Contextualized Measurement of Self- efficacy and College Students

Report
Contextualized Measurement of
Self-efficacy and College Students’
Perceived Sources of Self-efficacy in
Introductory Plant Science Courses
Lisa Keefe
Doctoral Dissertation Seminar
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Theoretical Framework
Review of Literature
Dissertation Conceptual Framework
Study #1
Study #2
Implications for Practice
Introduction
Introductory
Course
Early
Assessment
Difficult
Science
Concepts
Course Mastery
Science Literacy &
Career
Theoretical Framework
Mastery of SE: belief in
• Bandura (1997)definition
I do…
Experience
personal capabilities to organize and execute
tasks required to produce specific results
I hear…
within a specific context
Vicarious
Social
SE
• 4 Sources
of SE
Experience
Persuasion
I see…
Emotional
Response
I feel…
Review of Literature
• Self-efficacy (SE) = good predictor of academic
performance.
• SE has been studied in the sciences
• Need for context-specific studies
• Sources of SE also important but few existing
studies
(Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and future directions. Review of
Educational Research, 78(4), 751-796
Schunk, D., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. (Eds.). (2007a). Motivation in dducation: Theory, research and applications (3rd ed.): Pearson.
Klassen, R., & Usher, E. (2010). Self-efficacy in educational settings: Recent research and emerging directions. In S. Karabenick & T.
Urdan (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 16a): Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Gore, P. A. (2006b). Academic self-efficacy as a predictor of dollege outcomes: Two incremental validity studies. Journal of Career
Assessment, 14(1), 92-115. doi: 10.1177/1069072705281367
Conceptual Framework
Contextual Investigation of SE
Develop a Plant SE
Instrument
(Questionnaire)
EFA n=248
CFA n=241
Exploring Sources of
Plant SE (Qualitative)
Short-answer
(initial coding)
n=200+
Interviews
(Provisional
Coding) n=4
Literature
(Triangulation)
Study 1-Measuring Self-efficacy
•
•
•
•
•
•
Current Instruments
Participants
Development
Data collection and analysis
Results
Limitations
Measuring Plant SE
(Instrument
Development)
EFA n=248
CFA n=241
Current Instruments
College
BiologyQuestionnaire
Self• CBSI
Science
Motivation
(Glynn, Taasoobshirazi, &
efficacy
Instrument
Brickman,
2009) (Baldwin • Science Literacy item ideas
et al., 1999)
CAEQ Chemistry Attitudes &
Experiences Questionnaire
(Dalgety et al., 2003)
• Lab/experiment skills wording
CCSS College Chemistry Selfefficacy Scale (Uzuntiryaki et
al., 2009)
• Concept and skill
understanding at the
chemistry NOT course level
Baldwin, J. A., Ebert-May, D., & Burns, D. J. (1999). The development of a college biology self-efficacy instrument for nonmajors. Science Education, 83(4), 397-408.
Glynn, S. M., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Brickman, P. (2009). Science Motivation Questionnaire: Construct validation with nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 46(2), 127-146. doi: 10.1002/tea.20267
Dalgety, J., Coll, R. K., & Jones, A. (2003). Development of chemistry attitudes and experiences questionnaire (CAEQ). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7),
649-668
Uzuntiryaki, E., & Çapa Aydın, Y. (2009). Development and Validation of Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale for College Students. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 539551.
Participants
HORT 101, BTNY 110 & AGRY 105
major (M), science major (SM) and non-science major (NSM)
EFA:Spring 2012 (n=248)
• M=20%
• SM=32%
• NSM=48%
CFA:Fall 2012 (n=241)
• M=24%
• SM=19%
• NSM=57%
80% White/caucasian & 50% male/female ratio
Development
Expert Defined Dimensions for Successful Study in Introductory Plant Science Courses
Life Science Research & Literacy
Plant Sciences
Experimenting/applying research Terminology/diagram use
Terminology/diagram use
Genetics
Genetics
Environmental Responses
Life processes
Plant Concept specific
-
Photosynthesis
Respiration
Plant Scientists
Education Researchers
Kathryn Orvis, Horticulture
Neil Knobloch
Michael Zanis, Botany
Bryan Hains
Lori Snyder, Agronomy
Mark Balschweid
Future Outcomes
Life understanding of biology
Data Collection and Analysis
• Students told about the research before
participating. Also asked if concurrently
enrolled and not to fill out questionnaire twice
• 1st group factor analysis (EFA)
• 2nd group confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
EFA Results
PCSE
• 7 items; 48% variance
• Students’ beliefs in the ability to navigate core plant biology
concepts
• Photosynthesis/Respiration/Reproduction ect.
GSSE
• 5 items; 10% variance
• Students’ beliefs in their ability to perform basic skills
common to most science fields
• Scientific processes/experimentation
MSSE
• 6 items; 8% variance
• Students’ beliefs in their ability have mastered life science
tasks and concepts well enough to use them for life.
• Expertise as a life scientist
Factor Pattern Matrix for Plant Science Self-efficacy Items
Item
Explain the role of water in plant respiration.
Explain how weeds could become resistant to herbicides.
Explain how a plant produces food and uses energy.
Predict how a plant will respond to a given environmental condition.
Explain the process of pollination in plants to produce fruit.
Recall the anatomy of a plant.
Explain the role of light in photosynthesis.
Instruct a classmate on how to write an experiment report.
Ask a research question that could be answered experimentally.
Critique an experiment in a scientific paper.
Conduct an experiment on your own after reading the experimental
procedures.
Research the scientific facts in a common news story for accuracy of
the claims.
Achieve success in this life science course.
Graduate with a life science degree.
Master the plant biology skills taught in this course.
Tutor another student in a 1st year life science course.
Use concepts of life science in solving everyday problems at home.
Use correct biological terminology to explain a concept to a scientist.
Eigen Values
Cronbach’s α
PC
.82
.49
.85
.66
.70
.66
.78
.04
.07
.04
.09
GS
.06
.05
.01
.29
.05
.02
.01
.79
.70
.85
.46
MS
.05
.25
.02
.14
.17
.19
.03
.04
.01
.05
.25
0.18 .62
.04
.25
.04
.25
.11
.05
.01
8.70
0.91
.67
.59
.51
.86
.69
.57
1.41
0.88
.07
.05
.00
.11
.20
.25
1.82
0.87
ITEM8
e8
ITEM9
e9
ITEM10
e10
ITEM11
e11
ITEM12
e12
ITEM1
e1
ITEM2
e2
ITEM3
e3
ITEM4
e4
ITEM5
e5
ITEM6
e6
ITEM7
e7
ITEM13
e13
ITEM14
e14
.84
ITEM15
e15
.66
ITEM16
e16
ITEM17
e17
.72
CFI (0.92)
RMSEA (0.08)
GFI (0.88)
.83
GS
GSSE
.66
.61
.61
.61
.79
.67
.66
PCSE
PC
.82
.68
.68
.69
.67
PCSE
.71
7 Items
.71
MSSE
GSSE
5 Items
5 Items
.75
MS
MSSE
.64
Please rate how confident you are in your ability to perform the following tasks today.
1) Not at all confident 2) Slightly confident 3) Somewhat confident 4) Mostly confident 5)
Extremely confident
PCSE
•Explain how a plant produces food and uses energy.
•Predict how a plant will respond to a given environmental
condition.
GSSE
•Instruct a classmate on how to write an experiment report.
•Ask a research question that could be answered
experimentally.
MSSE
•Use concepts of life science in solving everyday problems at
home.
•Tutor another student in a 1st year life science course.
Limitations and Recommendations
• Minimally adequate model fit
• Small # of students
• Demographics (High non-science majors/low
racial diversity)
For Practice
• Measures SE of core (lynchpin) plant science
concepts
• Measures SE of translatable science skills
• Fills a need for SE questionnaire aimed at core
plant science concepts/skills and may have
use in any introductory plant science class
Study 2-Sources of Self-efficacy in an
introductory plant science class
•
•
•
•
Participants
Deductive analysis
Results
Limitations
Exploring Sources of
Plant SE (Qualitative)
Short-answer
(initial coding)
n=200+
Interviews
(Provisional
Coding) n=4
Literature
(Triangulation)
Participants
Short-answer (n=>200)
• 200+ students enrolled in HORT 101, AGRY 105 or
BTNY 110
• Spring semester 2012 and Fall 2012
Interview-Fall semester 2012 (n=4)
• 2 Landscape Architecture majors
– Alice had taken a plant biology dual-credit course
– Melinda’s parents own a landscaping company
• 2 Agricultural Education majors
– Rose had little experience but parents dabbled in row
crops
– Adam had an interest in gardening
Deductive Analysis
Realism assumes a single, blurry reality; therefore,
we made every effort to triangulate our data in
Literature
order to illustrate a single,
complex reality as
experienced through context and perception (Sobh
& Perry, 2006).
Shortanswer
Interviews
Short-answer
• Please rate how confident you are in your ability to
perform the following tasks as of today—
1) Achieve success in another life science class
2) Receive good grades on exams in this course
• “Think about the reasons you considered when
answering the question above. Describe briefly all of
the reasons on which you based your confidence
rating to this particular question. Include everything
that comes to mind in the spaces provided.”
Hutchison, M. A., Follman, D. K., Sumpter, M., & Bodner, G. M. (2006). Factors influencing the self-efficacy
beliefs of first-year engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 39-47.
Results of Short-answer and Interviews
Self reported influences
SA
I
Studying

Previous grade performance

Completion of assignments


Background knowledge/experience


Conceptual understanding


Class attendance


Teaching methods


Perception of teacher


Classmate interactions
Bandura (1997) Sources of Self-efficacy


Negative feelings


Learning ability


Interest


Required for major

Mastery Experiences
Vicarious Experience
Verbal/Social Persuasion
Emotional/Physiological
Other
Example
Provisional Coding
Initial coding
Short-answer: “not
a lot of previous
coursework”
Background
experience
Interview:
Background
experience code
“We kind of covered a lot compared to what we would have covered in high
school so I guess that amount of material surprised me first and foremost. Some
of it was a little more than I thought was, not necessarily that it was more than
what should have been taught, it was just more coming in with no knowledge,
like prior knowledge of any of this.”
Saldana, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Washington D.C.: Sage.
Limitations
• Overlapping constructs - Further qualitative
study focusing on the interaction of these
constructs
• A narrow perspective from the limited number
and diversity of interviews.
Practice
• Process of measuring sources of SE provide a
framework for college departments of any
field to better assess student outcomes early
in a course
• Qualitative inquiry can be time consuming,
but when using deductive analysis, the time
commitment can be manageable.
• Sources could be studied with a rating scale
Summary of Implications for Practice
SE Plant
assessment
• Plant sciences
context but
NOT course
specific
Provide
Mastery
Experiences
• Allow students
time to work
with & use new
concepts
Instructors
help students
achieve
mastery
• Blend of
planning &
strategies
Acknowledgements
Committee Members:
Neil Knobloch
Kathryn Orvis
Levon Esters
Jon Harbor
Plant Scientist Team:
Kathryn Orvis
Lori Snyder
Michael Zanis
John Cavaletto
Students enrolled in HORT 101, AGRY 105 & BTNY 210 2011-2012
Grant Team Leaders:
Bryan Hains
Mark Balschweid
NIFA Grant 2010-01801: Enhancing science
capacity in introductory Animal, Plant, and
Food sciences courses

similar documents