Self‐efficacy, reasoning ability, and achievement in college biology

Abstract

This study compared the relationships of self‐efficacy and reasoning ability to achievement in introductory college biology. Based on the hypothesis that developing formal and postformal reasoning ability is a primary factor influencing self‐efficacy, a significant positive correlation was predicted between reasoning ability and degree of self‐efficacy to complete biological tasks. Further, reasoning ability was predicted to be more highly correlated with course achievement than self‐efficacy. The study involved pre‐ and posttesting 459 introductory biology students. Both self‐efficacy and reasoning ability increased during the semester. As predicted, self‐efficacy and reasoning ability were positively correlated. Depending on the nature of the achievement measure, reasoning ability accounted for some 15 to 30 times more variance in achievement than self‐efficacy. Also, as predicted, reasoning ability was a strong predictor of self‐efficacy, but self‐efficacy was not a strong predictor of reasoning ability. Self‐efficacy estimates and achievement were higher for the concrete tasks than for the formal tasks and higher for the formal tasks than for the postformal tasks. In general, students tended to overestimate their abilities to carry out the concrete, formal, and postformal tasks. Results support the study's working hypothesis that intellectual development continues for some students during the college years, that a postformal level of intellectual development exists, and that reasoning ability is a primary factor influencing both self‐efficacy and achievement. Student overestimation of their abilities may contribute to complacency, lack of effort, and to less than optimal achievement. Consequently, it may be advantageous early in the semester to provide students with particularly challenging tasks that “shock” them out of their complacency and perhaps increase their effort, their reasoning skills, and their achievement. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 44: 706–724, 2007

Science Motivation Questionnaire: Construct validation with nonscience majors

“…Second, the students were nonscience majors: At this university, like many others, women represent more than 70% of the students in many large-enrollment nonscience majors in education, family and consumer sciences, the arts, and the humanities (Marsden, 2006). Women often outnumber men in studies of this kind: For example, Lawson et al (2007) studied 459 students-300 women (65%) and 159 men (35%)-in an introductory biology course for nonscience majors. They noted: ''The relatively high ratio of females to males can perhaps be attributed to the fact that the course enrolls a high percentage of the elementary education majors, who are predominantly female'' (p. 710).…”

“…Fourth, there is self-determination, which refers to the control students believe they have over their learning of science (e.g., Black & Deci, 2000). Fifth, there is self-efficacy, which refers to students' confidence that they can achieve well in science (e.g., Lawson, Banks, & Logvin, 2007). And sixth, there is assessment anxiety, which is the debilitating tension some students experience in association with grading in science (e.g., Parker & Rennie, 1998).…”

Examination of Learning Equity among Prospective Science Teachers Who are Concrete, Formal and Postformal Reasoners after an Argumentation-Based Inquiry Course

“…In addition, as argumentation is evidence-based reasoning, any result regarding this issue would be more meaningful if the performances of students with different reasoning levels were compared. Since the students' scientific reasoning skills were found to significantly predict student science achievement and conceptual knowledge in science classes (Ates & Cataloglu, 2007;Coletta & Phillips, 2005;Johnson & Lawson, 1998;Lawson, Banks, & Logvin, 2007;She & Liao, 2010), we think that students can be grouped under this variable to better analyze performance of students with different levels of reasoning ability in argumentation-based inquiry instruction.…”

Achievement Motivation for Introductory College Biology

“…The research in science education points to the importance of six motivational constructs, including self-efficacy, task-value, control of learning beliefs, test-anxiety, intrinsic motivation, and extrinsic motivation (Zusho, Pintrich, & Coppola, 2003) that play a role in influencing achievement. Often found to be a strong predictor of college achievement (Lawson, Banks, & Logvin, 2007;Lynch, 2006), self-efficacy can be defined as one's belief that a desired outcome, on a specific task, can be produced (Bandura & Locke, 2003;see also, Pajares, 1996;Usher & Pajares, 2008). In a multi-wave study with college students enrolled in introductory-chemistry courses, self-efficacy is found to be one of the strongest predictors of students' final course performance (Zusho, Pintrich, & Coppola, 2003).…”