The first purpose of this study was to test the Teacher’s Concerns Questionnaire (TCQ) in the Greek educational environment. The second purpose was to identify teaching concerns of a group of physical education students as a whole, and for male and female students separately. The third purpose was to determine whether the concerns of self, task and impact, change with teaching practice, according to Fuller’s developmental model. The subjects for this study were 327 3^rd-year Greek physical education students (142 male and 185 female). The TCQ [13] served as the data-gathering instrument. Factor analysis revealed that the TCQ is a poorly fitting instrument for collecting data of Greek preservice physical educators. The results showed that the students, both before and after their teaching practice, were highly concerned about the pupils’ learning and progress. Self and task concerns of student teachers, and mainly of the female student teachers’, were reduced over time while their impact concerns were increased. The concern for class control remained high throughout the whole teaching practice. Female students were significantly more concerned than male students prior to and after their teaching practice.

The development of teaching skills is an ongoing and career-long process. Teaching practice is the beginning of this long-term process, which contributes to the development of a prospective teacher. Teaching practice is considered by experts to be one of the most critical aspects of professional preparation [2, 6, 9, 22, 28]. Randal, after her review of literature on the subject, considered, “performance in student teaching to be the strongest predictor of success in in-service teaching [22].” She also claims that the most dramatic changes and improvements occur during student teaching.

Research has shown that generally teaching practice is a cause of anxiety for student teachers, including student teachers of physical education [2, 6, 8, 9, 18, 21]. In recent years considerable attention has been given to the study of concerns of both pre- and in-service teachers.

The transition from theoretical preparation to the first teaching job has been referred to as reality shock, transition shock, or praxis shock [29]. According to Veenman, “Reality shock indicates the collapse of missionary ideals formed during teacher training by the harsh and rude reality of everyday classroom life [29].”Beginning teachers face a variety of unique conditions that can lead to a transition shock [22].

One of the most comprehensive reviews of beginning teacher concerns was Veenman’s meta-analysisof 83 studies [29]. The researcher identified eight areas of concern experienced most often by the beginning teachers: 1. Maintaining classroom discipline; 2. Motivating students; 3. Dealing with individual differences; 4. Assessing students’ work; 5. Maintaining relations with parents; 6. Organizing class work; 7. Dealing with insufficient materials and supplies; 8. Dealing with problems of individual students. Research has shown that student teachers are concerned about many different aspects of their school experience. The key concerns of PE student teachers include discipline, understanding expectations of their supervisors, being observed and evaluated, being liked by pupils and motivating them, content adequacy, choosing and organizing material, presenting material and making the best use of the facilities and equipment [2, 4, 9, 15, 23]. Wendt and Bain [31] and Capel [7] found that the greatest cause of anxiety and concern for the student teachers was being observed, evaluated and assessed by the supervisors.

The concerns among physical education student teachers have been tested on the basis of Fuller’s theory of developmental conceptualisation. Fuller’s work [11] greatly contributed to the understanding of developmental aspects of teacher concerns. Fuller defined concerns in terms of the perceived problems or worries of teachers. In her classic Concerns Model, she identified changes in the focus of teacher concerns that occur over time. She classified concerns into three domains: self, task, and impact. The self scale represents concerns about a teacher’s own adequacy and survival in the teaching environment. The task scale deals with concerns about daily teaching tasks. The impact scale represents teachers’ concerns about student learning.

Fuller was convinced that teachers’ concerns changed during training. She expected self and task concerns to decrease and impact concerns to increase over time and experience. That is, as teachers gain more confidence in teaching, the concerns for self would change to concerns related to the actual task of teaching. As teachers gain control over task-related concerns, their concerns would become concerns about the impact of their teaching on students’ learning (behavior).

The Teacher Concerns Questionnaire (TCQ) developed by George [13] has been applied extensively to measure teacher’s concerns. In the field of physical education researchers who have used the TCQ included Behets [2], Boggess, et al. [4], Capel [6, 8], Fung [12], Meek [19], Rikard and Knight [23], and Wendt and Bain [30].

McBride [16] adapted the TCQ so that it could be specifically used to measure the concerns of physical education teachers. McBride’s adaptation focuses on the task concerns. He adjusted the original TCQ to the physical education working environment because the TCQ was inconclusive across a number of studies. McBride [16] tested the revised instrument and concluded that it represented a valuable data-gathering source in conjunction with other assessment techniques. According to Behets and Meek [3] the adapted TCQ-PE has not been subjected to full investigations about whether it will predict the concerns of physical education teachers more effectively than the TCQ. It is worth mentioning that the TCQ continues to be used in physical education studies in spite of McBride’s TCQ-PE.

The researchers focusing on PE student teachers’ concerns identifiedchanges in their concerns after the teaching practice period. These changes, however, did not always occur in strict accordance with Fuller’s theory. Results of some studies have provided support for Fuller’s theory, for example, the study of McBride et al. [18], who used a sample of experienced in-service physical educators. Some provided only partial support for Fuller’s theory [4, 17, 30, 32], and others have failed to support it [2, 12, 15, 19]. These mixed results have also been found in other studies using different instruments to measure concerns. These studies have not used the term “concern”. Other terms used include anxiety, stress and perceived problems. Capel [8] found a significant correlation between the total anxiety score and the total concern score during teaching practice. He also found that no significant changes occurred in student teachers’ anxiety during teaching practice. Paese and Zinkgraf [21] found that role-related stress (role ambiguity, role overload, role preparedness) significantly changed in a positive direction during the course of the student teaching experience. Hardy [15] noticed that “pre-service physical education students’ perceptions of self, task and impact concerns, their own characteristics, the context in which they teach, their relationships with significant others and their socialization into the school all have a bearing on the strength of their responses. Therefore, it is not surprising that researchers have reported conflicting results based on the TCQ.” Fung [12], McBride [17], and Meek [19] suggested that the inconsistent results may be instrument-related, due to the TCQ being inappropriate for use with physical education students.

Another factor affecting the outcome of the teaching practice is its duration. Showers, Joyce and Bennet [24], on the basis of their extensive experience in training thousands of students and the results of numerous studies, proposed that opportunities for practice must be ample, the guideline being 15 to 20 opportunities to practice, interspersed over o period of time. For some complex teaching models, students may need as many as 25 opportunities. Randall [22] notices that teaching practice interspersed over a period of time is more effective than concentrated, high-dose approaches. Sparks [25] recommended a series of four to six 3-hour workshops spaced 1 or 2 weeks apart as one effective schedule of teaching practice. Therefore, the researchers’ views of teaching practice duration appear to vary substantially.

Results of studies of student teachers’ concerns are inconsistent, thus more research is needed to increase the knowledge about teaching concerns. It is also ascertained that the TCQ has been extensively applied in PE settings, in several countries, in order to identify pre- and in-service teacher’s concerns and the developmental changes of these concerns. From the review of the literature it was also ascertained that changes in student teachers’ concerns related to the gender had not been investigated.

Scientific interest in the research on teacher concerns depending on the gender was aroused, because it was observed that the number of female students requesting help from the university supervisors in order to cope with the various problems arising during their teaching practice was much higher than the number of male students. In other words, female students appear to be more anxious and stressed than their male colleagues. If stress is considered to be related to concerns [8], then within reason female students are more stressed about teaching physical education than the male students. After an extensive review of relevant literature Veenman [29] refers to a study [26] where it was found that male beginning teachers experienced fewer problems than female beginning teachers. However, the same researcher mentions three studies [14, 27, 33] where no differences between sexes have been reported. Paese and Zinkgraf [21], who studied the role-related and task-based stress as for gender, found no significant differences between the sexes prior to the start and the end of the teaching practice. The above findings are inconsistent; they are not recent and generally study the perceived problems of beginning teachers with no reference to the student teachers’ concerns.

In Greece, up to date, no study has been undertaken to examine the above issues. The first purpose of this study was to test the TCQ in the Greek educational environment. The second aim was to identify the teaching concerns of a group of physical education students as a whole and for male and female students separately. Finally, the study was to determine whether concerns of self, task and impact change with teaching practice, according to Fuller’s developmental model.

The internal consistency of the TCQ on the pre- and post-teaching practice for male and female students was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. As Table 1 shows, the reliability coefficients ranged from 0.61 to 0.67 for self concerns, 0.37 to 0.56 for task concerns, and 0.71 to 0.80 for impact concerns. Nunnally [20] suggests a value of 0.70 as a lower acceptable bound of alpha. DeVellis [10] recommends an alpha below 0.60 as unacceptable, 0.60-0.65 as undesirable, 0.65-0.70 as minimally acceptable, 0.70-0.80 as respectable, 0.80-0.90 as very good, and above 0.90 as excellent. According to the above recommendations, the range of alpha coefficient for the TCQ at both pre- and post- teaching practice periods was undesirable and minimally acceptable for the self domain, respectable for the impact domain, and unacceptable for the task domain. Consistent with the previous studies [2, 4, 13, 19, 23], the internal consistency of the task scale was very low.

Table 1. Reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) for the TCQ

A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine Fuller’s three-three factor model using the AMOS 4.0 [1] software. First, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted on the pre-teaching practice. The results indicated that the three-factor model did not adequately fit the data (χ² = 231.53; p<0.001). In fact, the statistics that fit (NFI = 0.77; NNFI = 0.80; CFI = 0.84) explained the data poorly. The second confirmatory factor analysis on the post-teaching practice did not produce significant fit indices either (χ² = 241. 21; p<0.001; NFI = 0.85; NNFI = 0.85 and CFI = 0.87). Based on these findings, Fuller’s hypothesized three-factor model was not confirmed in both pre-and post-teaching practice.

A principal component factor analysis with varimax rotation was carried out to determine the factor structure of the TCQ when applied to Greek physical education students during their teaching practice. The analysis was performed for pre-teaching and post-teaching practice periods.Table 2 contains the main factor loadings of the 15 items of the TCQ. In both cases, before and after the teaching practice, the analysis revealed a different number of factors. More specifically, four factors emerged before teaching practice and three factors after teaching practice. The post-teaching practice three-factor solution did not correspond to the three-factor domain of the TCQ. For the pre-teaching practice period, Factor 1 comprised five items for the impact scale and one item for the self scale. After the teaching practice period, Factor 1 comprised five items of the impact scale and three items for the self scale. The three remaining factors in the pre-teaching phase and the two factors in the post-teaching phase became diffused. In summary, Fuller’s three-subscale model was approximated only on Factor 1, in the pre-teaching practice period. In this study, the low internal consistency of the task and self domain is confirmed, as it has also been reported in other similar studies [2, 4, 7, 13, 19, 23]. Since Rikard and Knight [23] did not find satisfactory internal cohesion in any factor, they redeveloped the TCQ in three different scales: Instructional Performance, Instructional Evaluation Scale, and Instructional Obstacles.

On the basis of the factor analysis for the pre- and post-teaching practice applications of the TCQ any further analysis of the findings in relation to the three-scale TCQ was impossible. As a result, they were analyzed with reference to the total concern score and to each individual item separately.

Table 3 shows the mean scores of individual items and the total concern score for the whole sample and also for both sexes identified on the TCQ pre- and post-teaching practice. Before teaching practice, in the entire sample the total concern score was 3.39, and the scores for individual items on the TCQ ranged from 2.43 to 3.87, which was an indication that no item on the scale caused the teacher students to be very concerned, nor were there any events which they were not concerned about. The event causing most concern forstudent teachers was “maintaining the appropriate degree of class control” (item 15; M = 3.87). This was followed by “routine and inflexibility of the teaching situation”, “challenging unmotivated students”, “being accepted and respected by professional people” and “meeting the needs of different kinds of students”. The event causing least concern was “doing well when a supervisor is present” (item 3; M = 2.43).

Table 2. TCQ Factor Loadings before teaching practice and after teaching practice

Table 3 also shows the total concern score andscores for the individual items after teaching practice. These ranged from 2.00 to 3.91 and the total concern score amounted to 3.39. The eventcausingmost concern for student teachers was “routine and inflexibility of the teaching situation”. This item on the task scale had the highest score (item 14; M = 3.91) of all items on the TCQ. This was followed by the item “maintaining the appropriate degree of class control” on the self scale, and then by the concerns on the impact scale: “challenging unmotivated students”, “guiding students toward intellectual and emotional growth” and “meeting the needs of different kinds of students”. The event causing least concern was “doing well when a supervisor is present” (item 3; M = 2.00).

The total concern score and scores for the 15 individual items for the whole sample and also for both sexes separately were subjected to a two-tailed t-test for paired samples, for the pre- and post-teaching practice. Table 3 contains mean scores, standard deviations and t-values for TCQ items in pre- and post-teaching practice for the entire sample and both sexes.In the whole sample the total concern score was exactly the same before and after the practice. After the teaching practice there was a statistically significant increase of 4 impact items (6, 8, 11, 12),whiletwo self items (3, 13) and two task items (1, 2) significantly decreased. Νo significant differences over time were found for the remaining items. The table also presents the total concern score and the mean scores for TCQ items of male and female students in the pre- and post-teaching practice. This shows that the male students in their pre- and post-teaching practice, were more concerned about “routine and inflexibility of the teaching situation” (item 14, M = 3.66 and M = 3.73, respectively) followed by “maintaining the appropriate degree of class control” (item 15, M = 3.65 and 3.72, respectively). The event causing least concern before and after teaching practice was “doing well when a supervisor is present” (item 3, M = 2.27 and 2.05, respectively). From the comparison of the means of each item before and after the teaching practice, in one task item (1), and one self item (3), there was a statistically significant decrease over time. In one impact item (6) a statistically significant increase over time was observed. No significant differences over time were found for the total concern score and for the remaining items. The female students, before teaching practice, were concerned primarily about “maintaining the appropriate degree of class control” (item 15, M = 4.03) followed by the concern of “routine and inflexibility of teaching situation” (item 14, M = 3.98). After teaching practice the female students were more concerned about “routine and inflexibility of teaching situation” (item 14, M = 4.04) followed by the concern of “maintaining the appropriate degree of class control” (item 15, M = 4.02). The event causing least concern before and after teaching practice was “doing well when a supervisor is present” (item 3, M = 2.55 and 1.96, respectively). The comparison of the means of each item before and after the teaching practice of female students in one task item (2), and two self items (3, 13), revealed a statistically significant decrease over time. In four impact items (6, 8, 11, 12) a statistically significant increase over time was noted. No significant differences over time were found for the total concern score and for the remaining items.

Table 4 presents the total concern score and the mean scores for the 15 individual items in pre- and post-teaching practice for male and female students. It also shows the comparison between male and female student teachers’ concern, pre and post teaching practice.

Table 3. Means scores and standard deviation for TCQ items before teaching practice and after teaching practice

Table 4. Means and standard deviations for the total concern score and individual items on the TCQ for male and female students before and after teaching practice

According to this table before the start of the teaching practice the female students’ total concern score is significantly higher than the male students’ score (t = –4.72; p<0.001). Moreover, prior to the teaching practice female students are more concerned than male students in 13 out of 15 items (in 10 items the difference is statistically significant). After teaching practice the female students’ scores remain higher than the male students’ in relation to the total concern score (t = 4.00; p<0.001) and within 12 out of 15 items (in 10 items the difference is statistically significant).

The results of this study should be discussed with caution for a number of reasons: 1. assessment of teaching concerns in several studies has been undertaken at different times in relation to the teaching practice, that is, before, during and after the teaching practice; 2. use of several different instruments to measure the concerns of pre- and in-service teachers; 3. lack of information about the context of the program and the teaching practice, as well as the nature of the students themselves. Capel also noted the above-mentioned reservations in her related studies [6, 8, 9].

Although the results of the pre- and post-teaching practice confirmatory factor analysis provided fit indices that are better than those from Meek’s [19] corresponding analysis, the TCQ of this particular 3-scale structure is not to be regarded as a valid instrument for measuring the student teachers’ concerns in the Greek sample. It is very likely that this also applies in the case of the Greek sample as in Meek’s [19] conclusive comment: “The Britishness of the sample highlighted cultural differences in the teaching practice process and expectations.” The picture revealed by the Greek sample results is similar to the mixed and generally unsupportive results of the U.S., Belgian and British samples [2, 4, 7, 19, 23]. The lack of homogeneity in the results is probably due to cultural differences. Consequently, Meek’s [19] incitement/suggestion is confirmed, “More direct cross-cultural comparisons, however, are required before substantive conclusions can be made.”

The results of the exploratory factor analysis revealed that the four-factor pre-teaching practice and the three-factor post-teaching practice structures declined substantially from Fuller’s model. Furthermore, the factor structure of the Greek sample did not correspond to those found in other studies [2, 4, 7, 19, 23].

From the results of this study, it is ascertained that the highest score of all student teachers’ concerns is that of maintenance of class control following by the concern of routine and inflexibility of the teaching situation. This finding bears a similarity to the findings of Capel [9] and Boggess et al. [4]. McBride et al. [18] also stated that despite long teaching experience, physical education teachers still had concerns about discipline and maintaining class control. The finding that item 8 “challenging unmotivated students” had the highest score of the impact items is in accordance with Behets’ [2] finding and confirms the student teachers’ concern for their pupils. Also the fact that no significant differences over time were found for the items on the task-item scale [5, 10, 14] bears similarities to the result obtained by Behets who found no significant differences over time for the items on the task concern scale. The findings of this study that the event causing least concern in both sexes was “doing well when a supervisor is present” is exactly opposite to that of Behets, who applied the TCQ to 100 fourth-year physical education students in the Physical Education Department at the University of Leuven; and by Capel [6] who applied the TCQ to 124 first-year graduate students of physical education students at one institution in England. They found that this event caused most concern. This may be due to differences in the teaching practice process, cultural differences, and responsibilities of cooperating teachers. The TCQ results showed that students of both sexes experienced moderate intensity of concern before the beginning of their first teaching practice, and that female students were significantly more concerned than male students. The results also suggest that before teaching practice not only male students but also female students were primarily concerned about the pupils’ learning and progress. After the teaching practice, it was found that students of both sexes also experienced moderate intensity of concern. This result is in line with other studies showing that teaching practice is a cause of anxiety for students [2, 6, 8, 9, 21]. Most concerns on the TCQ scale were also caused by the impact on the pupils (impact concerns) for both sexes, especially for female students. This result is in line with Behets’s study [2], who found that the mean scores for impact concerns were the highest.

According to Fuller’s developmental theory, self and task concerns should decrease while impact concerns should increase over time as a function of teaching experience. The comparison of the TCQ items from the two distributions revealed that student teachers (mainly female student teachers) reduced concerns about instructional obstacles, about the teacher’s own adequacy and survival in the teaching environment. At the same time concerns for and about student learning increased. The concern for class control remained high throughout teaching practice.The aforementioned results agree with Fuller’s developmental theory, but it cannot be claimed that they confirm it. These findings are also inconsistent with those of other studies [2, 4, 9, 15, 19, 23, 32, 30]. The other researchers have found definite changes in concerns among student teachers, which did not always occur in strict accordance with Fuller’s model. In particular, they speculate that (a) the teaching practice period is too short for detecting developmental growth in these student teachers; (b) cooperating teachersare not prepared well and cannot perform their role properly;(c) the students were not adequately trained to take on daily responsibilities in a school setting; and (d) the TCQ instrumentis not sensitive enough to reliably measure the concerns of students in a different cultural teaching system.

In this study, before and after teaching practice the female students were significantly more concerned than the male students. This finding contradicts the conclusion made by Paese and Zinkgraf [21] that male and female student teachers do not differ significantly in their stress level prior to the start and the end of the teaching practice.Moreover, it is not in line with the findings from studies referred to in Veenman’s review [29].

Both male and female students before and after the teaching practice period were highly concerned about their impact on pupils’ behavior. A similar trend has been reported in other related studies [2, 4].

For the entire sample the least concern was caused by task concerns. Self and task concerns significantly decreased, whereas impact concerns significantly increased over the teaching practice period. This finding is partially in line with the finding of Behets [2] who found that impact concerns increased significantly and scored the highest values. Specifically, the above mentioned researcher stated that the student teachers in his study “seemed to have concerns that reflect the ideal future Physical Education teacher”, and that “children must be the most important focus of concern when teaching”.

In conclusion, the results of this study show that the student teachers, both before and after their teaching practice period, were highly concerned about the pupils’ learning and progress (impact concerns). In addition, the female students were significantly more concerned than male students at the beginning and the end of the teaching practice period.

The results of the analysis of this study and of many other related studies [2, 8, 12, 15, 16, 19, 23] do not clarify whether the TCQ instrument can actually identify concern domains, changes over time, and cultural influences of different educational systems. Thus, we can argue that the proposals of Behets and Meek [3] for further investigation of preservice physical educators’ concerns are still topical. According to the above authors, research should use quantitative and qualitative instruments. Quantitative investigation could involve a longitudinal analysis and try to encapsulate the full developmental sequence.Also, this type of investigation could use a more sensitive instrument for greater understanding of preservice teachers’ concerns. Sensitiveness should include instrumentation issues of a larger item pool for each domain and expand the traditional five-point scale. Sensitiveness should also include some flexibility in including questionnaire items for context effects related to different teaching systems and different countries. Additionally, quantitative research could determine the influence of teaching experience on teacher’s concerns. Finally qualitative investigations, such as classroom observations, case studies, interviews, reports, life histories, notebook comments, and teaching practice logbooks, provide a more diverse and interpretative method of gaining access to the concerns of preservice physical educators.

[1] Arbuckle, J. L., Wothke, W., AMOS 4.0 user’s guide, Smallwaters, Chicago 1999.

[2] Behets, D., Concern of Preservice Physical Education Teachers, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1990, 10, pp. 66-75.

[3] Behets, D., Meek, G., Physical Educators’ Concern (in:) Y. V. Auweele, F. Bakker, S. Biddle, M. Durand and R. Seiler, eds., Psychology for Physical Educators. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL 1999, pp. 479-499.

[4] Boggess, T. E., McBride, R. E., Griffey, D. C., The concerns of physical education student teachers: A developmental view, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1985, 4 (3), pp. 202-211.

[5] Byrne, M. B., Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, London 2001.

[6] Capel, S., Anxieties of Physical Education Students on first teaching practice, “European Physical Education. Review”, 1996, 2 (1), pp. 30-40.

[7] Capel, S., Changes in students’ anxieties and concerns after their first and second teaching practices, “Educational Research”, 1997, 39 (2), pp. 211-228.

[8] Capel, S., A longitudinal study of the stages of development or concern of secondary physical education students, “European Journal of Physical Education”, 1998a, 3 (2), pp. 185-199.

[9] Capel, S., Experiences of Physical Education Students in Learning to Teach, “European Physical Education Review”, 1998b, 4 (2), pp. 127-144.

[10] DeVellis, R. F., Scale development: Theory and applications (2^nd ed.), “Applied Social Research Methods Series”, Vol. 26. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, London and New Delhi 2003.

[11] Fuller, F., Concerns of Teachers: A Developmental Conceptualisation, “American Educational Research Journal”, 1969, 6, pp. 207-226.

[12] Fung, L., Concerns among pre- and in-service physical educators, “Physical Education Review”, 1993, 16 (1), pp. 27-30.

[13] George, A. A., Measuring self, task, and impact concerns: A manual for use of the Teacher Concerns Questionnaire, R & D Center for Teacher Education, University of Texas, Austin 1978.

[14] Grantham, J. W., A study of the problems of beginning teachers in selected secondary schools of Mississippi, Dissertation Abstracts, 22, Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University 1961, p.1520.

[15] Hardy, C., The concerns of two groups of physical education preservice teachers during their teacher education year, “Bulletin of Physical Education”, 1994, 30, pp. 55-61.

[16] McBride, R. E., The TCQ-PE: An adaptation of the teacher concerns questionnaire instrument to a physical education setting, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1993, 12, pp. 188-196.

[17] McBride, R.E., Perceived teaching and program concerns among preservice teachers, university supervisors, and cooperating teachers, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1984, 3 (3), pp. 36-42.

[18] McBride, R.E., Boggess, T.E, Griffey, D.C., Concerns of inservice physical education teachers as compared with Fuller’s concern model, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1986, 5 (3), pp. 149-156.

[19] Meek, G., The teacher concerns questionnaire with preservice physical educators in Great Britain: Being concerned with concerns, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1996, 16 (1), pp. 20-29.

[20] Nunnally, J. C., Psychometric theory (2^nd ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York 1978.

[21] Paese, P., Zinkgraf, S., The Effect of Student Teaching on Teacher Efficacy and Teacher Stress, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1991, 10 (3), pp. 307-315.

[22] Randall, L.E., Systematic Supervision for Physical Education, Human Kinetics, Champaign IL 1992.

[23]Rikard, L. G., Knight, S. M., Obstacles to Professional Development: Interns’ Desire to Fit in, Get Along, and Be Real Teachers, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1997, 16 (4), pp. 440-453.

[24] Showers, B., Joyce, B., Bennet, B., Synthesis of Research on Staff Development: A Framework for Future Study and a State-of-the-Art Analysis, “Educational Leadership”, 1987, 45 (3), pp. 77-87.

[25] Sparks, G. M., Synthesis of Research on Staff Development for Effective teaching, “Educational Leadership”, 1983, 41 (3), pp. 65-72.

[26] Stone, E. H., Personal and professional problems recognized by beginning, junior and senior high school teachers and the relation to the number of their problems to personal characteristics, professional preparation, teacher assignment and career plans (Doctoral dissertation, University of Denver, 1963), 1964, “Dissertation Abstracts International”, 25, p. 1037.

[27] Taylor, J. K., Dale, I. R., A survey of teachers in their first year of service, University of Bristol, Institute of Education, Bristol 1971.

[28] Trimble, R.T., The effect of the student teaching experience on authoritarianism in student and cooperating teachers in physical education and other specialties, Doctoral Thesis (Dissertation), University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 1974.

[29] Veenman, M.L., Perceived Problems of Beginning Teacher, “Review of Educational Research”, 1984, 54 (2), pp. 143-178.

[30] Wendt, J.C., Bain, L.L., Concerns of preservice and inservice physical educators, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1989a, 8 (2), pp. 177-180.

[31] Wendt, J. C. and Bain, L. L., Physical educators’ perception of stressful teaching events, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1989b, 8 (4), pp. 342-346.

[32] Wendt, J.C., Bain, L.L., Jackson, A.S., Fuller’s concerns theory as tested on prospective physical educators, “Journal of Teaching in Physical Education”, 1981, Introductory Issue, pp. 66-70.

[33] Williams, L. E., Perceptions of the problems of beginning teachers and the relationship of the problems to selected variables. Doctoral dissertation, 1976 University of Georgia, University Microfilms International, 77-4165.