Measuring Instructor Self-Efficacy when Migrating Face-to-Face Courses Online


  • Yanyue Yuan NYU Shanghai, China
  • Jace Hargis NYU Shanghai, Center for Teaching & Learning, China



self-efficacy, online teaching, course design, motivation, teaching methods, active learning


This study measures instructors’ online teaching self-efficacy with an aim to capture their immediate and initial perception of migrating their teaching online and identify potential instructional needs and support. The authors sent a survey to all instructors in our institution four days prior to the first day of classes in spring 2020 and received 73 responses (60% response rate). The number of years of experience with online tools was low (88%). Instructors reported high confidence in their ability to teach online (82%); realization of the effort to create quality online experiences (90%); belief that teaching online would be different (90%); recognition of having to modify their assessment (77%); ability of adjusting teaching efficiently with unexpected events (82%); knowledge of where to seek teaching and technology guidance (86% & 89%); and confidence in developing a similar rapport with students (71%). Respondents were split in their beliefs about offering similar active learning opportunities. This study supplements research on instructors’ perception of online teaching as a well-planned and intentional event, offering implications over the immediate and long-term support to be offered to instructors regarding migrating courses online both in times of crisis and when such opportunities arise.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

  • Yanyue Yuan, NYU Shanghai, China

    PhD, Assistant Arts Professor, Arts and Sciences, NYU Shanghai. Dr. Yanyue Yuan is currently Assistant Arts Professor at NYU Shanghai. Prior to joining NYU Shanghai, she worked as Rutherford Curatorial Researcher at the London Science Museum, Adjunct Assistant Professor at ShanghaiTech University, and Assistant Research Professor at Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences. She holds a PhD in Education from the University of Cambridge and a Master’s degree in Anthropology from the University of Oxford

  • Jace Hargis, NYU Shanghai, Center for Teaching & Learning, China

    Professor, Director, Center for Teaching & Learning. Dr. Jace Hargis has enjoyed working as a Professor and Director of the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) at NYU Shanghai; a CTL Director at the University of California; a Professor and Associate Provost in Hawaii; a College Director in Abu Dhabi, UAE; an Associate Professor and Assistant Provost in northern California; and an Assistant Professor and Director of Faculty Development in Florida. He has authored a textbook, an anthology and published over 160 academic articles as well as offered hundreds of academic presentations. He has earned a BS in Oceanography from Florida Institute of Technology; an MS in Environmental Engineering Sciences and a PhD in Science Education from the University of Florida. Dr. Hargis’ research focuses on how people learn while integrating appropriate, relevant and meaningful instructional technologies


Angelo, T., & Cross, P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques. San Francisco: Jossey -Bass.

Baghdadchi, S., Hardesty, R., Hadjipieris, P., & Hargis, J. (2018). Active techniques implemented in an introductory signal processing course to help students achieve higher levels of learning. Proceedings from the American Society of Engineering Education Conference, June 24–27. Salt Lake City, Utah: American Society for Engineering Education.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self -efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychology Review, 84(2), 191–215.–295X.84.2.191.

Bandura, A. (1982). Self -efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147.–066X.37.2.122.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self -efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.

Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change: Vol. VII. Factors affecting implementation and continuation (Rep. No. R-1589/7-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 140.Retrieved from

Chiasson, K., Terras, K., & Smart, K. (2015). Faculty Perceptions Of Moving A Face -To-Face Course To Online Instruction. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 12(3), 321–240.

Conrad, D. (2004). University instructors’ reflections on their first online teaching experiences. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 31–44.

De Gagne, J.C., & Walters, K. (2009). Online teaching experience: A qualitative metasynthesis (QMS). MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5 (4), 577–589. Retrieved from

Foster, K.M. (2006). Bridging troubled waters: principles for teaching in times of crisis. Penn GSE Perspectives on Urban Education. Retrieved from

Freeman S., Eddy, S., McDonough, M, Smith, M., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H. & Wenderoth, M. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111, 8410–8415.

Freeman, L.A. (2013). Instructor time requirements to develop and teach online courses. Proceedings of the 2013 AIS SIGED: IAIM International Conference on Information Systems Education and Research, 8. Retrieved from

Hill, R., Hargis, J., & Park, E. (2016). Developing, teaching and assessing hybrid English courses. International Journal for the Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1), 123–134.

Knowlton, D.S. (2000). A theoretical framework for the online classroom: A defense and delineation of a student -centered pedagogy. In R.E. Weiss, D.S. Knowlton, & B.W. Speck (Eds.), Principles of effective teaching in the online classroom (pp. 5–14). San Francisco, CA: Jossey -Bass.

Kuh, G., O’Donnell, K., & Schneider, C. G. (2017). HIPs at Ten at ten. Change: Higher Learning, 49(5), 8–16.

Lewis, C., & Abdul -Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing effective online teaching practices: Voices of exemplary faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 83–98.–006-9010-z.

Lockard, E., & Hargis, J. (2017). Andragogical design thinking: A transition to anarchy in and beyond the classroom. Transformative Dialogues, 10(3). Retrieved from

McKeachie, W. (2005). McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and University Teachers. 12th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Mills, S.J., Yanes, M.J., & Casebeer, C.M. (2009). Perceptions of distance learning among faculty of a college of education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Technology, 5(1), 19–28. Retrieved from

Mintz, S. (2020, February 13). Online Course Design. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from

Puentedura, R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. Ruben R. Puentedura Weblog. Retrieved March 28, 2020 from

Puentedura, R. (2012). The SAMR model: Background and examples. Ruben R. Puentedura Weblog. Retrieved March 28, 2020 from

Ray, J. (2009). Faculty perspective: Training and course development for the online classroom. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 263–276. Retrieved from

Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self -Effi cacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp.35–37). Windsor, UK: NFER -NELSON.

Stewart, C., Bachman, C., & Johnson, R. (2010). Predictors of faculty acceptance of online education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(3), 597–616. Retrieved from

Tschannen -Moran, M., Woolfolk -Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher -efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). Understanding by Design guide. Alexandria, VA: ASC.







How to Cite

Measuring Instructor Self-Efficacy when Migrating Face-to-Face Courses Online. (2020). Eastern European Journal of Transnational Relations, 4(1), 97-113.