Self Efficacy And The Social Cognitive Theory Education Essay

Self susceptibility And The Social Cognitive Theory nurture EssayThis chapter is divided into four get outs. The premier part initially discusses the gain of self- susceptibility in the sociable cognitive theory. Then, definitions and properties of self- efficaciousness, characteristics of risque and base self-efficacious individuals, the beginnings of self- cogency and the difference surrounded by this construct and other analogous constructs atomic number 18 discussed. Moreover, the last section of the first part is devoted to the role of self- efficiency in blurb/ exotic diction strivement and improvement in general and in particular skills. The present moment part is devoted to the definitions of dustup skill strategies and their classifications. Moreover, the role of run-in schooling strategies in second/ exotic terminology attainment and strikement and the descent amidst language learning strategies and self-efficacy ar discussed in this part, too. Th e third part is devoted to the construct of anxiety in general and exotic language anxiety in particular. In this part, definitions and classifications of anxiety, the role of anxiety in second/ alien language achievement and advance and the kind betwixt foreign language anxiety and self-efficacy ar discussed. The last part discusses the creation of audition wisdom and how it is tie in to the collar constructs of self-efficacy, language learning strategies, and foreign language anxiety.2.1 Self-efficacy and the loving cognitive theoryTo understand the concept of self-efficacy better, matchless must consider the theoretical framework of social cognitive theory. Bandura (1986, 1997) considers the social cognitive theory as a theory of human functioning. Based on this theory, human functioning female genitalia be explained finished the operation of three divisors that interact with each other. adept factor is what Chomsky refers to as cognition, and Bandura in the soc ial cognitive theory refers to as testify(prenominal) factors. A nonher factor is what skinner referred to as environment and the third factor is what Bandura refers to as sort. Bandura (1986) believed in the concept of triadic reciprocality in the social cognitive theory. This refers to the interaction among personal, behavioral and environmental factors. Moreover, an individuals behavior is descendd by the interaction of the above menti mavend factors. In this theory, individuals be considered as proactive, self-regulating, self-organizing and self-reflecting rather than reactive champions and controlled by biological or environmental forces.Based on the social cognitive theory, individuals guide a form of self-belief or a self-system that enables them to control their actions, feelings, thoughts, and want (Bandura, 1986 Paj bes, 1997). This self-system fuddles it possible for individuals to make choices, remove their courses of actions, self-examine the adequacy of th eir behavior, interpret the outcomes, develop beliefs round their capabilities, and store this schooling to be used as a guide for future behavior (Bandura, 1986). Bandura (1997) considered the act of self-reflection as the just about influential mediator of human functioning and among the close arbiters of self-reflection ar perceptions of self-efficacy.2.1.1 Self-efficacy and its definitionsBandura (1986) considers self-efficacy as the main feature in the social cognitive theory. Based on the social cognitive theory, self-efficacy is the primary determinant of an individuals pauperism to act. Bandura (1986) defines self-efficacy as peoples ruling of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to get ahead designated types of effects. It is not concerned with the skills wizard has hardly with the creative thinker of what screw one do with whatever skills one possesses (p. 391).Besides Bandura, many researchers chip in provided contrary defi nitions of self-efficacy but most of them argon based on Banduras definition. Delcourt and Kinzie (1993) stated that self-efficacy reflects an individuals assertion in his or her ability to perform the behavior required to wee-wee specific outcomes (p. 36). Huang and Shanmao (1996) defined self-efficacy judgeations as the beliefs about ones ability to perform a given task or behavior conquestfully (p. 3). Schunk (2001) considers self-efficacy as beliefs about ones capabilities to learn or perform behaviors at designated trains (p. 126). Moreover Baron and Byrne (2004) place three kinds of self-efficacy Social self-efficacy, self-regulatory self-efficacy and pedantic self-efficacy. They considered social self-efficacy as the ability to retire note births, learn in social activities, and expire assertive. They referred to the self-regulatory self-efficacy as the ability to be curious, think carefully, and keep off senior high-risk activities. Finally, they considered faculty memberian self-efficacy as the ability to take part in learning activities, regulate the learning activities and meet phoneions.2.1.2 Self-efficacy and its propertiesSelf-efficacy beliefs are not dependent on ones abilities but instead on what one believes whitethorn be secureed with ones personal skills. Moreover, Bandura (1997) believed that there is a cartoon difference amongst possessing skills and being able to use them in diametric locations. And that is why, antithetical people with similar skills or the same(p) person on distinct occasions may perform differently. Bandura (1997) mentioned that self-efficacy beliefs are distinguished from the skills one possesses, although they may be square offd by the acquisition of skills. That is why he presume that self-efficacy beliefs are often better forecasters of success than prior accomplishments, skills, or knowledge. For example, in educational laytings, disciples self-efficacy mediates between the several determinants of competence (e.g., skills, knowledge, ability, or previous achievements) and their concomitant doings (Bandura, 2006 Schunk Pajares, 2001).Bandura (1997) mentioned that optimistic efficacy beliefs maintain and enhance need, and boost process. Optimistic self-efficacy beliefs are instrumental to the fortunate completion of challenging tasks. These beliefs may increase driving and unravelence and promote accomplishment in challenging circumstances. In faculty member settings, these beliefs gain vigorm to be necessary for attempting novel tasks or for learning current materials. He as well stated that innovativeness requires an unshakable find of efficacy to persist in creative endeavors when they demand prolonged investment of time and parturiency (Bandura, 1997, p. 239).Self-efficacy is not a fixed ability that individuals lay down or dont pick out in their repertoire of behaviors. But it is a generative capability in which cognitive, social, excited a nd behavioral sub-skills must be organized and rough-and-readyly score to serve innumerable purposes (Bandura, 1997, p.36). Bandura (1997) believed that the experience of self-efficacy decides individuals motivations, the goal they set, the confinement they flatten to achieve their goals and their leaveingness to persist in the search of difficulties and b upsets. For example, in an educational setting, students who flip the virtuoso of self-efficacy in their pedantic skills expect high marks on exams and expect the quality of their work to gain benefits for them.Another feature of self-efficacy is that it is task and res publica specific. In other words, it refers to specific judgment of a specific situation and it is not a context- drop out disposition. A high mavin of efficacy in one earthly concern does not necessarily mean high good guts of self-efficacy in another domain. And this is why measures of self-efficacy must determine the domains of action. In educat ional settings, self-efficacy beliefs are to a greater extent specific and situational judgments of capabilities (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, Pastorelli, 1996 reverberate, 2006 Pajares, 1997).In academic settings, according to Bandura (1986), self-efficacy refers to judgment of confidence to perform academic tasks or succeed in academic activities. Self-efficacy beliefs are also hypothesized to mediate the influence of other determinants of academic outcomes much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) as skills or past performance on subsequent actions. Efficacy beliefs also act in concert with other common mechanisms of personal agency such(prenominal)(prenominal) as self-concept beliefs, anxiety, and self-regulatory practices in influencing and visiting academic outcomes. Also, Bandura (1997) mentioned that in such settings self-efficacy affects students aspirations, their level of interest in academic work and accomplishments and how well they deck up themselves for future careers. He identified two types of efficacy in such settings One refers to achievement in specific subject surface area such as language or science and the second refers to self-regulated learning and the extent to which an individual feels prosperous on tasks that generalize across academic domains.2.1.3 high and petty(a) sense of self-efficacyBandura (1997) stated that people usually melt down to become involved in and perform activities that they judge themselves fitting of managing, but they tend to avoid those situations that are threatening and they believe exceed their skills and abilities. In an educational setting, a learner is more seeming to exert effort to engage in an assigned learning task when he or she sees him/herself capable of accomplishing it. When facing with difficult situations, those who become a stronger sense of self-efficacy tend to make greater efforts to deal with challenges. But those who grow a set out sense of efficacy are likely to avoid engaging in a difficult task or plane not screen awkward enough to accomplish the task. Avoiding difficult tasks leads to lower success and this, in itself, leads to until now lower sense of self-efficacy.Based on the researches through with(p) in the area of self-efficacy, there are major differences between those with high and low sense of self-efficacy. High self-efficacious people exert more attention, effort and persistence in the case of difficulties than people with lower sense of self-efficacy. Those with high sense of efficacy work harder than their low self-efficacy peers. When those with low sense of self-efficacy fail, they often put the tear for their bankruptcy on everything except their own shortcoming. High self-efficacious people set more challenging goals for themselves than low self-efficacious ones.People with high sense of self-efficacy scale those with low sense of self-efficacy and they employ more strategies to accomplish their goals (Bandura Locke, 2003 Latham, 2004 Locke Latham, 1990). Pajares (2006) reported that students with high sense of self-efficacy, regardless of previous successes or abilities, persist in the face of adversity. Moreover, these students are more optimistic and have lower stress levels and achieve more. Pajares and Schunk (2001) stated that the high the sense of efficacy, the more energy and effort are used to keep trying tasks or situations that may be more difficult and challenging in nature. They believed that in educational settings, a self-efficacious student takes academic risks, sets goals for him/herself, compares him/herself to other peers, maintains routines, and keeps track of what works well and what doesnt regarding academic and social progress. A self-efficacious person may not have the highest grades in the class, but he/she believes in his or her own abilities to accomplish tasks, to find the expert answer, to meet goals and often to surpass other peers. Schunk (1983) stated that a he ightened sense of efficacy sustains task involvement and results in greater achievement and lower perceptions of efficacy lead to less persistence and lower achievement.Regarding the difference between high and low sense of self-efficacy, Bandura (1997) stated that self-efficacy beliefs influence individuals pursued courses of action, effort expended in given endeavors, persistence in the confrontation of obstacles, and resilience to adversity. Self-efficacious individuals willing, therefore, climb up challenges with the intention and anticipation of restraint, intensifying their efforts and persistence accordingly. These individuals rapidly recover their take down sense of self-efficacy after enduring failure or difficulty, and attribute failure to insufficient effort or deficient knowledge. Students with a high level of self-efficacy get the picture tough tasks as challenges. They also have higher motivation to conquer the difficulties and more confidence to accomplish demand ing tasks. On the contrary, students with low sense of self-efficacy regard things as harder than they really are they do not perceive their efforts sens lead to better results, so they have less motivation to devote time to demanding tasks. He also stated that self-efficacy is a factor that eject differentiate successful learners from unsuccessful ones. Eggen and Kauchak (2004) mentioned that students who have high self-efficacy are more willing to accept a challenging task, work harder, have a calmer disposition despite experiencing failure in the beginning, practice effective learning strategies, and generally generate better performance than students who have low self-efficacy, even if they have the same ability and skill.Finally, Bandura (1997) describes the feature of self-efficacious learners as survey self-efficacious learners feel confident about solving a problem because they have developed an approach to problem solving that has worked in the past. They attribute their success mainly to their own efforts and strategies, believe that their own abilities will improve as they learn more, and recognize that errors are part of learning. Students with low self-efficacy believe that they have inherent low ability, choose less demanding tasks and do not try hard because they believe that any effort will reveal their own insufficiency of ability (p. 3).2.1.4 Self-efficacy and its comesPeople get their self-efficacy discipline from four different sources Mastery experiences, vicarious (observational) experiences, verbal persuasions, and physiological chemical reactions or states (Alderman, 2004 Bandura, 1997 Ormrod, 2003 Pajares, 2003 Pintrich Schunk, 2002 Zimmerman, 2001).The first source of self-efficacy is a mastery experience which is, according to Bandura (1997), the most influential source of efficacy information. Mastery experiences are prior performances that may be interpret positively or negatively. Successful performances strengthen persona l efficacy beliefs spell failed performances neutralize ones sense of self-efficacy. Successful performances lead to the anticipation of future success. Therefore, the information which is gathered from mastery experiences provides a reliable base from which one can evaluate self-efficacy and predict successful performance of future tasks. harmonise to Palmer (2006), mastery experiences are the most federal agencyful sources of creating a strong sense of efficacy because they provide students authentic evidence that they have the capability to succeed at the task. In educational settings or academic contexts, the previous success of a learner is the most influential source of self-efficacy beliefs.The second source of information for self-efficacy is vicarious experiences. It refers to the appraisal of ones own capabilities in relation to the accomplishment of peers. One can manage a task and foster the belief that he/she might possess similar capabilities by observing the succe ss of same peers. Also, observation of the failure of a comparable peer can undermine an individuals perception of the ability to succeed. So, vicarious experience may affect efficacy positively or negatively.The third source of self-efficacy comes from verbal persuasion. It refers to the peoples judgments of others ability to accomplish a given task. communicative persuasion is a weaker source of efficacy information in comparison to mastery or vicarious experiences. Verbal persuasion can be in the form of performance feedback or encouragement in overcoming obstacles. Positive verbal messages can lead to successful performances in future. On the other hand, negative persuasion can resist the outgrowth of stronger sense of self-efficacy.The last source of self-efficacy information is physiological or emotional states of people such as stress, anxiety, or fatigue in judging their capabilities. Physiological and emotional states can lead twain to an expectation for failure or enh ancing beliefs for future success. According to Bandura (1997), high emotional foreplay can undermine performance and people are more likely to expect success when they are not troubled by aversive arousal than when they are tense and emotionally agitated.Finally, it should be mentioned that self-efficacy beliefs do not come from a single source of the above mentioned information, but it is through the selection, integration and interpretation of information from these diverse sources that ones sense of self-efficacy is formed (Bandura, 1997).2.1.5 Self-efficacy and similar constructsThere are some constructs such as self-esteem, self-concept, and confidence that have fuzzy boundaries with self-efficacy or seem to constitute a conceptual circle with it. The common feature of all these constructs is that they all refer to beliefs about perceive ability but what distinguishes self-efficacy from them is the idea that it refers to specific types of performance and explicit sought aft er goals or results (Pajares, 1996).The main difference between self-esteem and self-efficacy is that self-esteem is a personal trait trance self-efficacy is not. Self-esteem is a more emotional response to self while self-efficacy applies to specific fields of human behavior. Self-efficacy is the assessment of ones capabilities while self-esteem is the assessment of ones self-worth (Epstein Morling, 1995 Maddux, 1995). According to Zimmerman and Cleary (2006), self-esteem is an affective reaction indicating how a person feels about him or herself whereas self-efficacy involves cognitive judgments of personal capacity. They stated that self-esteem is not a prognosticator of academic performance while self-efficacy is.The main difference between confidence and self-efficacy is that self-efficacy is the belief in ones bureau to achieve certain levels of performances while confidence does not involve the persons power or ability to perform at a certain level (Epstein Morling, 199 5).According to Pajares and Schunk (2001), an individuals self-concept involves evaluation of self-worth and it takes the cultural and social values into consideration. Self-concept has an indirect influence on performance while self-efficacy collect to its task-specific nature can predict performance more easily than generalized measures of self-esteem, self-concept or anxiety (Zimmerman Cleary, 2006). Bong and Skaalvik (2003) argued that self-efficacy can be seen as providing a basis for the development of self-concept. Moreover, Pajares (2003) stated that report self-efficacy is a significant predictor of achievement in makeup while writing self-concept beliefs are not.2.1.6 Self-efficacy and its role in achievement and proficiencyBased on the properties of self-efficacy mentioned above, it seems that it plays a great role in find out individuals behavior in their daily lives and especially in educational and academic settings. In this part the role of self-efficacy in indi viduals achievement and proficiency will be elaborated and some major relevant studies will be reviewed. Some of these studies focus on the predictive power of self-efficacy in individuals achievement.Bandura (1986) fictive self-efficacy to be a much more consistent predictor of behavior than any other closely related variables. He mentioned that many students have difficulty not because they are incapable of performing successfully, but because they are incapable of believing that they can perform successfully, that they have learned to see themselves as incapable of handling academic skills(p. 390). Some researchers (e.g., Bandura, 1997 Pajares, 1997 Schunk, 1989 Zimmerman, 1995) assumed that self-efficacy, which is an individuals judgment about his or her abilities to perform a given task can be a better predictor of success than his/her actual abilities because they considered self-efficacy a circumstantial determinant of behaviors. Some studies that have been done in the educ ational settings (e.g, Berry, 1987 Schunk, 1989) have shown that when learners have the same skills or they are at the same level of cognitive skill development, their performance can be different depending on their self-efficacy beliefs. That is why, Pajares (1997) stated that peoples prior accomplishments or actual abilities are not always good predictors of their subsequent success because the beliefs they hold about their abilities influence their subsequent behavior.But some researchers (e.g, Carmichael Taylor, 2005 Mills, 2004) warned that measuring self-efficacy in educational settings beforehand the target skills are acquired cannot be considered as a good predictor of achievement. For example, in Mills (2004) study, self-efficacy was measured at the beginning of a semester when the participants had not acquired the required skills to perform the tasks. So, the result revealed that self-efficacy did not predict the final grade. According to Zimmerman and Kitsantas (2005), self-efficacy can better predict or explain subsequent performance when the students are familiar with the necessary skills to perform the task being measured. Schunk (1999) also warned that high self-efficacy beliefs will not produce competent performance if students overleap necessary skills. For example, Chen (2003) instal that the impact of students self-efficacy beliefs on their math performance was greater when they possessed underlying math skills.Multon, Brown, and Lent (1991) after doing a meta- outline of self-efficacy research strand a positive and significant relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and academic performance. Moreover, they indicated that self-efficacy was strongly related to student performance in a variety of subject matters. They reported that self-efficacy beliefs accounted for approximately 14% of the variance in students academic performance. Graham and Weiner (1996) put in that self-efficacy beliefs more consistently predicted academic perfor mance than other motivational constructs.Recently, several researchers (e.g, Maddux Gosselin, 2003 Skaalvik Bong, 2003) have shown that students academic self-efficacy is predictive of their study behavior as well as academic outcomes. Self-efficacy has consistently been shown to be positively associated with general academic achievement (e.g., Jackson, 2002 Lane Lane, 2001) and with performance in several specific domains, including math (Pajares Miller, 1995), and writing (Pajares, 2003 Pajares, Britner, Valiante, 2000). Some recent studies have imbed a consistent link between having a high sense of self-efficacy and achievement and the fact that efficacy beliefs are one of the most classic predictors of motivation and performance (Bong, 2002 Pajares, 1996 Robbins, et al., 2004 Schunk Pajares, 2001). Also, Mills, et al. (2006) found that a stronger sense of self-efficacy leads to higher levels of achievement, greater willingness to face challenges and to exert effort.Many researchers indicated that self-efficacy has a stronger effect on academic performance than other motivational beliefs and it is found to have critical effects on various types of academic learning (Gibson, Randel, Earley, 2000 Linnenbrink Pintrich, 2002 Pintrich Schunk, 2002). Yazici, Seyis, and Altur (2011) found that self-efficacy beliefs are the most powerful predictors of academic achievements. Yang (2004) and Wong (2005) stated that students learning outcome is influenced by their perceived sense of self-efficacy. Moreover, Yang (2004) asserted that students learning attitudes, learning behaviors or even learning performances are affected by their sense of self-efficacy. Wong (2005) has shown that students performance can be facilitated by the enhancement of their sense of self-efficacy. Pajares (2002) mentioned that students academic self-efficacy influence their academic achievements in several ways. It influences the choices students make and the courses of action they p ursue. In situations that students have free choices, they tend to engage in tasks about which they feel confident and avoid those in which they dont. It also helps to determine how much effort students will expend on an activity, how long they will persevere when facing obstacles and how resilient they will be in the face of adverse situations.Although considerable research has been done to study self-efficacy in educational and academic settings, most of these studies have been circumscribe to the domain of mathematical problem solving and languages other than English. For example, (Britner Pajares, 2001 Pajares Graham, 1999) found that perceived self-efficacy of the students mediate between their abilities and their academic performance in math and science. collins (1982) found that across ability levels, students whose self-efficacy is higher are more veracious in their mathematics computation and show greater persistence on difficult items than do students whose self-effic acy beliefs are low. Pajares and Graham (1999) aimed to determine whether mathematic self-efficacy makes an independent division to the prediction of mathematic performance when other motivational variables and previous achievements are controlled. They found that mathematic self-efficacy was the only motivational variable to predict mathematic performance. Ayotola and Adedeji (2009) examined the relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics achievement. The result revealed that there was a strong positive relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and achievement in mathematics. The researchers concluded that self-efficacy beliefs are important components of motivation and of academic achievement. Jaafar and Ayub (2010) also found a positive relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics performance.In the case of languages other than English, McCollum (2003) found that the German language self-efficacy was a significant predictor of the semest er final grade. In a similar study, Mills (2004) investigated the relationship between French self-efficacy in class period and listening and proficiency in indication and listening. The result of the analysis indicated that French interpretation self-efficacy was a predictor of French course session proficiency but French listening self-efficacy was not a predictor of proficiency in listening. Mills (2004) assumed that the failure of French listening self-efficacy to predict French listening proficiency may have been partly due to the fact that the critical task measure in the study-that is, listening proficiency test-possessed psychometric flaws.Recently many researchers have investigated the role of self-efficacy in foreign language settings and the role it plays in the achievement and proficiency in foreign languages specially English. Hsieh and Schallert (2008) examined the relationship between self-efficacy and attribution in a foreign language setting. In their study attr ibution referred to the explanations individuals give for their success or failure in a particular performance. The result indicated that despite failure in performing the given tasks, students reported the same level of self-efficacy as successful students when they attributed their failure to lack of effort. The researchers concluded that even when students reported having low self-efficacy, helping them view success and failure as an outcome that they can control may increase their expectancy for success and lead to successful experiences.Wang and Wu (2008) adopted the social cognitive model to investigate the role of self-efficacy on behavioral influences such as feedback behaviors and learning strategies and on environmental influences such as achievement. In the case of behavioral influences, the result indicated that self-efficacy was significantly related to students elaborated feedback behaviors and use of learning strategies. However, the results indicated that self-effica cy was not related to students academic performance. The researchers argued that this may be due to the domain specific nature of self-efficacy. They assumed that students who lack performance information or experience in the academic domain may form inaccurate estimation of self-efficacy and this may have been the causality why self-efficacy did not predict students achievement in this study.With regard to learning English, Huang and Shanmao (1996) found a relationship between self-efficacy of ESL students and their slews on the reading and writing sections of the TOEFL test. In a similar study, Templin (1999) divided the EFL participants into high and low self-efficacy groups and found a significant difference between the English proficiency of the two groups.2.1.7 Self-efficacy and its role in achievement and proficiency in specific skillsSome researchers canvas the role of efficacy in specific skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing in English. Pajares (2003) in re viewing the predictive power of self-efficacy in writing found that writing self-efficacy makes an independent contribution to the prediction of writing outcomes and plays a meditational role that social cognitive theorists hypothesized. Moreover, he suggested that instruction in self-regulatory strategies such as goal setting, self-recording progress, revision strategies, and self-evaluating progress may increase both self-efficacy and writing skills.Shang (2010) investigated the impact of EFL self-efficacy in reading and reading proficiency. He found a correlation between EFL learners self-efficacy in reading and their reading proficiency. Recently, Sioson (2011) aimed to determine among the subscales of language learning strategies, beliefs about language learning and anxiety which one is the strongest predictor of performance in an academic speaking context. The result of bigeminal regression analysis revealed that only the motivation and expectation subscale of beliefs about l anguage learning was the significant predictor of speaking performance. Woodrow (2011) indicated that self-efficacy is a powerful predictor of writing performance than anxiety. According to the finding of his study, highly self-efficacious students performed well in their English writing and showed desirable learning attributes such as exerting effort.Ghonsooly and Elahi (2010) found a positive relationship between the Iranian EFL learners self-efficacy in reading comprehension and their reading achievements. The researchers indicated that high self-efficacious learners performed better than low self-efficacious learners in reading achievements. They concluded that EFL learners self-efficacy is an important factor in the achievement of high scores in English language skills such as reading comprehension. Rahemi (2010) studied the self-efficacy of Iranian high school students. The result indicated that students majoring in humanities had a very weak English self-efficacy and held cer tain negative beliefs about their academic ability as EFL learners. Moreover, a strong correlation was found between their English achievement and sense of self-efficacy. Rahimi and Abedini (2009) explored the role of self-efficacy in listening comprehension of Iranian EFL learners and their listening comprehension test performance. According to the results of the study, there was a significant difference between high and low self-efficacious students in impairment of listening comprehension. Moreover, self-efficacy in listening was significantly related to listening proficiency.In another study, Graham (2006) studied the role of efficacy in the development of listening skills and