Academic Self Efficacy and Online Learning Modality Among Graduate Psychology Students During COVID-19 Crisis

Godswill  Ambrose,; Cielo Faye  Batara,; John Austin  Berayo,; Michaela Denise  Dimaano,; Peter Cedrick  Guilot,; Marian Joi  Martinez,

Academic Self Efficacy and Online Learning Modality Among Graduate Psychology Students During COVID-19 Crisis

Discipline: Education

Abstract:

This study investigates the relationship between Academic Self-Efficacy (ASE) and preferred online learning modalities among graduate psychology students, with a focus on gender disparities. Employing a correlational crosssectional design, the research examines ASE in relation to gender and online learning preferences within a sample of 91 students. The study utilizes comparative measures to assess characteristics and differences. The main tool utilized in this study is the "Academic Self-Efficacy and Efficacy for Self-Regulated Learning" questionnaire, developed by Chemer, Hu, and Garcia (2001). This questionnaire consists of eight items, each weighted using a 7-point Likert scale, and is designed to gauge the respondents' current academic self-efficacy. Additionally, demographic information regarding gender and preferred online learning modalities was collected separately. To analyze the data obtained from the eight-item scale measuring academic self-efficacy, median scores were calculated for each respondent by arranging individual ratings from lowest to highest and averaging the two middle scores. Subsequently, these scores were encoded in SPSS for further analysis. The scale used in this study serves as a dependent measure or covariate, providing insights into the participants' self-efficacy levels and their relationship with other variables. The study reveals a notable gender disparity in ASE, with male students exhibiting higher self-efficacy levels compared to their female counterparts, consistent with previous research findings. Interestingly, despite the majority of students expressing a preference for mixed online learning modalities, no significant difference in ASE was observed between students in mixed online and asynchronous learning environments. This suggests that students' independent learning capabilities and adaptations to online learning modalities remain consistent regardless of the chosen mode. In conclusion, this study sheds light on gender-based differences in ASE among graduate psychology students and emphasizes the need to further explore such disparities within academic settings. Moreover, it underscores the importance of considering individual differences and preferences when designing online learning environments. These findings contribute to the broader understanding of ASE in online learning contexts and provide valuable insights for educators and policymakers aiming to enhance student engagement and success in online education.

References:

Ackerman, C. (2020). What is Self-Efficacy Theory in Psychology? Positive Psychology. Retrieved from https://positivepsychology.com/self-efficacy/
Datu, J. A. D., & Mateo, N. J. (2020). Character strengths, academic self-efficacy, and well- being outcomes in the Philippines: A longitudinal study. Children and Youth Services Review, 119, 105649. Dullas, A. R. (2018). The development of Academic Self-Efficacy Scale for Filipino Junior High School students. Frontiers in Education, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00019
Fallan, L., & Opstad, L. (2016). Student Self-Efficacy and Gender-Personality Interactions. International Journal of Higher Education, 5(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v5n3p32
Flavier, C. (2018). Challenges and Self-efficacy of Senior High School Students in LCCSilvercrest: Basis for Guidance Enrichment Program. Institutional Research, Guidance, and Counseling Department. Huang, C. (2013). Gender differences in academic self-efficacy: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Psychology of Education, pp. 28, 1–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-011- 0097-y
Mann, C. (2003). Observational research methods. Research design II: cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies. Emergency Medicine Journal : EMJ, 20(1), 54–60.
Margolis, H., & McCabe, P. P. (2006). Improving self-efficacy and motivation: What to do, what to say. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(4), 218-227. Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and the first-year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 55–64. Gore, P. A. (2006). Academic self-efficacy as a predictor of college outcomes: Two incremental validity studies. Journal of Career Assessment, pp. 14, 92–115.
Portney, L. G., & Watkins, M. P. (2015). Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. Torres, J. M., & Alieto, E. (2019). English learning motivation and self-efficacy of Filipino senior high school students. The Asian EFL Journal, 22(1), 51-72. Van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher education. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 95-108. Villas, J. (2019). Self-Efficacy of Filipino Senior High School Students: Differences Among Tracks/Strand and Type of School. Journal of Education and Practice, 10(8).
Yokoyama, S. (2019). Academic self-efficacy and academic performance in online learning: A mini review. Frontiers in Psychology, pp. 9, 2794. Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development. In Self-ef icacy in Changing Societies (pp. 202-231).