Andree Ory. *Born 1925, Alberta Canada *Majored in psychology at University of Iowa *Currently a Professor at Stanford University *President of American.

Andree Ory

*Born 1925, Alberta Canada

*Majored in psychology at University of Iowa

*Currently a Professor at Stanford University

*President of American Psychological Association 1974

*As Undergrad worked with Robert Sears Social Learning Theory

*1960’s Studied Cognitive Processes

*1970’s Studied Imitation and Modeling Behavior

*1980’s Developed Self-Efficacy Theory

*Percieved Self-efficacy- people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce effects.

 *Instructional Efficacy-teachers’ beliefs in their own abilities as a teacher to handle the classroom and influence their students’performances.

 *Cognitive Processes-Thinking processes involved in the acquisition, organization, and use of information.

*1987, Schunk “taught children with severe academic problems how to diagnose cognitive task demands, construct solutions, monitor their adequacy, and make corrective changes when they erred.”

*Bandura found that endurance and sustained effort=success and aiming for higher goals.

*Dowrick and Schunk (1983), Hanson (1989) test with vicarious experience and video-tapes.

*Bandura: “For most activities, however, there are no absolute measures of adequacy. Therefore, people must appraise their capabilities in relation to the attainments of others.”

*Bandura: “People often read their physiological activation in stressful or taxing situations as signs of vulnerability to dysfunction.

Ex: Palms Sweating Before a Piano Recital

*Collins first evaluated the self-efficacy levels of the children by asking them if they were good in math.

* Next, he gave them problems to work out with the easiest ones going to students with low self-efficacy levels giving the harder problems to those who supposed themselves to be “mathematically efficacious.”

*The children who thought of themselves as good produced better results not just on natural ability but by the effort they put forth.

* The children with high self-efficacy appraisals (evaluations) were more motivated to do well; thus, they worked harder to find new strategies for the problems they did not understand.

* Thus, as Collins proved, a child’s attitude does directly correlate with his performance academically, as proven in the above example with math.

*Many students do not achieve their highest potential academically because of a perceived low self-efficacy and that some teachers do not know how to positively impact their students’ confidence in their own abilities.  

*By finding out which source of self-efficacy is the most effective and how teachers can motivate their students to believe in themselves, the students can benefit academically and humanly as happier, self-empowered individuals.

*Students with a higher perceived self-efficacy will score better on the first math problem test than the students with a lower perceived self-efficacy on the vicarious experience test. *Students who were encouraged verbally after the first test will choose a higher level of difficulty on the second test.  

* Students who were motivated by a model to follow after the first test will improve their scores on the second test.  *Enactive mastery experience will have the greatest impact on the students’ perceived self-efficacy.

* Setting: St. Joan of Arc Catholic Church, Laplace, LA in Mrs. Daigre’s 4th grade Classroom with 12 4th graders (2 boys and 10 girls).

*After obtaining written permission from the parents, I gave 12 of the students a survey with the following questions on it to assess their perceived self-efficacy in math asking questions like:

*Do you like Math?*Do you enjoy memorizing Multiplication Tables?*What is something that you learned in Math this year?*Do you think you are very good at Math, okay at math, or not very good at Math?

*I asked the child if he/she would like the easy, medium, or hard multiplication problems and have them work on one.

*I gave him/her one minute to solve the problems on the worksheet and then scored the worksheet, showing the score to the child and asking them which level test he/she wanted if he had a second chance to work on it.

*I asked the child to choose which level worksheet he wanted. Depending on what he chose, I encouraged him to pick a worksheet that is the next level up in difficulty, recording his score.

*I gave him 1 min. to finish the worksheet and then gave him a choice of a second worksheet to work on, recording his score.

*I showed him an example of a medium level multiplication worksheet that a child from the first group took, scoring a 100.

*Then, gave each child a choice of which worksheet to work on next and recorded his score.

Actual Performance Ratings on Math Test

3 90-100

2 80-89

1 70-79

0 79-Below

Level of Self-Efficacy Rating

3

2

1

0

Level of Test Difficulty

3

2

1

*See Bandura Hand-Out

*1st Hypothesis-True; 2nd-Partially True;3rd-True; 4th-False*See Bandura Hand-Out

*1st Hypothesis-True

*2nd

*3rd-True

*4th-False

*See Bandura Hand-Out

*Educators must understand that self-efficacy does influence academic performance and that in some, not all cases, verbal persuasion helps the students.

*As with the results of each of the groups’ study, these three sources of self-efficacy do not always predict a high performance or a higher goal that the students chose.

*http://www.whje.com/web/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/stressed_out.jpg*http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/powers_of_persuasion/its_a_womans_war_too/images_html/images/we_can_do_it.jpg*http://news.stanford.edu/news/2006/february22/gifs/ppl_bandura.jpg*http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue4/staples.html*http://www.dbtechno.com/images/Teen_test_scores.jpg*http://mathquest.unt.edu/images/MathLab2.jpg*http://www.profile-comments.com/images/teacher/images/1-teacher.gif*http://www.profile-comments.com/images/teacher/images/1-teacher.gif*http://shsfatsilingpri.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/77005745.jpghttp://www.stockphotopro.com/photo-thumbs-2/AWNKNC.jpg*http://shsfatsilingpri.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/77005745.jpg

*http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_53cf51oMmEk/SAvpNcO8EjI/AAAAAAAAAqo/BHirzkGK97U/s400/math2*http://gachs.com/Pictures/st._joan_of_arc.jpg*http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=survey&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi*http://www.just-the-facts.us/graphics/math-facts-manipulatives.jpg*http://www.salotteries.com.au/library/Results-winner.jpg*http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/strollerderby/2008/08/23-End%20of%20Month/teacher.jpg*http://www.salotteries.com.au/library/Results-winner.jpg*http://www.salotteries.com.au/library/Results-winner.jpg*http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mbc/lowres/mbcn1206l.jpg*http://www.ct4me.net/images/MathInitiatives.gif*http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/21/jvc-video-cameras.jpg

*http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/21/jvc-video-cameras.jpg*http://i.ehow.com/images/a04/ts/j7/cure-sweaty-hands-800X800.jpg*http://www.myriadmusic.net/images/piano_keys_01.jpg*http://dancull.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/survey-pic2.jpg*http://www.enchantedlearning.com/bingo/numbers/onedigit/flashcards/multiplication/2tiny.GIF

*Bandura, Albert. “Enactive Mastery Experience.” Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. NewYork: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997. 80-81.

*Bandura, Albert. “Physical and Affective States.” Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. NewYork: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997. 106.

*Bandura, Albert. “The Nature and Structure of Self-Efficacy.” Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997. 36-38.

*Bandura, Albert. “Verbal Persuasion.” Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. NewYork: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997. 86.

*Bandura, Albert. “Vicarious Experience.” Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. NewYork: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997. 101.

*Bandura, Albert. “Sources of Self-Efficacy.” Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997. 78-115.

*Bandura, Albert. “Teacher’s Perceived Efficacy.” Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. NewYork: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997. 243-258.

*Crain, William. Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. 5th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005.