuously serve as advisors to children, adolescents, and their legal guardians. The counseling self-concept assesses perceived competence in conducting empathic, solution-focused consultative dialogues with students and mastering psychologically taxing, conflict-laden conferences with parents regarding educational trajectories and developmental challenges.

5. Media / Educational Technology Self-Concept (SK Medien)

Representing the technical-didactical interface, this domain measures candidate self-beliefs concerning the purposeful, pedagogical integration of educational media and modern digital information technologies into instructional sequences. It mirrors contemporary conceptualizations of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK).

6. Innovation Self-Concept (SK Innovation)

School development and continuous professional growth mandate teachers who are proactive agents of educational change. This dimension measures prospective teachers’ openness toward pioneering instructional designs, their intrinsic disposition to experiment with novel pedagogical methods, and their self-perceived creativity in advancing systemic school development initiatives.

6. Theoretical Framework

The structural and conceptual scaffolding of the ERBSE-L rests at the convergence of two foundational theoretical traditions in contemporary psychological science: the multidimensional model of self-concept and the model of professional teacher competence.

The Multidimensionality of Self-Concept

Historically, educational psychology treated self-concept as a global, unidimensional construct, frequently conflated with generalized self-esteem. This paradigm was fundamentally overturned by Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton (1976), who proposed a hierarchical, multifaceted model of self-concept. Herbert W. Marsh and colleagues rigorously substantiated this multifaceted paradigm across academic contexts, culminating in the Internal/External (I/E) Frame of Reference Model (Marsh, 1986; Möller et al., 2011). According to the I/E model, individuals evaluate their competence not along a single continuum, but via dual comparative mechanisms:

• External Frames of Reference: Social comparison processes wherein an individual contrasts their performance in a given domain against the observed performance of relevant reference groups (e.g., university cohort peers).
• Internal Frames of Reference: Dimensional comparison processes wherein an individual contrasts their own mastery in one domain (e.g., subject-matter mastery) against their personal standing in another distinct domain (e.g., social conflict mediation).

Because dimensional comparisons frequently suppress the correlation between distinct domain-specific self-concepts, an individual can simultaneously sustain an exceptionally high self-concept in one pedagogical subdomain while exhibiting a marked negative self-concept in another. The ERBSE-L explicitly transposes this multidimensional architecture from pupil academic self-concepts to the professional cognitions of prospective educators.

The COACTIV Model of Professional Teacher Competence

The content validity and functional categorization of ERBSE-L domains directly incorporate the structural framework of professional competence advanced in the German COACTIV study led by Jürgen Baumert and Mareike Kunter (Baumert & Kunter, 2006, 2011). In the COACTIV taxonomy, professional action competence comprises four core pillars:

1. Professional Knowledge: Subdivided into Content Knowledge (CK), Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), and General Pedagogical-Psychological Knowledge (GPK).
2. Beliefs, Values, and Goals: Subjective theories regarding teaching, learning, and epistemic orientations.
3. Motivational Orientations: Intrinsic career choices, self-efficacy, and mastery goals.
4. Self-Regulation: Emotional resilience, cognitive engagement, and prevention of occupational burnout.

Self-related cognitions—specifically job-related self-concepts—occupy a central, moderating position between professional knowledge acquisition and professional classroom behavior. Teachers who possess high cognitive content knowledge but deeply deficient diagnostic self-concepts may fail to implement adaptive instructional scaffolding when confronted with struggling students. ERBSE-L directly maps these operational demands to the statutory requirements articulated in the Standards for Teacher Education: Educational Sciences (KMK, 2004, 2008), which establish four fundamental spheres of educational responsibility: Teaching (Unterrichten), Educating (Erziehen), Assessment (Beurteilen), and School Development/Innovating (Innovieren).

7. Validity

Validation of the ERBSE-L followed a rigorous multi-stage psychometric evaluation documented primarily by Retelsdorf, Bauer, Gebauer, Kauper, and Möller (2014) within the framework of the multi-institutional German Panel zum Lehramtsstudium (PaLea). Evidence for construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity is exceptionally well-documented across multiple student cohorts.

Construct and Factorial Validity

Factorial validity was established sequentially. In an initial calibration study ($N = 484$), candidate items were examined through Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) and parallel analysis. The hypothesized six-factor solution emerged as mathematically and substantively superior to more parsimonious or over-factored configurations. In a subsequent cross-validation study ($N = 5,802$), this six-factor architecture was confirmed via Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), displaying excellent global model fit parameters: $\chi^2(155) = 1544.15$, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .966, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = .958, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .039 (90% CI [.037, .041]), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = .032.

Measurement Invariance

A rigorous prerequisite for utilizing the scale in comparative educational research is the demonstration of measurement invariance across demographic and curricular strata. Retelsdorf et al. (2014) systematically verified multigroup invariance:

• Sex/Gender: Metric and scalar invariance were confirmed between female ($72%$) and male ($28%$) teacher candidates, indicating that observed mean score differences reflect authentic latent construct variation rather than differential item functioning (DIF).
• Teaching Track (Schulform): The measurement model held invariant across candidates pursuing primary school (Grundschule), lower secondary (Haupt-/Realschule), upper secondary (Gymnasium), and vocational school (Berufliche Schulen) tracks.
• Longitudinal Invariance: Strict metric invariance was established over longitudinal measurement occasions across university semesters, justifying the scale’s use for tracking developmental trajectories over time.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent and discriminant validity were verified by examining inter-factor latent correlations and correlating ERBSE-L subscales with established external criteria, including career choice motivation (FIT-Choice framework), personality traits (Big Five), and standardized academic achievement indicators:

• Distinct Latent Profiles: Latent inter-correlations among the six subscales were moderate to low (ranging between $r = .18$ and $r = .52$), demonstrating that while the dimensions share common variance under the overarching umbrella of teaching competence, they assess non-redundant, distinct psychological facets.
• Criterion-Related Relations: Subject-Matter Self-Concept (SK Fach) correlated significantly with university grades in academic subject examinations and intrinsic academic interest, while demonstrating negligible correlations with pedagogical empathy. Conversely, Educational Self-Concept (SK Erziehung) and Counseling Self-Concept (SK Beratung) correlated strongly with social motivation, agreeableness, and pedagogical interest in fostering children’s personal development.
• Differential Trajectories: In accordance with theoretical expectations, candidates enrolled in secondary academic tracks (Gymnasium) reported significantly higher Subject-Matter Self-Concept than primary school candidates, whereas primary school candidates demonstrated higher Educational and Classroom Management Self-Concepts.

8. Reliability

The internal consistency of the ERBSE-L scales was evaluated across two large independent investigations. Given the extreme economy of the subscales—which feature only three or four items per domain to minimize respondent burden in large-scale testing—the resulting coefficients meet high psychometric benchmarks for short scales.

Internal Consistency Across Validation Studies

Table 1 details the Cronbach’s alpha ($\alpha$) values obtained across Study 1 ($N = 484$) and Study 2 ($N = 5,802$) as reported by Retelsdorf et al. (2014):

The investigators also calculated McDonald’s omega ($ω$) to estimate factor reliability under tau-congeneric measurement assumptions. Because the calculated $ω$ values diverged from Cronbach’s $\alpha$ by less than .01 across all dimensions, the classic alpha metrics serve as highly robust indicators of scale score precision. Test-retest stability coefficients over semester intervals revealed moderate to high latent autoregressive stabilities ($r_{tt} = .65$ to $.78$), reflecting that ERBSE-L assesses stable trait-like self-conceptions that nevertheless exhibit meaningful plastic sensitivity to structured clinical field experiences and university pedagogy.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the 20 ERBSE-L items was rigorously adjudicated through an advanced two-tier psychometric workflow combining exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), parallel analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (Study 1)

In Study 1 ($N = 484$ pre-service teachers; $68%$ female; mean age $M = 22.20, SD = 3.26$), researchers sought to determine whether the complex, interrelated facets of teacher competence were best captured by a 5-, 6-, 7-, or 8-factor latent model. Utilizing ESEM (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2009) with oblique geomin rotation, competitive model testing was conducted:

• The 6-factor model exhibited superior parsimony, substantive interpretability, and robust goodness-of-fit indices.
• Although the $\chi^2$-difference test suggested marginal statistical improvement for a 7-factor model, mathematical analysis revealed that the $\chi^2$-difference test exhibits a documented propensity to overestimate factor counts in large samples (Hayashi, Bentler, & Yuan, 2007).
• Furthermore, the seventh factor in the 7-factor extraction was a “bloated specific” or artifactual isolate displaying a substantial loading on only a single item from the educational dimension.
• Horn’s Parallel Analysis (1965) corroborated the empirical retention of exactly six underlying latent factors exceeding random eigenvalues.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (Study 2)

The structural viability of this 6-factor latent architecture was independently scrutinized in Study 2 using a vast cross-sectional sample of $N = 5,802$ pre-service teachers ($72%$ female; mean age $M = 21.93, SD = 3.64$) representing multiple universities and teaching programs across Germany.

The specified CFA model posited six correlated latent factors with each item constrained to load exclusively on its theoretically designated construct, without correlated error terms. Parameter estimation using Maximum Likelihood Robust (MLR) yielded exceptional fit criteria:

• Chi-Square: $\chi^2(155) = 1544.15, p < .001$
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): .966
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): .958
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): .039 (90% Confidence Interval: [.037, .041])
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): .032

Standardized factor loadings across all 20 items were substantial, ranging between $lambda = .62$ and $lambda = .86$, confirming that each observed indicator functions as an empirically discriminating measure of its target professional self-concept dimension.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The ERBSE-L is designed for administrative efficiency, ease of scoring, and maximum psychometric fidelity. The technical parameters of the instrument are summarized below:

• Test Type: Multidimensional, standardized self-report psychological rating scale.
• Administration Modality: Standardized paper-and-pencil questionnaire or computer-assisted self-administered online survey. (The instrument is not validated for oral interview administration).
• Target Population: Prospective teachers (pre-service teacher education students / Lehramtsstudierende) across all subject combinations and school tracks (primary, secondary, special education, and vocational).
• Total Item Count: 20 items.
• Subscale Allocation:
  • Subject-Matter Self-Concept (SK Fach): 3 items (Items 1–3)
  • Educational / Classroom Management Self-Concept (SK Erziehung): 4 items (Items 4–7)
  • Diagnostic Self-Concept (SK Diagnostik): 4 items (Items 8–11)
  • Counseling Self-Concept (SK Beratung): 3 items (Items 12–14)
  • Media Self-Concept (SK Medien): 3 items (Items 15–17)
  • Innovation Self-Concept (SK Innovation): 3 items (Items 18–20)
• Polarity and Coding: All 20 items are formulated in a positive direction; no reverse-scored items are included.
• Response Format: 4-point Likert scale:
  • 1 = trifft überhaupt nicht zu (Strongly disagree / Not at all true)
  • 2 = trifft eher nicht zu (Somewhat disagree / Mostly not true)
  • 3 = trifft eher zu (Somewhat agree / Mostly true)
  • 4 = trifft völlig zu (Strongly agree / Completely true)
• Scoring Protocol: For each of the six dimensions, individual scale scores are computed by calculating the unweighted arithmetic mean of the respective items (or alternatively, a raw sum score). The scale score range for each dimension is 1.00 to 4.00. A single global composite score should not be calculated, as doing so violates the empirically verified multidimensional structure.
• Reference Descriptive Statistics ($N = 5,802$):
  • SK Fach: $M = 2.91, SD = 0.52$
  • SK Erziehung: $M = 3.28, SD = 0.48$
  • SK Diagnostik: $M = 3.16, SD = 0.45$
  • SK Innovation: $M = 2.93, SD = 0.58$
  • SK Medien: $M = 3.09, SD = 0.64$
  • SK Beratung: $M = 3.22, SD = 0.51$
• Diagnostic Restriction: Validated strictly for group-level empirical educational research, cohort evaluations, and teacher professionalization studies; strictly contraindicated for high-stakes individual diagnostics or personnel selection.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The ERBSE-L was published and made accessible to the international scientific community in 2014 following its comprehensive validation within the research initiative Panel zum Lehramtsstudium (PaLea). The development and open dissemination of the tool were funded by institutional and governmental research grants dedicated to the advancement of empirical teacher education in Germany.

Licensing and Usage: The ERBSE-L is free of charge for non-commercial academic research, university teaching evaluation, and non-profit educational inquiries. Researchers utilizing the scale are requested to cite the foundational validation publication (Retelsdorf et al., 2014). For institutional implementations, commercial assessment usage, or digital reproduction in clinical test libraries, inquiries must be directed to the lead author:

Contact:
Prof. Dr. Jan Retelsdorf
Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (IPN) / University of Hamburg
Email: [email protected]
Project Portal: http://www.palea.uni-kiel.de

12. References

• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(3), 397–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903008204
• Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften [Keyword: Professional competence of teachers]. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 9(4), 469–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2
• Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2011). Das Kompetenzmodell von COACTIV [The COACTIV competence model]. In M. Kunter, J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss, & M. Neubrand (Eds.), Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften: Ergebnisse des Forschungsprogramms COACTIV (pp. 29–53). Waxmann.
• Bromme, R. (1997). Kompetenzen, Funktionen und unterrichtliches Handeln des Lehrers [Competencies, functions, and classroom practices of teachers]. In F. E. Weinert (Ed.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie: Pädagogische Psychologie (Band 3: Psychologie des Unterrichts und der Schule) (pp. 177–212). Hogrefe.
• Hayashi, K., Bentler, P. M., & Yuan, K.-H. (2007). On the likelihood ratio test for the number of factors in exploratory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 505–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701303986
• Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447
• Kultusministerkonferenz [KMK]. (2004). Standards für die Lehrerbildung: Bildungswissenschaften [Standards for teacher education: Educational sciences]. Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 16.12.2004. Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
• Kultusministerkonferenz [KMK]. (2008). Ländergemeinsame inhaltliche Anforderungen für die Fachwissenschaften und Fachdidaktiken in der Lehrerbildung [Joint state content requirements for academic subjects and subject didactics in teacher education]. Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 16.10.2008.
• Marsh, H. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312023001129
• Möller, J., Retelsdorf, J., Köller, O., & Marsh, H. W. (2011). The reciprocal internal/external frame of reference model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 852–867. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024479
• Retelsdorf, J., Bauer, J., Gebauer, S., Kauper, G., & Möller, J. (2014). Erfassung des berufsbezogenen Selbstkonzepts von angehenden Lehrkräften: Die Skala ERBSE-L [Recording of job-related self-concepts of prospective teachers: The ERBSE-L scale]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 46(4), 218–227. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000116
• Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407–441. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543046003407
• Terhart, E. (2002). Perspektiven der Lehrerbildung in Deutschland: Abschlussbericht der von der Kultusministerkonferenz eingesetzten Kommission [Perspectives of teacher education in Germany: Final report of the commission established by the KMK]. Beltz.
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)