If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Self Efficacy. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Self Efficacy paper right on time.
Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Self Efficacy, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Self Efficacy paper at affordable prices!
Understanding adult learning techniques and motivational influences behind themhave become a fairly new and important area of study. When evaluating how adults learnbest we must look at what the driving forces are behind learning. This is especially true
Write my Essay on Self Efficacy for me
when comparing children's and teen's inspirations to those of adults. Adults havedifferent goals and needs for learning than adolescents. One unique aspect of adultlearning settings that is different than those of adolescents are most likely that grades arenot necessarily a motivating factor for learning. There are other critical elemtents thatserve as motivators for adults. According to Malcom Knowles these sources ofmotivation include Social relationships, external expectations, social welfare, personaladvancement, escape/stimulation, and cognitive interest. These resources are veryimportant for self-directed learners to become competent enough to survive in adultlearning. Learning is a lifelong process and in the following paper I will discuss themotivations, skills, and characteristics of an adult learner when grades do not serve as theprimary motivating factor.
Adult learning became widely promoted by Malcom Knowles in his years of study. He was a theorist who focused on the importance of the individual in adult educationalsettings. Knowles attributed several characteristics to adult learners Adults areautonomous and self-directed, adults have life experiences and knowledge, adults aregoal-oriented, adults are relevancy-oriented, adults are practical, and adults need respect. This shows that there may be a number of reasons why adults may want to learn, as longas there is still a sense of choice that may be made. Learning is a process in whichindividuals take the initiative, with or without the help of others, to diagnose theirlearning needs, formulate learning goals, identify resources for learning, select andimplement learning strategies, and evaluate learning outcomes (Knowles 175).
Compared to children and teens, adults also cope with many more barriers thatmust be balanced in order for learning to take place. Some of the barriers include lack oftime, money, confidence or interest, lack of information about opportunities to learn, andalso problems with child care. Some instructors have also found that many adults are notable to engage in learning because they lack independence, confidence, or resources. Furthermore, not all adults are capable of achieving the self-directed option, and even theadults who do practice self-directed learning also engage in more formal educationalexperiences such as teacher-directed courses(Brookfield185). I feel that it is no longernecessary to define adult instruction as a process of transmitting what is known. It mustnow be defined as a process of continuing investigation. And so the most importantinvestigation is how to learn the skills and motivations of adult learning when grades arenot important.
A very important skill of an adult learner is the desire to be in control of decidingwhat to learn and how to learn it. This is where internal motivators come into play. Thetypes of motivators present in an adult learning setting may include the desire to maintainold skills or learn new skills, learning skills necessary for a new job, or developing theskills required for a promotion. Motivation plays a very significant role in the initiation ofeffort toward learning and the achievement of goals. It also leads to responsible andcontinuous learning. Hence, I feel it is essential for adult instuctors to create conditionswhere students become increasingly motivated by actual interest and the desire toconstruct personal meaning and shared understandings. Understanding these conditions iswhat the exploration of adult learning is all about. Therefore, probably the best way for aninstructor to ensure that the adult learner is motivated is by enhancing and understandingthe reasons that an adult attempts to learn and helping decrease the barriers. Learning willthen become self-reinforcing and intrinsically motivating for the adult learner. Adultlearners will have a higher degree of motivation if they understand that the learning goalswill meet their needs and are achievable. In adult learning, attention is primarily focusedon motivational factors, but there are other crucial factors that are just as important.
Self- monitoring is another important skill related to adult learning. Self-monitoring refers to an awareness of and a concern about one's thinking. Self-monitoring is the process whereby the learner takes responsibility for the creation ofpersonal meaning. This may mean adding to and enriching existing knowledge ormodifying and developing new knowledge. Cognitive and metacognitive processes areinvolved in self-monitoring. Metacognitive proficiency is associated with the ability to beresourceful and think critically. Models of critical thinking not only help describe themetacognitive processes associated with adult learning, but can be of great assistance inassisting students to become responsible for their learning (Garrison, 1). Usinginternal and external input to construct meaning and shape strategies enables us toself-monitor learning. Self-monitoring is ultimately linked to our management of learningtasks and activities.
Another interesting and important skill that arises during adult learning isautonomy. Autonomy is a structure which makes learning more attainable to the learner. Learning in adulthood means becoming more self-directed and autonomous. There arethree elements that characterize an autonomous learner independence, the ability to makechoices, and the capacity to articulate the norms and the limits of a learningactivity(Chene18). Chene (18), for example, defines the autonomy of the learner asindependence and the will to learn. However, she also notes that the learner must have anawareness of the learning process, an understanding of what is conceived as competencein a specific area of study, and the ability to make critical judgments. However, inautonomy there is a relationship between the personal and situational variables that mustbe present for a person to be autonomous in certain learning situations. Chene (18),contends that self-direction is a situational attribute of learners, not a general trait ofadulthood. Therefore, adults vary in their desire, capacity, and readiness for control overcertain types of learning tasks.
The next characteristic that I feel is unique to adult learning is the concept ofself-efficacy. Self-efficacy theory says that all processes of psychological and behavioralchange operate through the alteration of the individual's sense of personal mastery orself-efficacy. Self-efficacy was originally defined as a rather specific type of expectancyconcerned with one's beliefs in their ability to perform a specific behavior or set ofbehaviors required to produce an outcome (Bandura, 177). The definition ofself-efficacy has been expanded, however, to refer to peoples beliefs about theircapabilities to exercise control over events that affect their lives(Bandura, 18) and theirbeliefs in their capabilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources, and courses ofaction needed to exercise control over task demands, which in this case it would be thedemands of learning in a non-graded setting.The apparent need to ¡° learn on one's own has been a persistent theme in self-directedlearning. For this reason, it is not surprising to find that self-directed learning has itsgenesis in independent and informal adult learning contexts (Tough 171). An importantturning point in conceptualizing the construct occurred with the recognition that it lackeda cognitive perspective (Mezirow, 185). He said that a critical awareness of meaning andself-knowledge is a key dimension to self-directedness.Long (18) identified three dimensions of self-directed learning the sociological,pedagogical, and psychological. He described that much of the discussion aroundself-directed learning has focused on the sociological (independent task management) andpedagogical (application in educational contexts) issues. He stated amazement at the factthat the psychological (cognitive) dimension had been generally ignored, stating that the¡°critical dimension in self-directed learning is not the sociological variable, nor is it thepedagogical factor. The main distinction is the psychological variable (Long, 18)While the social context for learning has been and should remain an important factor, thelack of a specific psychological or cognitive dimension has been somewhat ironic,considering the humanistic origins of the concept. Rogers (16), for instance, used theconcept in terms of both a cognitive and affective perspective. For Rogers, self-directionwas mainly about taking responsibility for the internal cognitive and motivational aspectsof learning. The focus was on cognitive freedom and the ultimate goal was to get how tolearn.The phrase ¡°self-directed learning invokes both social and cognitive issues-that is,issues of ¡°self-direction and ¡°learning, respectively. In adult education, however,most of the focus has been on self-direction (i.e., self-management of learning tasks). Assuch, the construct has been largely defined in terms of external control and facilitation,rather than internal cognitive processing and learning. Long's position was that, withoutthe psychological or cognitive dimension, the focus is on teaching not learning. He arguedthat ¡°Pedagogical procedures whether imposed by a teacher or freely chosen by thelearner remain pedagogical or ¡®teaching' activities. Hence we have other-teaching orperhaps self-teaching but not self-learning . This distinction between external controland internal cognitive responsibility is the basis for the self-directed learning frameworkand model presented here.More recently, Brockett and Hiemstra (11) have proposed an interesting framework byexpanding the self-directed learning construct to include a personality disposition. Theirframework is based on the ¡°distinction between the process of self-directed learning andthe notion of self-direction as a personality construct . The two dimensions in theframework correspond to transactional or instructional methods and learner personalitycharacteristics.The self-directed learning model described here includes three overlapping dimensionsself-management (task control), self-monitoring (congnitive responsibility), and motivation(entering and task). While each dimensior is described separately, in practice, they areintimately related. task management and external control, we begin with the more familiarconcept of self-management, that is, the transactional (collaborative) control of externaltasks and activities. This dimension encompasses the sociological and pedagogical issuesthat Long (18) earlier identified. Garrison more formally captured this multidimensional view of self0directed learning. Hesuggested a comprehensive model of self-directed learning based on three corecomponents 1) self-management (control), ) motivation (entering and task), and )self-monitoring (responsibility). According to Garrison, AE has traditionally focused onthe first component, the control of learning, and paid less attention to the learningprocesses. He suggests that equal , including the motivation to engage in self-directedlearning and to complete self-directed learning tasks. His third component,self-monitoring, is the cognitive learning processes as well as metacognitive skills a personneeds to engage in self-directed learning. Adult learning professionals need to payattention to all three components(Swanson 18, p17).As a practical matter, the contingency model of self-directedness seems most appropriatefor facilitators of adult learning because it more closely matches the reality of mostlearning situations. There are many factors that individuals weigh in choosing whether tobehave in a self-directed way at a particular point. These may include? Learning style? Previous experience with the subject matter? Social orientation? Efficiency? Previous learning socialization? Locus of controlA. Self - Management Self-management is affected with task control issues. It emphasizes on the social andbehavioral implementation of learning intentions, that is, the external activities associatedwith the learning process.Self-management contains shaping the contextual conditions in the performance ofgoal-directed actions. In an educational context, self-management does not inferiorstudents are independent and isolated learners. Facilitates provide the support, directionand standards necessary for a fortunate educational outcome. Self-management of learningin an educational context is properly a collaborative experience.Educational self-management concerns the use of learning materials withi a context wherethere is an chance for sustained communication. Self-management of learning in aneducational context must tale account of the opportunity to test and make sure ofunderstanding collaboratively. This is an important aspect of know edge development.B. Self - MonitoringSelf-monitoring refers to cognitive and metacognitive processes monitoring the repertoireof learning strategies as well as an awareness of and an ability to concern about ourthinking. Self-monitoring is the process whereby the learner takes responsibility for theconstruction of personal meaning.Self-monitoring is similar to responsibility to construct meaning. This may mean adding toand enriching existing knowledge structures or modifying and developing new knowledge.Internally, cognitive and metacognitive processes are involved with self-monitoring theconstruction of meaning. Cognitive ability is a core variable in self-directed learning. Bandura (186) suggests that there are three self-regulated learning processesself-observation, self-judgement, and self-reaction.Metacognitive proficiency is very much associated with the ability to be reflective andthink critically. Models of critical thinking not only help describe the metacognitiveprocesses associated with self-directed learning, but can be of great assistance in helpingstudents become metacognitively responsible for their learning (Garrison, 1). To be aware of this internal and external input, and to use it to construct meaning andshape strategies is to self-monitor learning cognitively and metacognitively.Self-monitoring is intimately linked to the external management of learning tasks andactivities. An interesting and important issue arises with regard toresponsibility(self-monitoring) and control(self-management).C. MotivationMotivation plays a very significant role in the initiation and maintenance of effort towardlearning and the achievement of cognitive goals. To begin to understand the pervasiveinfluence of motivational factors, we need to distinguish between the process of decidingto participate (entering motivation) and the effort required to stay on task and persistence(task motivation). Entering motivation establishes commitment to a particular goal andthe intent to act. Task motivation is the tendency to focus on and persist in learningactivities and goals.It is hypothesized that entering motivation is largely determined by valence andexpectancy. Students will have a higher entering motivational state if they understand thatlearning goals will meet their needs and are achievable. In a learning context, valencereverberate the attraction to particular learning goals. The factors that determine valencesare personal needs (values) and affective states (preferences). Personal need reflects theimportance or worth of particular learning goals. Needs and values reflect the reasons forpersisting in a learning task. Closely associated with needs are affective states. This set ofconsists of attitudes toward self (e.g., self-esteem), task (e.g., anxiety), and goalpreference.Expectancy in a learning context refers to the belief that a desired outcome can beachieved. This factor made up of personal and contextual characteristics that influencegoal achievement. Personal characteristics (competency) reveberate the perceived skills,ability and knowledge of the individual while assessing goals. Perceptions of ability orself-efficacy influence the decision to participate as well as the choice of goals and learningenvironments. Contextual characteristics (contingency) reflect perceived institutionalresources or barriers as well as ideological and socioeconomic constraints. Together,competency and contingency assessments represent the mediating construct of¡°anticipated control. Anticipated control is an essential perception when assessingexpectancy of success and making decisions regarding goal-directed behavior.Entwistle (181) states that ¡°interest and intrinsic motivation are likely to foster a deepapproach, and an active search for personal meaning . Intrinsic motivation leads toresponsible and continuous learning. If these are the worthy aims of education, it isnecessary that we create conditions where students become increasing motivated byauthentic interest and desire to construct personal meaning and shared understanding. Understanding these conditions is, in essence, what the exploration of self-directedlearning is about. Authentic self-directed learning becomes self-reinforcing andintrinsically motivation.Motivation and responsibility are reciprocally connected and both are facilitated bycollaborative control of the educational transaction. Issues of motivation responsibilityand control are central to comprehensive concept of self-directed learning.Self-regulated learning emerged from research on self-efficacy (perceived proficiency) andmotivation. The current emphasis of self-regulated learning on cognitive and motivationstrategies (Winne, 15) makes it a potential resource for the development of thepsychological dimensions of self-directed learning. Furthermore, it has been argued thatself-regulation has a beneficial effect on academic outcomes (Winne, 15;Zimmerman &Bandura, 14).In conclusion, self-direction is seen as a necessary process for achieving worthwhile andmeaningful educational outcomes. Self-direction is seen as essential if students are toachieve Dewey's (116) ultimate educational goal of becoming continuous learners andpossessing the capacity for further educational growth.
Motivation
(Entering / Task)
Self-Monitoring
(Responsibility) Self-Management
(Control)
Self-directed Learning
Figure 1 Dimensions of Self - Directed Learning. SELF - DIRECTED LEARNING AS A PERSONAL ATTRIBUTEThere has been less focus in the research literature on self-direction in learning as apersonal characteristic of the learner. The assumption underlying much of this work isthat learning in adulthood means becoming more self-directed and autonomous (Knowles,180; Chene, 18). Kasworm (18b), for example, proposes that self-directed learning¡°represents a qualitative evolvement of a person's sense of cognitive definition anddevelopmental readiness for ambiguous and nondefined actions . And Chene (18)offers three elements that characterize an autonomous or self-directed learnerindependence, the ability to make choices, and the capacity to articulate the norms and thelimits of a learning activity.Research into the nature of the self-directed learner asking who and what questions Arethese learners introverts or extroverts? What is their cognitive style? What personalitycharacteristics do they have in common? What level of education have they achieved? Are they more autonomous than other learners? Basically researchers are trying to gain anunderstanding of the typical learner's characteristics and style. Specifically they havetried to link a number of different variables with being more or less self-directed in one'slearning. The notion of readiness and the concept of autonomy have been studied and discussedmost often in the professional literature on self-directedness as a personal attribute. Thenotion of readiness implies an internal state of psychological readiness to undertakeself-directed learning activities. Guglielmino (177) has provided the most widely usedoperational definition of this idea. She states that people must possess eight factors to beconsidered ready to pursue self-directed learning openness to learning, self-concept as aneffective learner, initiative and independence in learning, informed acceptance ofresponsibility, love of learning, creativity, future orientation, and the ability to use basicstudy and problem-solving skills. These factors undergird her Self-Directed LearningReadiness Scale (SDLRS), designed to ascertain adult readiness for self-directed learning.The relationship of autonomy and self-directedness in learning has been discussedprimarily at the conceptual level. Chene (18), for example, defines the autonomy of thelearner as independence and the will to learn. However, she also notes that the learnermust have an awareness of the learning process, an understanding of what is conceived ascompetence in a specific area of study, and the ability to make critical judgments¡°[Autonomy] is a structure which makes possible the appropriation of learning by thelearner Autonomy, however, is not necessarily context-free; there is a relationship between thepersonal and situational variables that must come into play for a person to be autonomousin certain learning situations. As Candy (187b) observes ¡°One does not ¡®become'autonomous in any final or absolute sense. Confidence and commitment enter into eachlearning situation. Pratt (188), in agreement with Candy, contends that self-direction is asituational attribute of learners, not a general trait of adulthood. Therefore, adults varyconsiderably in their desire, capacity, and readiness to exert control over instructionalfunctions and tasks.To understand self-directedness in learning as a personal attribute, more in-depth study isrequired. We need to isolate the variables that appear to assist a person to be moreself-directed in his or her learning-from seemingly simple demographic variables such asage, socioeconomic status, and occupation to more complex concepts like autonomy, lifesatisfaction, cognitive style, and motivation.). SELF - EFFICACY Understanding how people adapt and adjust to life's infinite challenges is, perhaps, themost important problem for scientific psychology. Not surprisingly, most of the importantmodels of human learning, cognition, emotion, personality, and social interaction havetried to account for the individual's capacity for adaptively responding to environmentalchanges, often referred to as competence (e.g., Sternberg & Kolligan, 10; White, 15).Self-efficacy theory is one of the more recent in a long tradition of personal competence orefficacy theories and has generated more research in clinical, social, and personalitypsychology in the past decade and a half than other such models and theories (Bandura,177,18b,186). The crux of self-efficacy theory is that the initiation of and persistenceat behaviors, and courses of action are determined primarily by judgments andexpectations concerning behavioral skills and capabilities and the likelihood of being ableto successfully cope with environmental demands and challenges.1. SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORYSocial cognitive theory is an approach to understanding human cognition, action,motivation, and emotion that assumes that people are capable of self-regulation and thatthey are active shapers of their environments rather than simply passive reactors to them. There are essential ideas in social cognitive theory, which makes the belowing specificassumptions.(Brandura 16 describes)1. People have powerful symbolizing capabilities that allow for creation of internal modelsof experience, the development of innovative courses of action, the hypothetical testing ofsuch courses of action through the prediction of outcomes, and the communication ofcomplex ideas and experiences to others.. Most behaviors are purposive or goal-directed and is guided by fore-thought(anticipating, predicting, etc.). This capacity for intentional behavior is dependent on thecapacity for symbolizing.. People are self-reflective and capable of analyzing and evaluating their own thoughtsand experiences. These metacognitive, self-reflective, activities set the stage forself-control of thought and behavior.4. People are capable of self-regulation by influencing direct control over their ownbehavior and by selecting or altering environmental conditions that, in turn, influence theirbehavior. 5. People learn vicariously by observing other people's behavior and its consequences.6. The previously mentioned capacities for symbolization, self-reflection, self-regulation,and vicarious learning are the result of the evolution of complex neurophysiologicalmechanisms and structures. 7. Environmental events, inner personal factors (cognition, emotion, and biologicalevents), and behavior are mutually interaction influences. Their own behavior, which theninfluences not only the environment but also cognitive, affective and biological states. This principle of triadic reciprocal causation or triadic reciprocality is, perhaps, the mostimportant assumption of social cognitive theory. A complete understanding of humanbehavior in any situation requires an understanding of all three sources ofinfluence-cognition, behavior, and environmental events.Social cognitive theory views the three major alternative approaches to explainingpersonality and behavior-psychodynamic theories, trait theories, and radicalbehaviorism-as unable to account satisfactorily of the complexity and plasticity of humanbehavior. Psychodynamic theories are difficult to test empirically, cannot accountadequately for the tremendous situational variation in individual behavior, are deficient inpredicting future behavior, and have not led to the development of efficient and effectivemethods for changing psychosocial functioning. Trait theories do not have goodpredictive utility and do not sufficiently consider the documented impact of situationalinfluences. Radical behaviorism makes assumptions about behavior that have beendisputed by empirical findings. For example, Research has demonstrated thatenvironmental events (antecedents and consequences) do not control behaviorautomatically, that anticipated consequences predict behavior better than actualconsequences, that complex patterns of behavior can be learned through observation alonein the absence of reinforcement, and that operant explanations alone cannot account forthe complexity of human learning and behavior. Because social cognitive theory assumesthat people process and use information in symbolic form, evaluate their own thoughts andbehaviors, predict and anticipate events and consequences, set goals and strive towardthem, and regulate their own behavior. It surpasses the previously mentioned approachesin its ability to account for situational influences and differences, to explain the effects ofbelief and expectancies, to predict behavior accurately, and to provide models andstrategies for effective behavior change.. SELF - EFFICACY THEORYSelf-efficacy theory maintains that all processes of psychological and behavioral changeoperate through the alteration of the individual's sense of personal mastery orself-efficacy. Self-efficacy was originally defined as a rather specific type of expectancy concerned with one's beliefs in one's ability to perform aspecific behavior or set of behaviors required to produce an outcome (Bandura, 177). The definition of self-efficacy has been expanded, however, to refer to ¡°people's beliefsabout their capabilities to exercise control over events that affect their lives (Bandura,18) and their ¡°beliefs in their capabilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitiveresources, and courses of action needed to exercise control over task demands. (Bandura, 10 P16).A. GENERALITY AND SPECIFICITY OF SELF - EFFICACY BELIEFSSelf-efficacy is conceptualized and measured not as a personality trait, but, instead, isdefined and measured in the context of relatively specific behaviors in specific situations orcontexts. However, the level of specificity at which self-efficacy is measured will bedetermined by the nature of the task and situation at hand, and by the nature of the taskand situation to which one wishes to generalize, or in which one wishes to predict(Bandura, 1).Although self-efficacy sometimes is used to refer to one's general sense of competenceand effectiveness (e.g., Smith, 18), the term is most useful when defined,operationalized, and measured specific to a behavior or set of behaviors in a specificcontext (e.g., Kaplan, Atkins, & Reinsch, 184; Manning & Wright, 18). Generalself-efficacy scales have been developed (Sherer et al., 18; Tipton & Worthington,184), but these scales have not resulted in much useful research on specific types ofbehavior change. In addition, measuring self-efficacy expectancies for quitting smokingwill be more successful if we measure the smoker's expectations for being able to refrainfrom smoking under specific situations (e.g., while at a party, after eating, when aroundother smokers; DiClemente, 186). If one's sense of competence is high for an abilityone values, then this will contribute to high self-esteem (or low self-esteem if perceivedcompetence for the valued skill is low). Judgments of inefficacy in unvalued areas ofcompetence are unlikely to influence significantly self-concept and self-esteem.B. DIMENSIONS OF SELF - EFFICACY? Performance ExperiencesPerformance experiences, in particular, clear success or failure, are the most powerfulsources of self-efficacy information (Bandura, 177). Success at a task, behavior, or skillstrengthens self-efficacy expectancies for that task, behavior, or skill, whereas perceptionsof failure diminish self-efficacy expectancy. ? Vicarious ExperiencesVicarious experiences (observational learning, modeling, imitation) influence self-efficacyexpectancy when people observe the behavior of others, see what they are able to do, notethe consequences of their behavior, and then use this information to form expectanciesabout their own behavior and its consequences. Vicarious experiences generally haveweaker effects on self-efficacy expectancy than do direct personal experiences (e.g.,Bandura, Adams, & Beyer, 177).? Imaginal ExperiencesSocial cognitive theory posits that people have tremendous capacity for symbolic cognitiveactivity. People can generate beliefs about personal efficacy or inefficacy by imaginingthemselves or others behaving effectively or ineffectively in future situations (Cervone,18)? Verbal PersuasionVerbal persuasion (or social persuasion) is a less potent source of enduring change inself-efficacy expectancy than performance experiences and vicarious experiences. Thepotency of verbal persuasion as a source of self-efficacy expectancies should be influencedby such factors as the expertness, trustworthiness, and attractiveness of the source, assuggested by decades of research on verbal persuasion and attitude change (e.g., Petty &Cacioppo, 181).? Physiological StatesPhysiological states influence self-efficacy when people associate aversive physiologicalarousal with poor behavioral performance, perceived incompetence, and perceived failure. Thus, when persons become aware of unpleasant physiological arousal, they are morelikely to doubt their behavioral competence than if the physiological state were pleasant orneutral. ? Emotional StatesEmotions or moods can be additional sources of information about self0efficacy. Peopleare more likely to have self-efficacious beliefs about performance when their affect ispositive than when it is negative.? Distal and Proximal SourcesDeterminants of current self-efficacy beliefs may be either distal (past) or proximal(current or immediate), and self-efficacy for a specific performance in a specific situationmeasured at a specific time will be the result of the confluence of distal and proximalinformation from all six sources. Just as proximal (immediate) consequences usually exertgreater control over behavior than distal (future) consequences, proximal (current)information about self-efficacy is likely to have a more powerful immediate effect oncurrent self-efficacy than distal (past) information.C. MEDIATING MECHANISMS? Goal-Setting and PersistenceSelf-efficacy beliefs influence people's choice of goals and goals directed activities,expenditure of effort, and persistence in the face of challenge and obstacles (Bandura,186; Locke & Latham, 10). In the face of difficulties, people with a weak sense ofpersonal efficacy develop doubts about their ability to accomplish the task at hand andgive up easily, whereas those with a strong sense of self-efficacy increase their efforts tomaster a challenge when obstacles arise. Through the monitoring of self and situation, people develop beliefs not only about theircurrent level of competence, but also beliefs (expectations) about rate of improvement incompetence.? CognitionSelf-efficacy beliefs influence cognition in four ways. First, they influence the goals peopleset for themselves. People with stronger self-efficacy beliefs for their performance sethigher goals and commit to goals more strongly than do people with weaker beliefs abouttheir abilities. Second, self-efficacy beliefs influence the plans or strategies people envisionfor attaining these goals. Third, they influence the development of rules for predicting andinfluencing events. Finally, self-efficacy for problem solving influences the efficiency andeffectiveness of problem solving. When faced with complex decision-making tasks,people who believe strongly in their problem-solving abilities remain highly efficient andhighly effective problem-solving abilities remain highly efficient and highly effectiveproblem solvers and decision makers; those who doubt their abilities become erratic,inefficient, and ineffective (e.g., Bandura & Jourden, 11; Bandura & Wood, 18).? AffectSelf-efficacy beliefs are powerful determinants of affective or emotional responses to lifeevents, responses that can then influence cognition and action. Two domains ofself-efficacy are important in the realm of emotion. First, self-efficacy beliefs aboutbehavioral performance influence the type and intensity of affect. For example, lowself-efficacy beliefs for the prevention of aversive or harmful events lead to agitation oranxiety (Bandura, 188). Lw self-efficacy beliefs for attaining highly desired goals oroutcomes lead to despondency or depression (Bandura, 186).Second, self-efficacy for controlling the cognition that influence emotion can, in part,determine emotional responses. People can become distressed about their apparentinability to control or terminate disturbing thoughts and aversive cognitions, such as thoserelated to anxiety (Wegner, 18).? Selection of EnvironmentsPeople usually choose to enter situations in which they expect to perform successfully, andavoid situations in which they anticipate that the demands placed on them will exceed theirabilities. Therefore, self-efficacy beliefs determine people's selections of situations andactivities, selections that greatly influence the continued development of these same beliefs(e.g., Taylor & brown, 188).D. OUTCOME EXPECTANCYIn self-efficacy theory, outcome expectancies are determined primarily by self-efficacyexpectancies. The outcomes people expect depend largely on how well they expect toperform (Bandura, 186).? Measurement IssuesMost studies that have examined both self-efficacy and outcome expectancy seem tosuggest that self-efficacy determines outcome expectancy and that outcome expectancydoes not add significant predictive utility beyond that offered by self-efficacy. Most ofthese studies, however, have employed questionable measures of self-efficacy andoutcome expectancy.Some research, however, indicates that when defined and measured carefully and in amanner consistent with the conceptual distinction, self-efficacy expectancy and outcomeexpectancy can each be important in the predicition of intentions and behavior.? Response Expectancies, Self-Efficacy, and IntentionsSome researchers have raised questions about the relationships among self-efficacy,outcome expectancy, and intentions in situations in which performing a behavior may leadto involuntary aversive reactions such as fear, pain, or discomfort (Baker & Kirsch, 11). Fear and pain expectancies are response expectancies- beliefs about one's ownnonvolitional reactions to events- which are a type of outcome expectancy (Kirsch,185b). Thus, in situations that involve pain or fear, self-efficacy appears to bedetermined partly by outcome expectancies (e.g., Baker & Kirsch, 11).When people anticipate aversive outcomes (e.g., fear or pain) and are not willing toengage in behavior that may produce those outcomes, their linguistic habit is to say thatthey cannot perform the behavior (low self-efficacy) rather than they will not perform it. Measures of willingness may simply be measures of intention (Baker & Kirsch, 11), asemployed in the theory of reasoned action (ajzen & Fishbein, 180). Therefore, insituations in which fear or pain is anticipated, measures of perceived ability to perform thebehavior (self-efficacy) may be measures of intention to perform the behavior. Thisintention is determined primarily by the strength of the person's pain or fearexpectancies. The mislabeling of intention and perceived ability may occur in otherimportant domains in which people are asked to engage in behaviors that may lead toimmediate discomfort, such as dieting, exercising, or violating personal norms (Baker &Kirsch, 11). In each of these situations, ¡°self-efficacy -what people say they can andcannot do-may be determined largely by outcome expectancies-the anticipation of bothpositive and aversive consequences (Baker & Kirsch, 11)On the other hand, there is compelling evidence that avoidance behavior is determined byself-efficacy, not by anticipated anxiety, and that anticipated anxiety is determined byperceived self-efficacy (Bandura, 1).E. OUTCOME VALUERecent research indicates that the notion of outcome value and its relationship tosatisfaction with outcomes is not as simple as once was believed. Hsee and Abelson(11) proposed that actual value or position relation-how positive or negative anoutcome is rated on a satisfaction/dissatisfaction scale- is only one aspect of outcomevalue and probably not the most important aspect. Hsee and Abelson (11) alsoproposed that displacement relation and velocity relation are important determinants ofsatisfaction with outcomes. Displacement relation is ¡°the directional distance (i.e.,displacement) between the original (reference) outcome position and the position after achange . Satisfaction (dissatisfaction) depends on how much more (less) an outcomedeparts from its original position in a positive direction. Velocity relation is the ¡°rate(i.e., velocity) at which the outcome is changing . Satisfaction is greater (less) when thevelocity is more (less) positive.F. RELATED CONCEPTS OF MASTERY, CONTROL, AND COMPETENCEAn understanding and appreciation of self-efficacy theory and the research bearing on itare enhanced by understanding the relationships between self-efficacy and other conceptsconcerned with mastery and efficacy. Each of these can be viewed as social cognitiveconcepts because each deals with people's thoughts, beliefs, motives, explanations, andpredictions about themselves and other people.? Locus of ControlLocus of control of reinforcement (Rotter,10) is ¡°the degree to which persons expectthat a reinforcement or an outcome of their behavior is contingent on their own behavioror personal characterisitics versus the degree to which persons expect that thereinforcement of outcome is a function of chance, luck, or fate, is under the control ofpowerful others, or is simply unpredictable (Rotter, 10,p. 48). Thus, locus ofcontrol is the general belief that one's behavior can have an impact on the environmentand that one is capable of controlling outcomes through one's own behavior. Although itsounds similar to self-efficacy expectancy, locus of control is a generalized outcomeexpectancy because it is concerned with the extent to which one believes one's behaviorcontrols outcomes, not confidence in one's ability to perform certain behaviors (Bandura,186). Empirical evidence supports making this distinction between self-efficacy andlocus of control (Smith, 18; Taylor & Popma, 10).? Probability of SuccessMcClelland (185) has proposed a general behavior theory that considers motivation,incentive value, and probability of success to be the major determinants ofachievement-related behavior and affiliative acts. Probability of success ¡°is determinednot only by actual skill but also by the individual's beliefs about the efficacy of making aresponse that may be somewhat independent of the individual's skill in making itMcClelland makes a distinction between beliefs about ¡°efficacy of effort in bringing abouta consequence through a particular response in a given situation and ¡°generalizedconfidence a person has that he or she can bring about outcomes through instrumentalactivities of any kind . A belief about ¡°efficacy of effort seems similar to outcomeexpectancy. Although, McClelland suggested that ¡°generalized confidence is nearly thesame as a self-efficacy expectancy, His definition of generalized confidence is moresimilar to Rotter's definition of locus of control, which is a kind of generalized outcomeexpectancy, than to Bandura's definition of self-efficacy expectancy, which is a beliefabout one's ability to perform behaviors or execute behavioral strategies.? Causal Attributions and Explanatory StyleTheory and research on explanatory style or attributional style also are concerned withbeliefs about personal control and effectiveness (e.g., Peterson & Stunkard, 1). Mostof this work has been directed toward understanding the effect of explanations fornegative life events on perceived helplessness and depression (Brewin, 185, Robins,188). Helplessness beliefs are closely related to self-efficacy beliefs and outcomeexpectancies. Explanations or attributions, however, are beliefs about the causes of eventsthat have already occurred; self-efficacy and outcome expectancy are beliefs aboutpossible future events. The relationship between causal attributions or explanations andself-efficacy and outcome expectancies is unclear, as are the ways attributions,self-efficacy, and outcome expectancies interact to influence behavior and affect. Forexample, some theories propose the attributions influence affect and behavior indirectlyvia their influence on expectancies. Because self-efficacy is influenced by past success orfailure and observations of the behavior of others, attributions made about these actual andvicarious experiences probably influence self-efficacy. In addition, self-efficacy maymediate the relationship between attributions and performance (Forstering, 186). Conversely, self-efficacy may influence attributions (e.g., Alden, 186; Bandura, 1). Aperson with low self-efficacy for a performance domain may be more likely to attributefailure in that domain to lack of ability than to lack of effort; the opposite pattern may holdfor those with high self-efficacy (Bandura, 1).Schiaffino and Revenson (1) provided evidence that causal attributions andself-efficacy interact in influencing depression and physical disability. Self-efficacy wasnegatively related to depression for subjects who made internal, stable, global attributionsfor RA flare-ups; however, self-efficacy had little relationship to depression for subjectswho made external, unstable, specific attributions for flare-ups. The pattern ofrelationships was different for physical disability. For subjects who made internal, stable,global attributions, self-efficacy was (surprisingly) positively related to disability; but, forsubjects who made external, unstable, specific attributions, self-efficacy and disability werenegatively related. Clearly, these relationships require further exploration.4). SELF EFFICACY IN EDUCATION
Bandura (177) hypothesized that self-efficacy affects choice of activities, effort,and persistence. Compared with students who doubt their learning capabilities, those withhigh self-efficacy for accomplishing a task participate more readily, work harder, andpersist longer when they encounter difficulties.
Learners acquire information to appraise self-efficacy from their performanceaccomplishments, vicarious (observational) experiences, forms of persuasion, andphysiological reactions. Students' own performances offer them reliable guides forassessing their self-efficacy. Successes raise self-efficacy and failures lower it, but once astrong sense of self-efficacy is developed, a failure may not have much impact (Bandura,186).
Learners also acquire self-efficacy information from knowledge of others throughclassroom social comparisons. Similar others offer the best basis for comparison. Studentswho observe similar peers perform a task are apt to believe that they, too, are capable ofaccomplishing it. Information acquired vicariously typically has a weaker effect onself-efficacy than performance-based information; the former effect easily can be negatedby subsequent failures.
Students often receive persuasive information from teachers and parents that theyare capable of performing a task (e.g., ¡°You can do this ). Positive feedback enhancesself-efficacy, but this increase will be temporary if subsequent efforts turn out poorly.Students also acquire efficacy information from physiological reactions (e.g., heart rate,sweating). Symptoms signaling anxiety might be interpreted to mean that one lacks skills.
Information acquired from these sources does not automatically influenceself-efficacy; rather, it is cognitively appraised (Bandura, 186). In appraising efficacy,learners weigh and combine their perceptions of their ability, the difficulty of the task, theamount of effort expended, the amount of external assistance received, the number andpattern of successes and failures, the perceived similarity to models, and persuadercredibility (Schunk, 18b).
Self-efficacy is not the only influence in educational settings. Achievementbehavior also depends on knowledge and skills, outcome expectations, and the perceivedvalue of outcomes (Schunk, 18b). high self-efficacy does not produce competentperformances when requisite knowledge and skills are lacking. Outcome expectations, orbeliefs concerning the probable outcomes of actions, are important because students strivefor positive outcomes. Perceived value of outcomes refers to how much learners desirecertain outcomes relative to others. Learners are motivated to act in ways that they believewill result in outcomes they value.
Some school activities involve performance of previously learned skills, but muchtime is spent acquiring new knowledge, skills, and strategies. At the start of a learningactivity, students differ in their self-efficacy for acquiring the new material as a result ofprior experiences and aptitudes (abilities, attitudes). As students work on the task,personal factors (e.g., goal setting, information processing) and situational factors (e.g.,rewards, teachers' feedback) provide cues that signal how well they are learning andwhich they use to assess self-efficacy for further learning. Motivation is enhanced whenstudents perceive they are making progress. Higher motivation and self-efficacy promotetask engagement and skill acquisition (Schunk, 18a).5). CONCLUDING COMMENTS
self-directed learning is consistent with a collaborative constructivist view oflearning that encourages students to approach learning in a deep and meaningful manner.Meaningful learning outcomes would be very difficult to achieve if students were notself-directed in their learning. Taking responsibility to construct personal meaning is theessence of self-directed learning. To be a self-directed learner is to be a critical thinker.
More specifically, some research directions would be explore the theoreticalconnections between self-direction and critical thinking; map the relationship betweenresponsibility(mentoring) and control(management) factors with regard to cognitivedevelopment; articulate specific strategies associated with management and monitoringissues; understand the influence of excessive workload, prescribed content and evaluationon self-direction and critical thinking; and, study the effect of mediated learning networkson self0direction and critical thinking. These are but a few possibilities among manyworthwhile research initiatives.
Another area of research that may prove valuable in understanding the cognitiveand motivational dimensions of self-directed learning is the literature on self-regulatedlearning. Self-regulated learning has emerged over the last two decades as a result ofsocial learning research initiatives (Zimmerman, 18). In contrast to self-directedlearning, self-regulated learning emerged from research on self-efficacy (perceivedproficiency) and motivation. The current emphasis of self-regulated learning on cognitiveand motivation strategies (Winne, 15) makes it a potential resource for the developmentof the psychological dimensions of self-directed learning. Furthermore, it has been arguedthat self-regulation has a beneficial effect on academic outcomes.
Self-efficacy theory and research have contributed to the study of perceivedcontrol and competence in at least three was. First, self-efficacy theory emphasizes thedistinction between three important variables concerned with personal control andmotivation-self-efficacy expectancy, outcome expectancy, and outcome value. Second,self-efficacy theory emphasizes the measurement of these variables, especiallyself-efficacy, with a greater degree of behavioral and situational specificity than has beenthe case in other theories and bodies of research. Third, and most important, self-efficacytheory provides a model to explain the origin and effects of perceptions of perceivedcontrol and guidelines for changing human behavior and enhancing adjustment andadaptation.
There are several important factors affecting self-efficacy; Goal setting Effects ofgoal setting on self-efficacy have been obtained in several studies. Bandura and Schunk(181) found that during subtraction instruction, providing children with a proximal goalheightened self-efficacy, as well as motivation (rate of problem solving) and skillacquisition, more than did giving them a distant goal or a general goal. Heightenedself-efficacy sustains motivation and promotes learning.
Information processing; Researchers have investigated how the demands ofcognitively processing academic material influences self-efficacy. Students who believethey will experience great difficulty comprehending material are apt to have lowself-efficacy for learning it, whereas those who feel capable of handling theinformation-processing demands should feel efficacious (Schunk, 18b). Higherself-efficacy leads students to perform those activities that they believe will producelearning. As students work on tasks, they derive information about how well they arelearning. The perception that they are comprehending material enhances self-efficacy andmotivation. Self-efficacy correlates positively with motivation to employ learningstrategies.
Models students acquire much self-efficacy information vicariously from peers andteachers. Modeled displays can convey to observers that they are capable and can motivatethem to attempt the task; observed failures may lower students' self-efficacy anddissuade them from working and peer models increased self-efficacy and skill better thanthe teacher model or no model.
Feedback theory and research support the idea that feedback can affectself-efficacy in important ways. Early success signal high learning ability; ability feedbackfor early successes can enhance self-efficacy for learning. Effort feedback for earlysuccesses should be credible with students who have to work hard to succeed. Each typeof feedback promoted self-efficacy, motivation, and skill better than no feedback.Performance feedback, indicating that students are making progress in learning, shouldraise self-efficacy, motivation, and achievement, especially when students cannot reliablydetermine progress on their own. Schunk (18d) found that self-monitoring ofsubtraction progress provided reliable performance feedback and promoted self-efficacyand achievement.
Rewards rewards enhance self-efficacy when they are linked with students'accomplishments and convey to students that they have made progress in learning.Rewards are informative and motivating. As students work on tasks, they learn whichactions result in positive outcomes (successes, teacher praise, high grades). Suchinformation guides future actions. Anticipation of desirable outcomes motivates studentsto persist.
In conclusion, self-direction and self-efficacy are seen as a necessary process forachieving worthwhile and meaningful educational outcomes. They are associated withinitiating learning goals, maintaining intention, and striving for quality outcomes.Self-direction and Self-efficacy are seen as essential if students are to achieve Dewey's ultimate educational goal of becoming continuous learners and possessing thecapacity for further educational growth. Learning interest and opportunities for controlpromote self-direction and continued learning opportunities for self-directed learning, inturn, enhance metacognitive awareness and create the conditions where students learnhow to learn. Even though adult learners who pursue self-directed learning, to thesomething important for themselves in this changing society, if they do not have highself-efficacy, they may not achieve their goals which they want to reach.
As for adult learners and educators, people would try to keep the great balancebetween self-directedness and self-efficacy to achieve the highest goal by themselves.
Please note that this sample paper on Self Efficacy is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Self Efficacy, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Self Efficacy will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!
