Role of self-efficacy and self-esteem in academic performance

European Journal of Educational Sciences Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

Page 8 Progressive Academic Publishing, UK

www.journalsgate.com

ROLE OF SELF-EFFICACY AND SELF-ESTEEM IN ACADEMIC

PERFORMANCE

Gopolang Maropamabi

Department of Special Support Services

Ministry of Education and Skills Development

BOTSWANA

[email protected]

CITATION: Maropamabi, G. (2014). Role of self-efficacy and self-esteem in academic

performance. European Journal of Educational Sciences, 2 (2), 8-22.

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the role of self-efficacy and self-esteem in academic performance. The

study sought to establish whether self-efficacy beliefs and self-esteem do affect students’

academic performance or not. A sample of 100 students (18—36 years, mean =21 years)

from the University of Botswana was selected through a convenient sampling method. The

main hypothesis of the study was that students with high self-efficacy and self-esteem are

more likely to have high academic performance. Rosenberg Global Self-Esteem and the

General Self-Efficacy Scales were used to measure self-esteem and self-efficacy respectively.

Students’ GPAs were used to measure academic performance. The results indicate no

significant relationships between academic performance, self-efficacy and self-esteem.

Although 98.1 % of respondents reported that they could get good grades if they wanted to,

only 12.2 % had a high GPA. Students with high self-efficacy were more likely to have low

self-esteem (p= .000).

Keywords: Self-efficacy, self-esteem, academic performance, grade point average (GPA),

University of Botswana.

INTRODUCTION

Perceived self-efficacy can be defined as the extent at which the person believes s/he has

control over a course of action. It is about the extent at which a person believes s/he is

capable or incapable of discharging a course of action or behaviour (Maddux, 2005). A

person’s self-esteem is his/her perceived self-worth, which is sometimes influenced by

societal and cultural beliefs (Maddux, 2005). Chemers et al. (2001, p. 56) found that ―self-

efficacy beliefs are related to an enhanced ability to use effective problem-solving and

decision-making strategies, to plan and manage one's personal resources more efficiently, to

entertain more positive expectations, and to set higher goals. Very central to these self-

efficacy effects seems to be the ability to manage the stressors created in demanding

situations by means of a more positive analysis of extant risks and available coping resources,

which results in the tendency to see demanding situations as challenges rather than threats.‖

Usher and Pajares (2008, p. 751) noted that ―self-efficacy has received ample educational

research, where it has been found to predict student’s academic achievement across academic

areas and levels.‖ According to Usher and Pajares (2008, p. 752), ―self-efficacy is also

associated with key motivational constructs such as self-concept, optimism, achievement-

goal orientation, academic help-seeking, anxiety and value.‖ Maddux (2005, p. 278) noted

that ―when the world seem predictable and controllable, and when our behaviours, thoughts,

mailto:[email protected]




and emotions seem within our control, we are better able to meet life’s challenges, build up

healthy relationships, and achieve personal satisfaction and peace of mind.‖ Sanderson

(2004) noted that people who have a strong sense of self-efficacy for a given behaviour are

likely to exert considerable effort to perform the behaviour. That is if a person has a strong

belief that s/he is capable to do something, s/he is most likely to work hard to achieve it

despite the challenges. She extensively exposed the positive and strong relationship between

self-efficacy, psychological and physical wellness.

Some findings however, show that one’s self-concept reciprocates with his/her success and

achievement (Lent et al., 1986). Lent et al. (1986) found that students’ academic self-efficacy

was predictive of subsequent academic performance; ―students reporting relatively strong

self-efficacy generally achieve high grades and were much more likely to persist in technical

or scientific majors over a 1 year period that those with a low self-efficacy‖ (p. 265). A good

number of studies attest to the desirable effects of strong beliefs in one’s own abilities and

qualities on a variety of outcomes in settings such as education, health and business

(Trautwein et al., 2006).

Education is undoubtedly a core value in most societies in the world. As a result governments

and individuals are dedicating considerable amounts of their capital to education and literacy

(Botswana Federation of Trade Unions (BFTU, 2007). Education and literacy seem to set a

precedent for a better and prestigious life (BFTU, 2007). Though many children are taken to

school to benefit from education, only a small fraction of those taken to school are able to

advance and reach their expected success; many are impeded by disabilities, socioeconomic

and psychological factors (Botswana Government paper no 2 of 1994: Revised National

Policy on Education, 1994). However, academic failure seems in most cases to originate

within an individual and therefore this study intends to investigate this assumption. The

proposed study is based on the hypothesis that students with strong and/ or positive self-

efficacy beliefs and/ or self-esteem are more likely to excel inacademic pursuits than those

with low self-efficacy and low self-esteem.

Similar and related studies have been conducted in Europe and the USA investigating the

relationship of self-efficacy, self-esteem, hope and other related psychological states in

academic achievement and success, but such studies have hardly been conducted in

Botswana. It appears people in Botswana are ignorant about the impact of self-efficacy

beliefs and self-esteem in success and achievement in almost all endeavours. The main

objective of the proposed study is to investigate the extent at which a student’s self-esteem

and self-efficacy beliefs can affect his/her academic performance. The results are intended to

answer the main question of whether self-efficacy beliefs and self-esteem really affect

students’ academic performance and inform relevant stakeholders in enhancing students’

academic performance and or self-regulatory abilities.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Universities can increase, maintain, or decrease motivation, self-efficacy, and value-

expectancy of students for better academic performance; Nilsen (2009) found in a study

conducted to investigate the influence of motivation, self-efficacy, and value-expectancy.

However, most studies on academic motivation have used an a-priori theoretical approach to

understanding issues related to students’ motivational constructs and achievement; ―many of

the recent theories have postulated in advance, the existence of certain motivational

constructs such as self-efficacy, task value and expectancy for success and have attempted to




validate these preconceived constructs‖ (Van Etten et al., 2008) (p. 812). This approach, it is

arguedthat it is not appropriate and reliable because it uses quantitative investigations which

may not well explain the complexities of student motivation and performance, therefore,

qualitative approaches are better able to explain issues of academic motivation and

performance than quantitative ones (Van Ettenet al., 2008).Van Etten et al.(2008) argued that

―the real complexity of student motivation, however, cannot come through investigations that

are so limited, for such studies are not intended to be informative about all of the factors

affecting or potentially affecting student motivation, but rather they are intended to make a

case for the particular influences that are the focus of the investigation‖ (p. 813). According

to Van Ettenet al. (2008)to study student academic motivation holistically ―an inductive,

qualitative research approach should be adopted in contrast to the deductive, quantitative

approaches typically employed in contemporary studies on motivation‖ (p. 813).

Valiente et al. (2008) therefore, used the quantitative approach and found significant positive

correlations between effortful control, school relationship, social competence, classroom

participation, and academic performance. Effortful control is ―the efficiency of executive

attention including the ability to inhibit a dominant response and/or to activate a subdominant

response, to plan, and to detect errors‖ (Rothbart & Bates, 2006) (p.129). They found that

teacher-student relationship, social competence, classroom participation, and consistent

expectations partially mediated the relation between effortful control and change in grade

point average (GPA) from the beginning to the end of the school year. In another study

academic competence was found highly correlated with positive mental health and high

school graduation (Valiente et al.,2008). They also noted that although the majority of

research on school success has focussed on curricula, structure, teacher-child ratios, and

intelligence, there is an increased awareness of the important roles played by student’s

regulatory abilities, school related relationships and classroom participation in contributing to

academic competence.

According to Lodewyk and Winnie (2005) ―at the outset of the engagement with a task,

students are theorized to perceive various personal and contextual elements such as their

ability, the difficulty of the task, the degree of effort required, help available, and their past

successes and failures‖ (p. 3). Bandura (1993 as referred by Lodewyk & Winnie, 2005)

asserted that ―self-efficacy (a student’s confidence in his or her ability to overcome

challenges to attain specific goals) influences how students respond‖ (p. 3). Thus, self-

efficacy predicts choices students make about how to engage with tasks: a person with the

same knowledge and skills may perform poorly, adequately, or extraordinarily depending on

fluctuations in self-efficacy beliefs (Lodewyk & Winnie, 2005). Lodewyk and Winnie (2005)

also found that ―higher self-efficacy appears to reassure and compose learners who face

challenging tasks whereas low self-efficacy invites students to emphasize errors and other

information that handicaps performance‖ (p. 4). Research indicates that students with a strong

sense of academic self-efficacy profit in several ways (Lodewyk & Winnie, 2005). Students

with a strong sense of self-efficacy―seem to self-regulate more productively, more willingly

take on challenging tasks, apply more effort, persist longer despite obstacles, experiences less

anxiety, use more effective tactics and strategies, achieve better academic performances, and

cognitively process information more effectively‖ (Lodewyk & Winnie, 2005, p. 4).

Chemers et al. (2001) noted that ―efficacy beliefs influence the particular courses of action a

person chooses to pursue, the amount of effort that will be expended, perseverance in the face

of challenges and failures, resilience, and the ability to cope with the demands associated

with the chosen course. Self-efficacy has been related to persistence, tenacity, and




achievement in educational settings‖ (p. 55). Chemers et al. (2001, p. 55) ―meta-analysis of

research in educational settings found that self-efficacy was related both to academic

performance (r = .38) and to persistence (r = .34).‖ Students who harbour negative beliefs

about themselves limit their potentialfor achievement. They feel they are unableto perform

well on a task or not good enoughto perform above expectations hence mediocrity is

maintained (Rice & Dolgin, 2008). Students are said to use strategies in school to portray

themselves as unable to do school work. According to Rice and Dolgin (2008, p. 163) these

strategies include; ―procrastinating, deliberately not trying, allowing others to keep them

from studying, and using other self-defeating strategies, students can thus convey that

circumstances, rather than lack of ability, are the reasons for poor and mediocre

performance.‖ Chemers and colleagues noted that ―self-efficacy is much more than the

reflection of specific ability. In studies of mathematics problem solving, children with high

efficacy were found to persist longer (Bouffard-Bouchard et al., 1991...) and to use more

efficient problem-solving strategies (Collins, 1982...) than low-efficacy learners‖ (Chemers et

al., 2001, p. 55).

Trautwein et al. (2006) conducted a study to ―examine the directionality of the effects

between global self-esteem, domain specific academic self-concepts, and academic

achievement‖ (p. 334) and they emphasized the learning environments as potential

moderators of the direction of the effects. Trautwein et al. (2006) also found reciprocal and

mutual positive relationship between self-esteem, academic self-concept, and academic

achievement. They stated that researchers, in recent years tended to differentiate between

global evaluation of the self and evaluations of specific abilities or domain specific concepts.

Trautwein et al. (2006, p. 334) further stated that ―empirical examination of the achievement

has been limited by two factors namely; the use of different definitions and conceptualization

of self-esteem, domain specific academic self-concept, and achievement by different

researchers from different fields of study.‖ The second factor is that ―some researchers with a

background in personality and social psychology have typically focussed on global self-

esteem‖ (Trautwein et al., 2006, p. 334).

According to Shavelson et al., (1982) ―self-concept is hierarchically structured, with

perceptions of behaviour at the base moving to inferences about the self in general‖ (p. 3).

Self-concept was found to be influenced by influenced by prior achievement and feedback

from others, but also having an impact on later achievement (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002 as

referred byTrautwein et al., 2006). Marsh (2008, p. 510) noted that ―positive self beliefs are

at the heart of the recent emphasis on positive psychology.‖ Marsh et al. (2008) proposed the

Big-Fish-Little-Pond-Effect (BFLPE) model, which posits that students compare their own

ability with that of other classmates and use this comparison information to form their own

academic self-concept. They found that BFLPE is very specific to academic self-concept but

self-esteem and non academic components of self-concepts were not related to academic

achievement (Marsh et al., 2008). Self-efficacy beliefs of studentstherefore, were found not

much focussed on comparison with others but it was focussed on the specific criterion items

like specific subjects, tests, and assignments. They further distinguished between self-belief

constructs, academic self-concept and self-efficacy because the later it was found that it does

not involve comparison with other students’ academic performance.

Self regulatory efficacy was found to raise academic goals and aspirations, personal standards

for the quality of work considered to be acceptable, and beliefs in one’s capabilities for

academic achievement (Caprara et al., 2008).Self regulatory efficacy means self-efficacy for

self-regulated learning (Caprara et al., 2008). Caprara et al. (2008, p. 532) found that ―self-




efficacy beliefs to academic achievement further confirm that belief in one’s capabilities

contributes independently to academic achievement rather than simply being an

epiphenomenal reflection of prior performance.‖ Colquitt et al. (2000 as referred by

Vancouver & Kendall, 2006) examined the past 20 years of motivational training research.

They found that ―trainee’s self-efficacy was strongly and positively related to (a) declarative

knowledge (r _ .27), (b) skills (r _ .16), and (c) greater utilization of the trained materials

once the trainee returned to the work environment (r _ .58)‖ (Vancouver & endall, 2006, p.

1147).

Thijs and Verkuyten (2008) found that academic achievement is negatively affected by peer

victimization; victimized students tend to have low academic self-efficacy and in turn

perform low academically. They also found that studies on cross-sectional data show that

victimized children receive lower grades than their more accepted classmates because they

considered themselves to be less competent. They also found emotional well-being as an

important factor in academic achievement. Van Etten et al. (2008) found that grades and

graduation are two important primary goals that motivate students during senior year but

there are other internal and external factors that affect students’ academic motivation. Van

Etten et al. (2008, p. 816) found that students’ ―motivation was undermined if they had low-

grade expectations and were willing to settle for low or mediocre grades.‖ This means that if

students anticipate low grades their academic motivation is undermined as a result they will

be willing to take poor results and make little efforts to get good results.

Croizet et al. (2002) conducted a study to investigate why students holding non-prestigious

high school degrees underachieve at the university, they found that internal factors (i.e. low

ability) and environmental factors (e.g. differences in cultural, economic and socialization

experiences) affect some students’ academic achievement. Croizet et al. (2002) found that

―underachievement originates within the individual, limitations can be conceptualized as

generally inherited, environmentally determined or both‖ (p. 168). They further noted that the

burden generated by the suspicion of inferiority that some students face especially those who

did non-prestigious degrees causes underachievement and in turn affect such students’ self-

esteem and motivation (Croizet et al., 2002). Furthermore, they found that stereotype threat:

―the great threat to one’s self-integrity can interfere with intellectual function and undermine

performance and that students with a reputation of low intellectual ability who are also

victimized and stereotyped experience extra pressure coming from the risk of conforming

their reputation of inferiority‖ (Croizet et al., 2002, pp. 167, 168).

Marsh, (2004) conducted a study to investigate the multicollinearity in the relationship

between self-efficacy, self-concept, and achievement. They found that multicollinearity

seriously threatens valid interpretations; it can produce misleading or uninterpretable results

when a set of highly independent variables is used to predict a dependent variable (Marsh et

al., 2004). To further elucidate this effect they used two models in their study, the first model

(Model 1) showed that self-efficacy alone better predict mathematics achievement. The

second model (Model 2) however, due to the elimination of multicollinearity effects, showed

that both self-efficacy and self-concept (mathematics self-concept) do not differ in their

contribution to the prediction of mathematics achievement. Vancouver et al. (2001)found that

self-efficacy was a positive function of past performance, but that it was negatively related to

subsequent performance.




THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The study was based on Albert Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986). The

Social Cognitive theory explains human functioning in terms of a model of triadic

reciprocality (Bandura, 1986) in which behaviour, cognitive and other personal factors, and

environmental events all operate as interacting determinants of each other. The Social

Cognitive Theory identifies basic capabilities which influence a person’s behaviour. Among

the suggested capabilities is the self-reflective capability. According to Bandura (1986) the

self-reflective capability enables people to analyze their experiences and to think about their

thought processes. People’s judgements of their own capabilities affect their level of effort

and perseverance to execute a particular course of action. Much emphasis is given to the

concept of perceived self-efficacy which is defined as ―people’s judgements of their

capabilities to organise and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of

performances‖ (Bandura, 1986, p. 392). Locke et al. (1984 as referred by Bandura, 1986)

found that perceived self-efficacy is a significant determinant of performance which operates

partially independently of underlying skills. Perceived self-efficacy is also referred to as a

self-referent thought which mediate the relationship between a person’s knowledge and

actions (Bandura, 1986). People without positive self-efficacy beliefs are expected to be

unable to behave optimally even when they fully know what to do.

The Social Cognitive Theory defines self-esteem in terms of how people evaluate themselves

(Coopersmith, 1967 as referred by Bandura, 1986). People who show a sense of unworthiness

are said to have low self-esteem, whereas those who show self-pride are said to hold

themselves in high esteem (Bandura, 1986). People who meet their standards feel pleased

with themselves, and those who fail to measure up to their standards are displeased with

themselves. This is perhaps the relationship of self-efficacy and self-esteem. Self-esteem is

however, much dependent on previous performances and social factors. Bandura (1986)

noted that both self-esteem and self-efficacy beliefs are self-referent thoughts which both

contribute to the quality of life of an individual.

The Social Cognitive Theory is relevant to this study because it deals directly with concepts

that are being investigated in this study. The theory maintains that most human behaviour is

self-regulated through cumulative direct and vicarious experience. People’s experiences

either direct or through observation, help them to develop performance standards which they

use to evaluate their own behaviour (Herganhahn & Oslon, 2007).Bandura (1986) argue that

in social, intellectual, and physical pursuits those who judge themselves highly efficacious

expect favourable outcomes whereas self-doubters expect mediocre performances hence

negative outcomes. Chemers et al. (2001) found ―significant and substantial direct effects of

self-efficacy on challenge-threat evaluations (...), academic expectations (...), and academic

performance (...)‖ (p. 60). Students with high self-efficacy perceive academic demand to be

more of a challenge than a threat;they have greater academic expectations, and better

academic performance than those with low self-efficacy (Chemers et al., 2001).

Students with higher expectations for academic success show higher performance than those

with lower academic expectations (Chemers at al., 2001).If students value academic

achievement and believe that they are capable of getting good grades and excelling in school,

it is believed they will engage in behaviours that will make them get good grades and excel

academically (Herganhahn & Oslon, 2007). These studies show that Social Cognitive Theory

is quite relevant and applicable to answer the main research question and hypothesis of this

study. It is expected in this study for students with high self-efficacy beliefs and self-esteem




to perform well academically than those with low self-esteem and self-efficacy beliefs as the

literature shows. Social Cognitive Theory has been used widely and applied in various

contexts including: health psychology (Sanderson, 2004), educational and academic settings

(Bandura, 1986), and employee performance and motivation. A few criticize the theory of not

being systematic or unified. It is also criticized for assuming that human behaviour is

somewhat consistent by emphasizing human agency and not situational variables

(Herganhahn & Oslon, 2007). Nevertheless the abundant studies which support it especially

in academic contexts make it a relevant theory for the present study.

METHODS

The study aimed to explore whether students’ self-esteem and self-efficacy beliefs influence

their academic performance. The target group was the University of Botswana students. The

questionnaire was distributed to 100 students in three classes; two of which were second year

Psychology and Social work classes while one was a fourth year Psychology class. Both

Psychology classes had students from different Faculties of the University. All the

questionnaires were returned but ten were not retained for data analysis because they had

missing answers. Convenient sampling method was used in choosing the sample. Though it

has some limitations in ensuring a representative sample, it is very cost effective and

convenient because it takes a very short time to identify respondents (Cozby, 2007).

Participation in the study was voluntary and the responses were treated with utmost

confidentiality.

A questionnaire was designed containing the following variables: self-esteem, self-efficacy,

academic and demographic variables. Self-esteem was operationalised using the Rosenberg

Global Self-Esteem Scale which has ten items measured on a three point scale (Rosenberg,

1965). The Rosenberg General Self-Esteem Scale uses pre-given answer categories as

follows: strongly agree=3, agree=2, disagree=1, and strongly disagree=0. The sum of the

scores for the ten items yield a self-esteem score where the higher the score the higher the

self-esteem for an individual and vice versa (Rosenberg, 1965). On the Rosenberg Global

Self-Esteem Scale only item 10 was modified to read as ―I have a positive attitude toward

myself‖ instead of ―I take a positive attitude toward myself.‖ Kaplan and Saccuzzo (2005)

reported that the Rosenberg GlobalSelf-Esteem Scale ―has strong psychometric properties

with considerable evidence of concurrent, known-groups, predictive, and construct validity‖

(p. 382). Kaplan and Saccuzzo (2001) also reported that Rosenberg Global Self-Esteem Scale

has an internal reliability of .92, and its test-retest reliability shows correlations of .85 and .88

over a two week period.

Self-efficacy was operationalized through items 11 to 20 in the questionnaire (see appendix)

adapted from the General Self-Efficacy Scale developed by Jerusalem and Schwarzer (1992).

The General Self-Efficacy Scale has ten items all with pre-given answer categories (e.g. Not

at all true, hardly true, moderately true, and exactly true). On the General Self-EfficacyScale

one item was reworded or modified to read as ―When facing difficulties I can rely on my

coping abilities‖ instead of ―I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on

my coping abilities." This item together with the one on the Rosenberg Self-Efficacy Scale,

were slightly modified to be understood easily by the target group. The General Self-Efficacy

Scale has internal reliabilities ranging from .76--.90 and it has been found to be global and

equivalent across cultures (Kaplan & Saccuzzo, 2005). Academic performance was

operationalised through questions ―how do you rate your academic performance‖ and ―what

is your current GPA (cumulative grade point average)?‖ For answer categories see appendix.




Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and correlations as provided by SPSS version

21.

RESULTS

Of the 90 respondents 64 (71.1 %) were male and 26 (28.9 %) were female. A slight majority

of 46 (52.9 %) belonged to the age group 18—20 years and 41 (47.1 %) to the age group of

21 and above. Most respondents (50; 55.6 %) grew up in an urban area, 58 (58.9 %) were

enrolled in the Faculty of Social Sciences and 51 (56.7 %) were second year students.

Interestingly, a majority of 53 (58.9 %) respondents had a mother/female guardian who had a

tertiary education, and 48 (53.9 %) had a father/ male guardian with a tertiary education. On

academic contentment, the majority of respondents (65, 72.2 %) indicated that they were

content with their performance, and all but 1 (11 %) agreed that they could get good grades if

they wanted to. A good number of respondents (48, 53.3 %) had a moderate GPA (3.5—

3.99). Only 2 (2.2 %) respondents had a GPA above 4.50 which falls within the University’s

first class category.

Interestingly, a majority of respondents (47, 52.2) scored at a low level of self-esteem on the

Rosenberg Global Self-Esteem Scale (see appendix 1) but 55 (61.1 %) had high self-efficacy

on the General Self-Efficacy Scale (see appendix 2). Table 2 show that both females and

males did not differ significantly with regard to self-esteem scores, and self-efficacy scores

but they differed on GPA (p= 0.019). Females were more likely to report a GPA (3.5—3.99),

while males were more likely to report a GPA (below 3.49) (p= 019). Table 3 shows

significant correlations between self-esteem and self-efficacy, and self-efficacy and academic

contentment; self-esteem and self-efficacy(r= 0.469, p=0.000) and self-efficacy and academic

contentment (r= 0.269, p= 0.010).




II. ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE NUMBER (N)

VALID PERCENT %

What is your current GPA?

4.00—5.00 11 12.2

3.50—3.99 48 53.3

3.49 & below 31 34.4

I am content with my academic performance.

False 25 27.8

True 65 72.2

I can get good grades if I want to

True 89 98.1

False 1 1.1

The findings show a negative relationship between self-efficacy and self-esteem (p= 0.000);

students with high self-efficacy were more likely to have low self-esteem while those with

low to moderate self-efficacy were more likely to have high to moderate self-esteem than

those with low self-efficacy. There were no significant relationships between self-efficacy

and age group, up-bringing, and academic performance (GPA). No significant relationships

were found between academic performance (GPA) and self-esteem, Faculty enrolment, self-

efficacy and academic (performance) contentment. These findings do not support the

hypothesis of the study which posits that students with high self-efficacy and self-esteem are

more likely to have a high GPA (academic performance). The hypothesis was tested using the

Spearman’s Rho to test for associations between GPA (academic performance), self-efficacy

and self-esteem. Interestingly, there was no significant association between self-efficacy and/

or self-esteem, and academic self-efficacy (I can get good grades is I want to). This item

specifically sought to know if a student believes he/she can get good grades if she/he wanted

to.




DISCUSSION

The study aimed to investigate whether students’ self-efficacy and self-esteem beliefs

influenced their academic performance. The findings indicate that all respondents but one

believed they could get good grades if they wanted to but their scores on the General Self-

Efficacy Scale somewhat differed with their academic performance because there were no

significant association of respondents’ self-efficacy and academic performance (GPAs). This

finding is contrary to Lane et al. (2004) who found that self-efficacy and self-esteem

significantly correlate, and that self-efficacy is related to performance accomplishments and

performance among postgraduate students. Respondents also indicated that they believed in

their capability to pass and get good grades despite their actual inability to really get good

grades. Contrary to most research findings (Chemers et al., 2001; Marsh et al., 2004; Caprara

et al., 2008; Lane et al., 2004; Marsh et al., 2008), no statistical significance was found on the

relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and students’ GPAs. Lane and Lane (2001) found

no significant relationship between self-esteem and academic performance, but, strong

relationship was found between self-efficacy and self-esteem. The results are also contrary to

Bandura (1986)’s findings that perceived self-efficacy significantly determines performance

and operates partially independent of underlying skills that students possess. These results

show that self-efficacy is not significantly related to academic performance and are

inconsistent with the findings of Lane and Lane (2001).

The main hypothesis of this study is therefore not supported by the findings because neither

self-efficacy nor self-esteem was significantly associated with academic performance. Most

students (81.8 %) were content with their performance; hence they could be satisfied with

mediocre results while encouraging complacency as stated by Valliant et al. (2008) that the

relationship between effortful control (including self-regulatory abilities) and GPA is

mediated by other factors such as valence and outcome expectancy. For students to actually

get good grades they should be motivated and optimistic to get good grades while they also

engage in pro-academic actions. In line with these results Van Etten et al. (2008) found that

students’ motivation was undermined if they had low-grade expectations and were willing to

settle for low or mediocre grades; if students anticipate low grades, their academic motivation

is undermined as a result they will be willing to take poor results and make little efforts to get

good results. Bandura (1986) found that in social, intellectual, and physical pursuits those

who judge themselves highly efficacious expect favourable outcomes whereas self-doubters

expect mediocre performances hence negative outcomes. This finding is however not in line

with Lane and Lane (2001) who found that self-efficacy toward intellectual ability predicted

subsequent academic performance; thus, a student’s self-efficacy influenced how he/ she

would perform academically. Lane and Lane (2001) also found significant relationship

between self-efficacy and academic performance ―even though the time gap between self-

efficacy and performance was long, and the complexity of the task was high‖ (p. 693).

Interestingly, self-efficacy was significantly correlated with academic contentment because

those with high self-efficacy were significantly more likely to be content with their academic

performance (p= 0.010). This is consistent with previous studies (Caprara et al., 2008; Marsh

& Hau, 2004; Trautwein et al., 2006; Valiente et al., 2008) that found that self-efficacy was

influenced by previous performance; in this case students’ acceptance of their academic

performance makes them believe in their capability to attain the level they expect to attain

even when those grades are not highly above average. This could probably explain why

students do not get very good results despite their indication that they could get good grades

if they wanted to. Because students already accept their academic performance they are less




likely to work hard enough to surpass their already accepted level of performance as

demonstrated by the majority of respondents indicating that they were content with their

performance. The relationship between self-efficacy and self-esteem was quite significant (p=

0.000) but negative; students with high self-efficacy were more likely to have low self-esteem

while those with low to moderate self-efficacy were more likely to have high to moderate

self-esteem. However, the results are somewhat contrary to Marsh et al. (2004) who found

that both self-efficacy and self-concept (academic self-esteem) did not differ in influencing

mathematics performance.

These findings could mean that students’ self-efficacy has no bearing in their academic

performance while their self-esteem are negatively related with their self-efficacy beliefs. The

level of contentment students have in their previous academic performance positively affects

their self-efficacy beliefs but, the extent of this effect is not established as it was not part of

this study. Literature support the relationship between academic performance and self-

efficacy beliefsbut only previous performance (academic contentment) was associated with

self-efficacy beliefs. The findings are not consistent with the Social Cognitive Theory

because both self-esteem and self-efficacy beliefs were associated with academic

performance. The Social Cognitive Theory does not account for the negative relationship

between self-efficacy and self-esteem. It does not also explain the insignificant correlation

between self-efficacy and self-esteem beliefs. The validation and use of the scales used in this

study is eminent in Botswana because respondents had problems with understanding some of

the items in the scales. Botswana validated scales measuring self-efficacy and self-esteem

and academic context may have resulted in findings consistent with the Social Cognitive

Theory.

Despite their popularity both Rosenberg Global Self-Esteem and the General Self-Efficacy

Scales are to some extent limited in their application to academic contexts as demonstrated by

respondents’ answering tendencies. Most respondents felt that some of the items in the scales

were not grammatically understandable as a result they either chose the same answers for all

items or skipped items they could not understand. It is likely that this problem may have

influenced the results of the study if respondents’ actual self-referent beliefs were not

accurately measured. Ten questions were not included for data analysis because some items

on the scales had missing answers especially items 8, 11, 18, and 20 (see appendix). The

official GPAs of students were not accessible therefore respondents may have provided false

GPAs. Due to limited funding and time, a representative sample was not selected especially

that students from other Faculties as demonstrated by 58.9 % being from the Faculty of

Social Sciences were not fairly or absolutely represented.

More research is needed on the role of students’ regulatory abilities (self-esteem and self-

efficacy) and particular attention should also be directed to use of appropriate scales to

measure these constructs. Instead of using general scales, specific and simple scales should

be used to measure academic self-efficacy and self-esteem. Qualitative and longitudinal

approaches should be used to further investigate the relationship and influence of self-

efficacy and self-esteem beliefs in academic performance and achievement as argued for by

Van Etten et al. (2008).




CONCLUSION

As Bandura (2006b as referred by Caprara, 2008) noted that ―the capacity to regulate one’s

thoughts, motivation, affect, and action through self-reactive influence constitutes one of the

core properties of human agency within a conceptual framework of social cognitive theory‖

(Caprara et al., 2008, p. 525). Students’ self-regulatory abilities need to be stimulated and

nurtured to positively influence their actual performance. The indication by a majority (98.1

%) of respondents that they are capable of getting good grades if they wanted despite their

actual GPA remaining below the highest range (4.50—5.00), shows a gap which needs

attention and action by teachers and lecturers to influence students to value academic

achievement and good grades so as to enable them to actually get good grades (GPA’s). If

students don’t value high academic performance while having high expectancy beliefs they

might not work hard enough to getgood performance/grades.

REFERENCES

Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behaviour. In J. Kuhl & J.

Beckman (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behaviour(pp. 11—39). Berlin:

Springer.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.

Educational Psychologist, 28, 117—148.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thoughts and action: A Social Cognitive Theory.

Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice hall.

Bandura, A. (2006b). Toward a Psychology of human agency. Pespectives on Psychlogical

Science, 1, 164—180.

Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-

esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier

lifestyle? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 1—44.

Botswana Federation of Trade Unions (BFTU). National Policy on Education. BFTU:

Gaborone. March 2007.

Bouffard-Bouchard, T. (1990). Influence of self-efficacy on performance in a cognitive task.

Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 353—363.

Caprara, V. G., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Del Bove, G., Vecchio, G. M., Barbaranelli, C., &

Bandura, A. (2008). Longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived self-efficacy for

self-regulated learning in academic continuance and achievement. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 100, 525—534.

Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first-year

college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, -

55—64.

Collins, J. L. (1982, March). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behavior. Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,

New York.

Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training

motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 85, 678–707.

Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: Freeman.

Cozby, P. C. (2007). Methods in behavioural research (9th

Ed.). Boston: McGraw hill.

Croizet, J., Dutrevis, M., & Desert, M. (2002). Why do students holding non-prestigious high

school degrees underachieve at the university? Swiss Journal of Psychology, 61,

167—175.




Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of

Psychology, 53, 109—132.

Government paper No. 2 of 1994: Revised National Policy on Education (RNPE). Gaborone:

Government printer.

Heatherton, T. F., & Wyland, C. L. (2003). Assessing self-esteem. In S. J. Lopez & C. R.

Synder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and

measures (pp. 219—233). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Herganhahn, B. R., & Oslo, M. H. (2007). An introduction to theories of Personality (7 Ed.).

London: Pearson prentice hall.

Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy: Thought control of action. Washington

DC: Hemisphere.

Lane, J., & Lane, A. M. (2001). Self-efficacy and academic performance. Social Behavior

and Personality, 29, 687-694.

Lent, R. W., Brown, D. B., & Larkin, K. C. (1986). Self-efficacy and the prediction of

academic performance and perceived career options. Journal of Counselling

Psychology, 33, 265—269.

Lodewyk, K. R., & Winnie, P. H. (2005). Relations among the structure of learning tasks,

achievement, and changes in self-efficacy in secondary schools. Journal of


Kaplan, R. M., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (2005). Psychological testing: Principles, applications,

and issues (6 Ed.). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.

Maddux, J. E. (2005). The power of believing you can. In C. R. Synder& S. J. Lopez (Eds.).

Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 277—287). New York: Oxford University

press.

Marsh, H. W., Dowson, M., Pietsch, J., & Walker, R. (2004). Why multicollinearity matters:

A re-examination of relations between self-efficacy, self-concept, and achievement.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 518—522.

Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., & Koller, O. (2008). Social comparison and Big-

Fish-Little-Pond effects on self-concept and other self-belief constructs: Role of

generalized and specific others. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 510—524.

Nilsen, H. (2009). Influence on student academic behaviour through motivation, self-efficacy

and value-expectation: An action research project to improve learning. Issues in

Informing Science and Information Technology, 6, 545—556.

Pietsch, J., Walker, R., & Chapman, E. (2003). Relationship among self-concept, self-

efficacy, and performance in mathematics during secondary school. Journal of


Rice, F. P., & Dolgin, K. G. (2008). The Adolescent: development, relationships, and culture

(12th

Ed.). New York: Pearson Education Inc.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, New Jersey:

Princeton University Press.

Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (2006). Temparement. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N.

Esseinberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and

personality development (6th

Ed., pp. 99—166). New York: John Wiley& Sons.

Sanderson, C. A. (2004). Health Psychology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Shavelson, R. J., & Bolus, R. (1982). Self-concepts: The interplay of theory and methods.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 3—17.

Thijs, J., &Verkuyten, M. (2008). Peer victimization and academic achievement in a

multiethnic sample: The role of perceived academic self-efficacy. Journal of





Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., Koller, O., &Baumert, J. (2006). Self-esteem, academic self-

concept, and achievement: How the learning environment moderates the dynamics of

self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 339—349.

Usher, E. L., &Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: A critical review of the

literature and future directions. Review of Educational Research, 78, 751—796.

Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., Swanson, J., & Reiser, M. (2008). Prediction of children’s

academic competence from their effortful control, relationships, and classroom

participation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 67—77.

Van Etten, S., Pressley, M., McInerney, D. M., & Liem, A. D. (2008). College seniors’

theory of their academic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 812—

828.

Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., & Williams, A. A. (2001). The changing signs in the

relationship among self-efficacy, personal goals, and performance. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 86, 605–620.

APPENDICES

Appendix 1




Appendix 2

Role of self-efficacy and self-esteem in academic performance

Documents

Transcript of Role of self-efficacy and self-esteem in academic performance