Abstract
Students’ self-efficacy expectations (SEE) in mathematics are associated with their engagement and learning experiences. Going beyond previous operationalisations of SEE we propose a new instrument that takes into account not only facet-specificity (expectations related to particular competences or skills) and strength (confidence of the expectations), but also level (perceived task difficulty) of these expectations as proposed by Bandura (Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, W. H. Freeman & Co, New York, 1997; Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, 2006). In particular, we included level-specific items referring to perceived difficulty on a subsequent national test in mathematics. In total 756 Norwegian grade 5, 8, and 9 students completed the “Self-Efficacy Gradations of Difficulty Questionnaire.” We fitted plausible multitrait-multimethod models using structural equation models. The best fitting model included three factors representing levels of perceived difficulty, and a-priori specified correlated uniquenesses representing four facets. The facets related to problem solving or students’ self-regulation skills during the test in order to accomplish the following: (1) complete a certain number of problems, (2) solve tasks of a certain challenge, (3) concentrate, and (4) not give up for a certain amount of time. The results indicated that three correlated constructs representing levels of SEE are associated with scores on national tests in mathematics, and that the strongest association is between national test scores and medium level SEE. Taking level (difficulty) into account broadens our understanding of the self-efficacy construct, and allows investigation into differential relationships between SEE and performance.
Highlights
Self-efficacy expectations (SEE) are related to key learning behaviours and outcomes such as individuals’ motivation and engagement (Martin et al 2012), goal setting behaviours (Bong 2009), persistence (Multon et al 1991), and physiological experiences (Meece et al 1990)
The research questions we address in this paper are as follows: 1. What is the structural validity of the proposed self-efficacy constructs, which include facets and levels of selfefficacy expectations?
We investigated the structural validity of the Self-Efficacy Gradations of Difficulty Questionnaire, which disentangles test taking facets and levels of difficulty from strength of SEE, and how the aforementioned constructs were associated with performance on national tests in mathematics
Summary
Self-efficacy expectations (SEE) are related to key learning behaviours and outcomes such as individuals’ motivation and engagement (Martin et al 2012), goal setting behaviours (Bong 2009), persistence (Multon et al 1991), and physiological experiences (Meece et al 1990). SEE have been linked with perseverance (Zeldin and Pajares 2000), performance outcomes (Schulz 2005), attitudes towards mathematics and choice of maths-related courses and careers (Hackett and Betz 1989). Existing instruments have incorporated facet-specificity (expectations related to particular competences or skills) and strength (confidence of the expectations), while levels (perceived task difficulty) of mathematics SEE have seemingly not been included. We contribute to existing research by proposing a new instrument of SEE that takes into account strength and facet-specificity, and level of SEE as proposed by Bandura (1997, 2006). Taking level into account broadens our understanding of the self-efficacy construct, because it allows the distinction between SEE for different levels of perceived difficulty, as well as investigation into the relationship between SEE and performance
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
