Examining self-efficacy during learning: variability and relations to behavior, performance, and learning

Abstract

Self-regulated learning (SRL) theorists propose that learners' motivations and cognitive and metacognitive processes interact dynamically during learning, yet researchers typically measure motivational constructs as stable factors. In this study, self-efficacy was assessed frequently to observe its variability during learning and how learners' efficacy related to their problem-solving performance and behavior. Students responded to self-efficacy prompts after every fourth problem of an algebra unit completed in an intelligent tutoring system. The software logged students' problem-solving behaviors and performance. The results of stability and change, path, and correlational analyses indicate that learners' feelings of efficacy varied reliably over the learning task. Their prior performance (i.e., accuracy) predicted subsequent self-efficacy judgments, but this relationship diminished over time as judgments were decreasingly informed by accuracy and increasingly informed by fluency. Controlling for prior achievement and self-efficacy, increases in efficacy during one problemsolving period predicted help-seeking behavior, performance, and learning in the next period. Findings suggest that self-efficacy varies during learning, that students consider multiple aspects of performance to inform their efficacy judgments, and that changes in efficacy influence self-regulated learning processes and outcomes.

Addressing complexities in self-regulated learning: a focus on contextual factors, contingencies, and dynamic relations

“…In this special issue, we intentionally include papers that demonstrate how complementary methods can be employed to provide insight on dynamic or contingent relations amongst phenomena, and how context influences SRL processes. For example, individualized case studies, interviews, and observations (Lichtinger and Kaplan 2015) and fine-grained assessments of motivation and behavior (Bernacki et al 2015) can be used to examine dynamic relations between motivational and metacognitive processes as they occur over iterations of the SRL cycle. Binbarasan-Tüysüzoğlu and Greene (2015) applied a valenced coding scheme to think aloud protocol transcripts and contingency analysis to examine the contingent relationship between metacognitive monitoring judgments and subsequent metacognitive control while learning with hypermedia.…”

“…In this issue, two articles examine dynamic relations in very different specificities. Bernacki et al (2015) use embedded questionnaires and trace methodologies to examine minute-to-minute relationships between selfefficacy judgments, help seeking, and problem-solving attempts, whereas Lichtinger and Kaplan (2015) employ classroom observations, strategy traces, and interviews to examine dynamic relations between learners goals, affect, and actions during classroom learning activities.…”

“…For instance, SRL events that occur over the range of seconds (i.e. 10 0 ) fall on a cognitive band and include cognitive and metacognitive events, which are typically observed in tasks using trace methodologies (e.g., problem-solving and help-seeking behaviors; Bernacki et al 2015) and think-aloud protocols (e.g., judgments of learning; Binbarasan-Tüysüzoğlu and Greene 2015). Events on the rational band occur over several minutes to several hours (i.e.…”

“…Events on the rational band occur over several minutes to several hours (i.e. 10 2 to 10 4 ), and include patterns of events, changes in learning strategies (e.g., adaptive metacognitive control strategies; Binbarasan-Tüysüzoğlu and Greene 2015), and fluctuations in motivation (change in self-efficacy; Bernacki et al 2015). These might also include general tendencies or aggregate counts of SRL behavior, as captured in journals (McCardle and Hadwin 2015) or interviews (Lichtinger and Kaplan 2015).…”

“…The contributors of this special issue are leading international researchers who examine how contextual factors influence SRL (Ben-Eliyahu and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2015;McCardle and Hadwin 2015), how contingent metacognitive processes influence achievement (Binbarasan-Tüysüzoğlu and Greene 2015), and how SRL processes dynamically influence one another as learning unfolds (Bernacki et al 2015;Lichtinger and Kaplan 2015). Two commentaries identify the cross-cutting themes of the special issue (Karabenick and Zusho 2015) and appraise the alignment between the theoretical assumptions, research designs, and analyses in these and other studies of SRL (Dent and Hoyle 2015).…”