Faculty actions in the classroom are known to impact student writing self-efficacy and academic achievement. The purpose of this paper was to validate Locke and Johnston’s Individual and Collective Self-Efficacy for Teaching Writing Scales, a tool originally validated in high school teachers, in a new population of post-secondary faculty. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis methods were used in two studies with independent samples of multidisciplinary faculty (N = 281) for the exploratory factor analysis (Study 1) and nursing discipline specific faculty (N = 187) for the confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2). Three factors were identified in the questionnaire which maintained the essence of the theoretical structure proposed by Locke and Johnston. Factor 1 was named Context and Process Competencies, Factor 2 Textural Competencies, and Factor 3 Motivational Competencies. This factor structure was confirmed with acceptable goodness of fit in the confirmatory factor analysis Study 2. Learning to be a teacher of writing is a developmental process and this measurement tool has important validation information that speaks to its usefulness in understanding that process. • Instructional practices are known to impact student achievement levels. • Faculty individual self-efficacy for teaching writing is three factors. • Faculty undergo a slow enculturation practice to teaching writing. • This scale can be used to assess impact of teacher agency on student outcomes.

Existing writing self-efficacy instruments have assessed the concept through mechanical and process features of writing to the neglect of the influence of situated context. The purpose of this study was to develop and test the Situated Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Scale (SAWSES) based on Bandura’s self-efficacy theory and a model of socially constructed writing. A sequential multimethod approach constituted the methods. A Delphi panel of 15 expert scholars conducted a theoretical evaluation of the scale and the items were piloted with 20 nursing undergraduate students using cognitive interviews. The scale was validated in two studies with independent samples of 255 nursing students (Study 1), and in an interdisciplinary sample of undergraduate (N = 543) and graduate students (N = 264) (Study 2). The three identified factors present a structure to the questionnaire which is developmental and has the potential to detect gaps in student self-assessed ability to master various facets of disciplinary writing: 1) Writing-Essentials – synthesis, emotional control, language; 2) Relational-Reflective – relationship building with writing facilitators (teachers, academic sources) and the self through reflection; and 3) Creative Identity – exploring gaps in student achievement of transformative writing (creativity, voice, and disciplinary identity), where confidence can help identify the most engaged writers.