THE ROLE OF SELF-EFFICACY INFORMATION IN INFLUENCING SECONDARY

SCHOOL STUDENT’S SCIENCE SELF-EFFICACY BELIEFS

BY

MARY WONG SIEW LIAN

(Jurnal Penyelidikan MPBL, Jilid 5, 2004, page 24-37)

Introduction

There are a lot of researches regarding self-efficacy. Self-efficacy beliefs have received

attention in educational field especially in studying about academic motivation and self-

regulation (Multon, Brown, & Lent, 1991; Pintrich & Schunk, 1991, 1994). This concept is

based on Albert Bandura Social Cognitive Theory (1986) of human behaviour.

This paper presents the findings of an investigation into how various sources of self-

efficacy information influencing secondary school students’ perception of self-efficacy in

Science. This research considered significance nowadays, especially in Malaysia context after

implementation of Etems (English for the teaching of Science and Mathematic).

Today, learning science becomes more challenging compared to before, when students

learned Science using Malay language as medium of learning. This would be the greatest

challenge for students and teachers especially at rural area.

1
 In this research, the researcher conducting her research in an urban coeducational

secondary school in Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia. This paper reports on her findings show that

probes on how each source of self-efficacy information influenced students’ Science Self-

efficacy (SSE) beliefs yielded some interesting findings.

Type of Research and its Purpose

She used both quantitative and qualitative types of research. She used quantitative

method when she wanted to assess students SSE by using Science Self-Efficacy Scale. After that,

she was conducting some semi-structured interviews to gain insights into selected student’s self-

efficacy.

She was conducting this research to investigate how various sources of self-efficacy

information influence secondary school students’ perceptions self-efficacy in Science. Students

also ask to identify which source of self-efficacy information had the greatest impact on their

self-beliefs. In this section, she makes it clear and achievable.

Research Problems

The researcher didn’t mention the research problem clearly. She is supposed to clarify

the research problem before stating the research questions. By giving a clear explanation of

research problems and research questions, the reader or future researcher can get a clear direction

of this study.

2
 However, in term of research questions she clarifies it’s clearly. She underlined two

important aspects of self-efficacy; that is, how various types of self-efficacy information

affecting students’ perception of self efficacy in science, and which one of them had the greatest

impact on their self-efficacy belief. By using these two questions, she expands this research and

able to contribute an important finding to our educational system.

When she was starting this research, our Ministry of Education is not yet implementing

Etems. However, her research can helps Science teacher for having an in-depth understanding in

the process of teaching Science in English and helping their students to improve in learning

science.

Literature Review

She makes an extensive and comprehensive effort in understanding concept of self-

efficacy and researches done in this area of study. She began her paper by giving a clear

definition of concept of self-efficacy. She also explained about the founder of this concept that is

Albert Bandura and his Social Cognitive Theory of human behaviour (1986).

She was giving four main sources of self-efficacy information; enactive attainments,

vicarious experiences, verbal persuasions and physiological states or emotional arousal. These

were the main subject of discussion of this research.

3
 Researches done by Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., & Beyer, J. (1977), Brown, I., & Inouye,

D. K. (1978), Ehlers, A., Margraf, J., Roth, W. T., Taylor, C. B., & Birbaumer, N. (1988),

Bouffard-Bouchard, T. (1989), Matsui, T., Ikeda, H., & Ohnishi,R (1989, 1990), Lopez, F. G., &

Lent, R (1991, 1992), Pahares, F (1996, 1997), Hampton, N. (1998), were being her major source

of references.

There is a slight difference between the earlier and the latest finding. For instance, Lopez

and Lent (1992) found that 9th grade students’ math self-efficacy beliefs were influenced by

performance accomplishments (i.e. enactive attainments) and emotional arousal, but not

vicarious learning or verbal persuasions. Furthermore, Hampton (1998) found that performance

accomplishments and vicarious experiences predicted students’ academic self-efficacy beliefs for

both students with learning or non-learning disabilities.

There were also some researchers who studied the correlation between self-efficacy

perceptions and selection of maths-related majors and careers also reported the same results. She

took a research done by Matsui, Matsui, and Ohnishi (1990) reported that performance

accomplishment, vicarious learning and physiological state but not social persuasions, predicted

students’ maths self-efficacy perceptions.

Whereas research done by Lent, Lopez and Bieschke (1991), found that students’

performance accomplishments were the most important source of self-efficacy information for

maths self-efficacy

4
 All these literature review only covered mainly on students’ math self-efficacy. She

should try her best to get sources regarding science area since science is one of the most crucial

and challenging subject. Research on science itself can help future researcher to understand and

get a clear picture of getting rid of students’ problems in learning science.

Research Design

The researcher didn’t mention clearly the type of her research design. But, from my

understanding her study was a phenomenological approach because there was an essence to

share her experiences. In this research, she entered into an individual’s experience of

experiencing science self-efficacy beliefs. And, she finally interpreted students’ experience and

explored the most significance source of self-efficacy.

Appropriateness of Research Design

Phenomenology is the most suitable word in explaining this research. The researcher

expressed her interest in understanding the social world in this case in education field from the

points of the students, and emphasizes the main source of students’ Science self-efficacy beliefs.

Positionality

From my understanding, this research involved three researchers who were experienced

secondary school science teachers with 10 to 15 years experience in teaching. They were played

5
an active part in this research such as; drawing up the items for Science Self-Efficacy Scale.

However, she didn’t explain who they were.

During conducting the interviews, she mentioned that one of the researchers was

conducting the interviews in a room provided by the school authorities. A few questions raised

up here.

Firstly, who was conducting the interviews?

Secondly, who was the real researcher?

Thirdly, who analysed the data?

Fourthly, what is the position of the author of this research?

I just make an assumption that Mary is the main researcher in this study. She was the one

who conducting the questionnaires distribution and interviews because she explained the process

in a very clear explanation. Therefore, in this research she was an outside researcher (means she

make a clear justification as a researcher and not as participant in this research.

She relies more on “Self-efficacy Concept” by Bandura dominating her ideas and her

research framework. She used her experience as Science teacher to explore her students and

finding the ways to improve her students’ academic achievement. She didn’t imposing her

beliefs in this study. She relies totally on Bandura views and other related researchers regarding

this topic. Her result is also based on her findings that supporting the previous research.

6
Qualitative Methods

The researcher was conducting her research by using both methods. The first phase, she

used quantitative method by using a Science Self-Efficacy Scale which consisting of 10 sciences

items covering a range of science topics familiar to students. These items were developed to

assess students’ SSE.

The participants were asked to give realistic estimates of their confidence in answering

such science items correctly. The items in the scale represented three domains of Science that is

Biology, Chemistry and Physics. It also included 5 levels of questioning based on Blooms

Taxonomy Cognitive Domains namely knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis and

synthesis.

She designed by herself about 30 items based on her expertise and other teachers’

comment and suggestions that are; calculations, analyzing graphs, diagrams, charts and texts and

designing experiments. She also was testing the suitability and reliability of the scale by doing

pilot study.

The second phase of study, she proceeded the study by using qualitative method by

conducting interviews. She was very keen in her work. She did a pilot study when she prepared

the interview protocol. She prepared both in English and Bahasa Malaysia in order to make the

interviewees felt comfortable.

7
 Before she conducts her interview, she established a good rapport with the participants.

They were informed the purpose of the interviews and promised them to keep all the responses

as confidential. The participants were not being pushed to give the answer but advised to respond

as honestly as they could. The students were also given choice to converse in their preferred

language. She took about 30 minutes to interview students personally. All the interview sessions

were audio-taped.

Sampling

For quantitative method, she had 312 students involved in this study. They were mainly

from three Form levels (Form 2, Form 4 Science and Lower 6 Science). Then, for qualitative

study, she selected 42 students as purposive sampling. These were the students who undergone

her study.

She didn’t clarified the time duration or the timeline when her performing her study.

Interviewing 42 students was not an easy task. She must be took longer period in conducting this

research because of the number of the participants and time to establish friendly rapport with the

interviewees. The interview process itself took about 30 minutes per individual.

Data Collection

The first step, she used Science Self-Efficacy Scale (SSES). Here, she didn’t clarified

how she was collecting the data. She was just mentioning the reliability of the pilot question.

8
 The second step, when she was conducting the interviews she used audio-taped as

medium to collect data.

As a teacher in primary school and as a reader I can understand this phenomenon. The

researcher makes a clear description about this study, just lacking few subject matters. For

example, she didn’t mention how she got the respondent, select randomly or selectively. She

didn’t describe about the demographic data background such as gender and the family social

economic status. She was just mentioning about their ages only.

The researcher’s role is also vague because she didn’t justify her roles precisely and her

position ultimately. She didn’t mention who conduct the interviews and who interpret it. She also

didn’t mention weather she is the teacher or not, or did the participants were her students or vice

versa.

Procedural Rigor

She described the procedures clearly and enabled the data recorded and finally interpreted

accurately. However, there is no information regarding the issue of gaining access to the setting,

the issue of trustworthiness (in term of students’ approval to precede the research). The

researcher was also being silent about the time which had been utilised during this study.

9
Data Analysis

She didn’t mentioned how she analysed the data, but full analysis of SSES can be found

in the Table 1 (Influence of Various Sources of Self-Efficacy Information on Students’ SSE

Beliefs). In this part, she was only focusing on ‘how various sources of self-efficacy information

influenced students’ perception of SSE’.

For qualitative part, she was transcribed verbatim and content analyzed from the audio-

taped interview by using qualitative data analysis by Ritchie & Spencer, (1994). Here, she was

more focusing on which source of self-efficacy had greatest impact on one student’s self-efficacy

beliefs.

Analytical Preciseness

She explained clearly how she gets the findings from her interviews. The data were

inductively interpreted (explained from general to specific). But, there was no other method used

by the researcher (just interview). There was also no ‘thick’ description because the researcher

she just coded one sample from 42 students that she interviewed.

However, even though she provided reasonable explanation on her findings but it could

be predicted, because this area of self-efficacy had been widely discussed in this research area.

The significance aspect is only a contribution to the teaching of Science.

10
Auditability

Because of this study only have two research questions, the process of analyzing the data

is not challenged enough compared to the research with more questions. Method used was the

one and only that is interview.

Trustworthiness

For the sake of ensuring the quality of the findings, she took two coders to code the

interview transcripts nine selected students separately. So, she was using triangulation by

researcher when she used two researchers to analyze the data.

However in this section, she researcher didn’t clarify does she get approval from the

authority to conduct the research? Does she get informed-consent from the students? All these

didn’t mention clearly. She just assured the students verbally and not any other required material

such as written contract or etc.

She is also supposed to conduct more than one time interviewing process. By repeating

the interview with the same participant, can re-check the reliability of the response.

Only one type of method that is; interview could not be a strong evidence or verdict to

prove one’s exploratory or discovery. She should used another method such as participant

observation or focus group.

11
Conclusions

This research is considered an essential contribution for academic world especially in

Malaysia context. This research should be republished and distributed widely for the community

of education especially in primary and secondary school. This finding is also could be

significance and beneficial for Science students at higher academic education.

This study is suggesting the teachers should pay special attention should be given to low

SSE students regarding their formation of self-efficacy beliefs based on vicarious information

and verbal persuasions.

Even though there is few things lack in this research, this research can help much if the

readers want to explore and gain more knowledge on a contextual research. To sump up, I hereby

recommend this paper to be a reference for all Science teachers in this country for the sake of our

younger generation.

12
Centre for Education and Human Development

CENTED)

International Islamic University Malaysia

THE ROLE OF SELF-EFFICACY

INFORMATION IN INFLUENCING
SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENT’S
SCIENCE SELF-EFFICACY BELIEFS

BY:
MARY WONG SIEW LIAN
(JURNAL PENYELIDIKAN MPBL, JILID 5, 2004, PAGE 24-37)

EDF 6801
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHOD
(ARTICLE REVIEW)

LECTURER:
DR. SUHAILAH HUSSEIN

13
 PREPARED BY:
KAMARUNNOR DOLLAH @ ABDULLAH (G 0628388)

14