Learning Style and Self-Efficacy in Relation to School Success among Students
1. Introduction
School success is an important factor influencing not only the presence of the pupil/student and his present perception of himself, but it is also an important predictor that participates in the formation of his self-image and determines the further direction of the pupil/student. In recent decades, due to the penetration of knowledge from personality psychology into education, we have noticed an increased publication of research in this area by many regional and foreign authors, such as: L. Krejčová (2011), W. Lee, M. Lee and M. Bong (2014), M. Seligman (2011), M. Verešová and M. Čerešník (2013), M. Weber et al. (2013), and others. The findings of the latest studies indicate that school success is an important predictor involved in shaping the future of the pupil/student. The evaluation of success at school is evaluated until the end of school attendance, and that at all levels and types of schools. Based on the results of the education, the pupil/student acquires a certain position in the class, creates a self-image, shapes his personality and last but not least, based on his success in school, he decides on his future and professional focus. D. Sedláčková (2009) mentions the importance of a pupil's/student's success in school, because, as she states, the pupil's/student's experience with success is very important (to the extent that his environment allows him to realize and experience it). Repeated failure lowers self-confidence. Standard school classification can result in the "labeling" of unsuccessful as well as successful students. In this sense, the evaluation is not perceived as an expression of momentary success or failure, but as a fateful statement about one's own abilities, which can accompany the student/student for a longer period of time. Considering the above-mentioned problem, we will try to find out the relationship between students' self-concept and their school success.
2. Theoretical starting points
J. Slávik (1999) understands school success as a process of knowing the student's level of knowledge, work and learning activities (in Tomšik, R., 2015). A narrower concept of school success reflects ideas of what a student should be and in what direction and on the basis of what means his personality should develop (Helus, Z. et al., 1979). In the context of a narrower understanding of school success, Z. Helus (1982) states that a successful student is understood as an individual who flawlessly and reliably manages challenging tasks at a high pace. However, the author adds that the student's school success cannot be limited only to the evaluation of his grades or the adaptation of his behavior. The teacher's evaluation of the student's performance contributes to the formation of attitudes towards learning, towards school, and affects personality characteristics that are important for school success. In the evaluation of the student, not only his performance is reflected, but also the attitude of the teacher towards the student, the teacher's opinion about the means by which he achieved this performance, or what effort he made (Helus, Z. et al., 1982). School success criteria in a narrower definition are monitored through objective tools and measures, such as standardized knowledge tests, classification from the evaluation of individual subjects, or through grade averages. Within the scope of the research, the authors distinguish between two types of evaluation. Heteronomous evaluation of school success is an evaluation of the achieved educational results from the outside, i.e. primarily by a teacher or other actor of education in the school. The autonomous evaluation of school success is the result of comparing the achieved educational results with the intended goals, values or criteria of the pupil/student himself, that is, it is an evaluation "from the inside". School evaluation by grades (in the sense of the previous division, it is a heteronomous evaluation) is so far the most widespread approach to the results of education in the pursuit of the greatest possible objectivity. However, autonomous evaluation is also important for experiencing satisfaction and psychological well-being at school, which has a significant motivational dimension for the further acquisition of knowledge, skills and competences in the school environment (Lukášová, H., 2010).
Psychological aspects involved in the success of students at school, among which we most often include in connection with education, for example, motives for learning and self-efficacy of students, which in recent years are mainly devoted to by foreign authors such as: T. V. Kornilova, S. A. Kornilov and M. A. Chumakova (2009), W. Lee, M. Lee and M. Bong (2014), M. Seligman (2011), M. Weber et al. (2013), and others. The concept of self-efficacy was introduced into personality psychology by A. Bandura (1986, 1997), a representative of social-cognitive psychology, who views a person as a proactive agent who regulates his own cognitive processes, motivation, actions and emotions, rather than as a passive entity reacting to the environment (Feltz, D. L. et al., 2008). Self-efficacy, or awareness of one's own effectiveness, is an important element of a person's self-regulatory structure. It develops on the basis of personal experience, from experiencing one's own successes, but also from observing other people and subsequently reflecting on their behavior and its consequences. Experts investigated the strength of the relationship between these psychological attributes of personality in the context of education and its efficiency and improvement of the quality of life of students in schools. The relevant issue in pedagogical research in Slovakia is not given such a comprehensive research area as abroad.
In the context of school success, we focused on two constructs, namely motives for learning and students' self-efficacy. The surface motive for learning is based on the reproduction of the curriculum and the passive acceptance of new knowledge. Students with this strategy are characterized by a preference for memory learning (memorization), they do not strive for a deeper understanding of causal relationships and connections of knowledge. External motivation to learn dominates over internal. Students do not distinguish between basic and expanding parts of the curriculum. Rather, they perceive the curriculum as isolated and unrelated knowledge that they cannot connect and meaningfully analyze or synthesize. They have a problem in general, or they cannot work with deeper thought operations. They cannot choose a learning style or define which learning style they prefer. Traditional teaching only further supports this learning strategy among students. The result is formal content structures of the curriculum and its rapid forgetting (Jinks, J., Morgan, V., 1999; Sedláčková, D., 2009). The deep motive for learning is based on active learning in an effort to understand the subject matter, to understand its meaning and essence. Students with this learning strategy apply the acquired knowledge in practice. Internal motivation to learn prevails among them. During the process of acquiring knowledge, they select knowledge into essential, non-essential, main, secondary, create a structure of the content of the curriculum and use deeper thought processes. They are well aware of learning strategies and master the one thanks to which they acquire knowledge and insights faster (Jinks, J., Morgan, V., 1999).
In his study, C. M. Rodriguez (2009) provides evidence of the interrelationship of two critical components such as self-concept and expectation of educational results on the part of the student and the related choice of learning strategies on the basis of which the student achieves school success. Self-concept theory is suitable for analyzing students' motivation to define and understand their own learning and behavior. The analysis of the results of the author's research shows that a high academic self-concept causes a high cognitive effort of the student, the use of deep learning strategies and self-reflection as well as a deep approach to learning. The effect of deep learning through in-depth strategies has the greatest impact on a student's academic results and his success in school. Students who have high academic expectations prefer to choose in-depth learning strategies. It is clear that using superficial approaches to learning is not conducive to academic success. Similar research was carried out by D. Gasevic et al. (2017). In a sample of 144 engineering students, the authors found significant relationships between a depth approach to learning and the use of depth motives for learning. However, there was no significant relationship or significant association with intrinsic motivation to learn for surface approach to learning and surface learning strategy. Among the study results of students in the sense of better study results, there was a significant relationship with an in-depth learning strategy and high internal motivation, as well as with a higher effort and performance in school.
D. McIlroy et al. (2015) consider, based on research results, self-efficacy to be the strongest predictor of educational outcomes and its direct effect on achieving school success. The authors agreed on a single name for the mentioned phenomenon - academic self-efficacy, due to the broad content of the term self-efficacy and its specific focus on education. This aspect of self-efficacy is mentioned in detail in their work by D.H. Schunk and F. Pajares (2002) and they state that academic self-efficacy reflects the pupil/student and his/her perception of his/her own competences in relation to tasks in the academic/study area. During the school year, certain fluctuations in self-efficacy can be noted due to the fact that pupils/students receive continuous feedback based on their performance during their studies. Students with lower achievement have less self-confidence than students with better academic results, who have higher self-confidence and place a higher value on their learning (Zusho, Z., Pintrich, P.R., 2003). The above points out that the motivational orientation of the personality is connected with its academic self-efficacy, which is tied to educational results.
Based on this study, we can conclude that students with a high academic self-concept use a deep learning strategy and achieve better academic results than students with a lower self-concept and using surface learning strategies. Students using a deep learning strategy use critical thinking and reflective approaches to learning. We believe that an in-depth approach to learning will be positively correlated with high academic self-efficacy, which will be reflected in the school success of adolescents in the sense of both heteronomous and autonomous evaluation.
3. Methods
We measured the construct of academic self-efficacy using the Student efficacy scale (MJSES; school self-efficacy questionnaire by the authors J. Jinks and V. Morgan (1999). The scale contains 30 items. Respondents respond to individual statements on a 4-point scale. The items are divided according to the respondent's statement, according to how he perceives his success, whether he attributes it to talent, effort, or chance. The score is the scale can range from 30 to 120. A higher total score on the scale expresses a higher degree of self-efficacy. The reliability of the scale measured by the Cronbach's alpha coefficient ranges from α = 0.664 to 0.882.
We measured learning style using the Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ) scale by Biggs from 1987. The scale consists of six subscales that are filled with 42 items. Three focus on surface components and three on deep components in combinations: deep motive, deep strategy, deep approach and surface motive, surface strategy and surface approach to learning. The scores for the deep and surface approach range from 10 to 50 points, while the scores for the other variables range from 10 to 25 points. The lower the total score, the higher the measure of the investigated variable. The reliability of the scale measured by Cronbach's alpha coefficient in our research ranges from α = 0.548 to 0.683.
We determined the academic performance (GPA) using the overall assessment of students at the end of the school year. The resulting GPA is the average academic grade calculated from all end-of-year evaluations of subjects by the grade from the end-of-year report card (minimum 1, maximum 5) and we understand it as a heteronomous evaluation. Heteronomous evaluation expresses external evaluation, i.e. evaluation of the student by the teacher. As the second type of evaluation, we chose autonomous evaluation, that is, evaluation from the inside, when the student evaluates his own performance at school. We evaluated the autonomous assessment of overall school success (CŠÚ) on a Likert-type scale (1–6), which students used to express their feelings about the degree of their knowledge of individual academic subjects. In the statistical processing, the scores of heteronomous school success (GPA) and autonomous school success (CŠÚ) were reversed.
The data were processed in the statistical programs IBM SPSS 20 (Statistical Package For The Social Sciences) and STATA 13. Descriptive statistics methods were used to describe the research data. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to determine the normality of the research data, and Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to determine the strength of the relationship.
N = 457 students of the second and third years of four-year grammar schools in Slovakia aged between 17 and 18 were included in the research. The average age of the respondents was M = 17.2 years. When selecting respondents, we followed the approximation of R. V. Morgan and D. W. Krejci (1970) for equal representation of the sample in individual regions of the Slovak Republic. The research sample meets the stated criterion. When choosing the research sample, we assumed that the research sample will be late adolescents. According to P. Macek (2003), late adolescence is the period from 17 to 22 years of age. Individual and more complex changes in the psychological and social sphere, independence, work, coping with psychological and emotional stress, personality integration are typical for this period. Self-regulation of experience and behavior, as well as learning, is part of the personality of late adolescents, which is why we decided to focus on this age cohort of students. When choosing the research sample, they took into account ensuring the homogeneity of the group, on the basis of which we chose exclusively grammar school students, while we also assume higher achieved educational results than students of other secondary schools.
4. Results
We determined the normality of the data distribution of the research set using the Kolmogorov-Smirn coefficient, on the basis of which we confirmed the asymmetry of the data, and non-parametric tests were chosen for further analyses. The data did not meet the criteria of normality at the level of the following variables: deep motive, deep strategy, deep approach, surface motive, surface approach, school success as well as subjective assessment of overall school success. The results of statistical analyzes are presented in the following tables (Tab. 1).
Tab. 1: Descriptive statistics and normality of research data.
When the variables were correlated, using the Spearman correlation coefficient, the following significant relationships were found: self-efficacy correlated negatively (due to the reverse scoring of the MJSES research approach) with in-depth approach (rs = -0.265**), in-depth motive (rs = -0.333**) and in-depth strategy (rs = -0.143**). A stronger correlation was found between self-efficacy and school success (rs = 0.339**) as well as subjective school success (rs = 0.461**) at a statistical significance level of 0.01. Based on the statistical analysis, we can conclude that increasing self-efficacy also increases in-depth approach, in-depth motive, in-depth strategy, school success, as well as subjective school success among students. No statistically significant correlations were found between self-efficacy, school success and the surface components of the SPQ scale. The results of statistical analyzes are presented in the following table (Tab. 2).
Tab. 2: Correlation between research variables.
In the next part of the work, we focused on gender differences in the correlation between research variables. Based on statistical analysis, significant correlations between self-efficacy and in-depth approach (rs = -0.183*) and in-depth motive (rs = -0.333**) were found in boys. A stronger correlation was found between self-efficacy and school success (rs = 0.348**) as well as subjective school success (rs = 0.459**) at a statistical significance level of 0.01. Similarly, as was found at the level of the entire research sample, by increasing students' self-efficacy, in-depth approach, in-depth motive, but also school success and subjective assessment of overall school success increased. Self-efficacy in boys was not correlated with deep strategy and surface components (Tab. 3).
Tab. 3: Correlation between research variables (boys).
Unlike boys, in girls, significant correlations were found between self-efficacy and all depth components at the 0.01 level of statistical significance: depth approach (rs = -0.314**); deep motif (rs = -0.347**); depth strategy (rs = -0.201**). Similar to boys, a stronger correlation was found between self-efficacy and school success (rs = 0.340**) as well as subjective school success (rs = 0.482**) at the 0.01 level of statistical significance. From which we conclude that even in girls, increasing self-efficacy also increases in-depth approach, in-depth motive, in-depth strategy, school success, as well as subjective school success. Self-efficacy in girls, as well as in boys, was not correlated with surface components (Tab. 4).
Tab. 4: Correlation between research variables (girls).
5. Discussion
Research results show that the relationship between belief in one's own strengths, i.e. the level of self-efficacy has a positive relationship with educational outcomes. In our case, with school success of adolescents. The Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (Morgan, & Jinks, 1999) offers, with its three subscales, three areas to which students consider their strengths. Those students who show higher self-efficacy tend to show higher levels of self-efficacy. Likewise, C. M. Rodriguez (2009) found that a high academic self-concept causes a student's high cognitive effort, use of an in-depth approach to learning, and self-reflection. An in-depth approach to learning has the greatest impact on a student's academic results and overall success in school. Students who have high academic expectations prefer an in-depth approach to learning. It is obvious that using a superficial approach to learning does not contribute to a student's academic success. We hypothesized that there would be a positive relationship between self-efficacy and learning styles. This relationship was confirmed for high self-efficacy and all three in-depth components of learning styles. Self-efficacy was not correlated with the surface components, which we consider to be evidence that when a student believes in his own efficacy and tackles school tasks with enthusiasm and belief that he can do it, he chooses learning styles that will help him master the subject or the school task. He takes an in-depth interest in the subject matter or school task, investigates the essence and regularities, while the student who does not trust himself and does not believe that he has the ability and strength to handle the task, does not make such an effort and does not pay so much attention to learning. We examined gender differences because they are not given much attention in foreign studies. We were interested in whether the level of self-efficacy and the choice of learning style would be fundamentally different for boys and girls. Self-efficacy corresponded equally in both boys and girls in relation to heteronomous and autonomous evaluation of school success. The difference was in one of the depth components for boys. The reason for this fact remains unanswered and a few questions arise as to why it could be this way. We would like to carry out further research. Which would be focused only on self-efficacy and in-depth components of the learning style, and that for boys and girls in a balanced ratio, since now in this research the representation of female respondents prevailed.
This is valuable information for a teacher trying to motivate his students, because the teacher should react differently to a student who associates his belief in success with talent than to a student whose belief in his talent is low. Belief in self-efficacy leads to behavior that in turn contributes to success, in other words, this belief has a high motivational effect. A teacher plays an important role in creating opportunities for his students to be successful. Our research clearly shows that the influence of learning factors on the part of the student, namely the student's academic self-efficacy factor and the choice of a preferred learning approach based on heteronomous and autonomous assessment predicts school success. In this context, we do not mean that the teacher should improve students' grades, or be inclined to better evaluation in the sense of heteronomous evaluation expressed by the grade, but should work with the knowledge that his students' self-efficacy is significantly affected by the evaluation. During the evaluation, he should not focus on the student's mistakes or the areas in which he does not excel and draw his attention to them, because as our study shows, such behavior leads to lower self-efficacy. It should focus on the student's strengths and highlight his potential. Praise him more often and look for his strengths. He should act in this way with the intention of increasing the student's self-efficacy and working to increase his self-confidence. A higher evaluation by the teacher will stimulate a higher autonomous evaluation of the student himself about his achievements, which has a positive effect on the formation of high academic self-efficacy. High academic self-efficacy results in a preference for an in-depth approach to learning. As a result, the student also achieves higher success in school. It is therefore a dynamic complex of the influence of factors that result in school success of adolescents. We assume that this is very valuable information, especially for the teacher in the next row of experts, who are devoted to this issue at the theoretical and research level, and the students themselves. We believe that the positive development of self-efficacy and school success of adolescents is a prerequisite for their high belief in their own strength, and this will greatly influence their choice of further study or professional orientation and determine the direction of their future. Therefore, we should pay considerable attention to the development of adolescent self-efficacy and approach it from theoretical and research points of view to the practical level. Teachers should create a positive creative climate by using non-traditional activating methods and organizational forms. New concepts of teaching support it, but implement it in educational practice gradually and slowly.
Conclusion
The research also confirms the findings of foreign authors, who in their studies demonstrate strong links between self-efficacy and school success of adolescents. We also confirmed the assumption that students who use in-depth strategies, motives and approaches also confirmed a significant relationship with school success both on the heteronomous and autonomous levels. These significant relationships were demonstrated in both boys and girls, but they were more pronounced in girls. The relationship between self-efficacy and the choice of learning style was also demonstrated, which was based on the questionnaire of J. Biggs, which selects two essential ones, i.e. in-depth and surface learning style formed by a combination of six subscales (in-depth approach, in-depth strategy, in-depth motive, surface approach, surface strategy and surface motive).
Authors: Mgr. Lucia Foglová, PhD. PaedDr. Robert Tomšik List of bibliographic references
BANDURA, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. BANDURA, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company. BIGGS, J.B. 1987. Study Process Questionnaire Manual. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. FELTZ, D.L., SHORT, S.E., & SULLIVAN, P.J. 2008. Self-efficacy in sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics GASEVIC, D., JOVANOVIĆ, J., PARDO, A., & DAWSON, S. 2017. Detecting learning strategies with analytics: Links with self-reported measures and academic performance. Journal of Learning Analytic, 2017, 4, 1, 45-57. HELUS, Z. et al. 1979. The psychology of student success at school. Prague: State pedagogical publishing house. JINKS, J., & MORGAN, V. 1999. Children's Perceived Academic Self-Efficacy: An Inventory Scale. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 1999, 72, 4, 224-230. KORNILOVA, T. V., KORNILOV, S. A., & CHUMAKOVA, M. A. 2009. Subjective evaluations of intelligence and academic self-concept predict academic achievement: Evidence from a selective student population. Learning and Individual Differences, 2009, 19, 596-608 KREJCIE, R. V., & MORGAN, D. W. 1970. Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1970, 30, 607-610. KREJČOVÁ, L. 2011. Psychological aspects of adolescent education. Prague: Grada Publishing. LEE, W., LEE, M., & BONG, M. 2014. Testing interest and self-efficacy as predictors of academic self-regulation and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2014, 39, 86-99. LUKÁŠOVÁ, H. 2010. Quality of life of children and didactics. Prague: Portal. MACEK, P. 2003. Adolescence: psychological and social characteristics of adolescents. Prague: Portal. MCILROY, D., POOLE, K., URSAVAS, Ö.F., & MORIARTY, A. 2015. Distal and proximal associates of academic performance at secondary level: A mediation model of personality and self-efficacy. Learning and Individual Differences, 2015, 38, 1-9. RODRIGUEZ, C. M. 2009. The impact of academic self-concept, expectations and the choice of learning strategy on academic achievement: The case of business students. Higher Education Research and Development, 2009, 28, 5, 523-539. SCHUNK, D. H., & PAJARES, F. 2002. The development of academic self-efficacy. In A. Wigfield, & J. S. Eccles (Eds.). A volume in the educational psychology series. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, p. 15-31. SEDLÁČKOVÁ, D. 2009. Development of healthy self-confidence of the pupil. Prague: Grada Publishing, a.s. SELIGMAN, M. 2011. Flourish. New York: Free Press. TOMŠIK, R. 2015. The Influence of Personality Traits on Academic Achievement. i-psychologia, 2015, 12, 1-4. VEREŠOVÁ, M., & ČEREŠNÍK, M. 2013. Education results and their implementation in study programs. Nitra: UKF. WEBER, M., RUCH, W. A., LITTMAN-OVADIA, H., LAVY S., & GAI, O. 2013. Relationships among higher-order strengths factors, subjective well-being, and general self-efficacy - The case of Israeli adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 2013, 55, 322-327 ZUSHO, Z., & PINTRICH, P.R. 2003. Skill and will: the role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 2033, 25, 1081-1094.