ththe combined effects of classroom teaching and learning strategy use on students’ chemistry...

7/21/2019 ThThe Combined Effects of Classroom Teaching and Learning Strategy Use on Students Chemistry Self-Efficacye

1/16

The Combined Effects of Classroom Teaching

and Learning Strategy Use on StudentsChemistrySelf-Efficacy

Derek Cheung

# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract For students to be successful in school chemistry, a strong sense of self-efficacy isessential. Chemistry self-efficacy can be defined as studentsbeliefs about the extent to whichthey are capable of performing specific chemistry tasks. According to Bandura (Psychol. Rev.84:191215,1977), students acquire information about their level of self-efficacy from foursources: performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and physi-ological states. No published studies have investigated how instructional strategies in chem-istry lessons can provide students with positive experiences with these four sources of self-

efficacy information and how the instructional strategies promote students

chemistry self-efficacy. In this study, questionnaire items were constructed to measure student perceptionsabout instructional strategies, termed efficacy-enhancing teaching, which can provide positiveexperiences with the four sources of self-efficacy information. Structural equation modelingwas then applied to test a hypothesized mediation model, positing that efficacy-enhancingteaching positively affects studentschemistry self-efficacy through their use of deep learningstrategies such as metacognitive control strategies. A total of 590 chemistry students at ninesecondary schools in Hong Kong participated in the survey. The mediation model provided agood fit to the student data. Efficacy-enhancing teaching had a direct effect on studentschemistry self-efficacy. Efficacy-enhancing teaching also directly affected students use of deep

learning strategies, which in turn affected studentschemistry self-efficacy. The implications ofthese findings for developing secondary school studentschemistry self-efficacy are discussed.

Keywords Chemistry education . Deep learning strategies . Mediation analysis . Self-efficacy .

Student beliefs

Introduction

Since Bandura (1977) introduced his self-efficacy theory, the construct of self-efficacy hasproven to be essential for understanding human behavior. Bandura conceptualized self-efficacyas peoples beliefs about the extent to which they are capable of organizing and executing the

Res Sci EducDOI 10.1007/s11165-014-9415-0

D. Cheung (*)Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Konge-mail: [email protected]


2/16

courses of action required to produce given attainments. In school, students need to perceivethemselves as self-efficacious to succeed in science. Science self-efficacy can therefore bedefined as studentsbeliefs about the extent to which they are capable of performing specificscience tasks or solving specific science problems. Research has shown that individual

students levels of self-efficacy affect the course of action they choose to pursue(Taasoobshirazi and Glynn2009), the degree of classroom engagement they exhibit whenstudying science (Lau and Roeser 2002), the persistence they put forth in science andengineering college majors (Lent et al. 1984), the level of science achievement they attain(Chen and Pajares2010; Merchant et al.2012; Zusho et al.2003), and the enrolment choicesthey make (Dalgety and Coll2006).

According to Bandura (1977,1997), students acquire information about their level of self-efficacy from four sources: performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences, verbal

persuasion, and physiological states. Although the effectiveness of the these four sources ofself-efficacy information has been demonstrated by researchers (e.g., Hampton and Mason

2003; Koh and Frick2009; Lopez et al.1997; zyrek2005; Tang et al.2004; Usher2009;Usher and Pajares2008), little is known about how regular day-to-day classroom teaching inscience can provide these four sources of information. In New Zealand, Jackman et al. (2009)investigated year 10 students science self-efficacy using a quasi-experimental design. Theyfound that regular science lessons enhanced students science self-efficacy if the teachingconsidered factors affecting academic self-efficacy, such as social modeling and the creation ofself-motivating statements (e.g., I will be able to do this if I work through to the end). Thisfinding suggests that students are more likely to have an increase in academic self-efficacy if theyare positively exposed to Banduras four hypothetical sources of self-efficacy information. One

purpose of the study detailed here was to investigate the extent to which Hong Kong chemistryteachers provided these four sources of self-efficacy information under regular classroom condi-tions. In the context of school chemistry, regular chemistry teachingrefers to the normal chemistrylessons in the school timetable every week. In Hong Kong, chemistry lessons in secondary schoolsare usually 40 min in duration, and there are three or four chemistry lessons per week.

An important question that should also be asked by researchers is the following: How dothe four sources of information facilitate students self-efficacy development? To date, no

published research on science or chemistry self-efficacy has investigated the mechanismthrough which regular classroom teaching enhances students self-efficacy. It is likely thatclassroom teaching alone is not sufficient because students themselves have to actively

participate in the learning process. Recently, Chiou and Liang (2012) also pointed out thatBanduras four hypothetical sources of information may not directly affect students self-efficacy. They used structural equation modeling and found that a deep approach to learningscience directly influenced Taiwanese studentsscience self-efficacy, but their model did nottake the four sources of self-efficacy information into account. Thus, another purpose of thisstudy was to develop and test a mediation model by integrating Banduras four sources of self-efficacy information with learning strategy use, using Hong Kong secondary chemistry as thecontext for research.

Previous Research on the Measurement and Sources of Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy is a domain- and task-specific construct (Pajares1996); beliefs in ones efficacycan vary across different science disciplines, such as physics, chemistry and biology. Even forchemistry, beliefs in ones efficacy can vary across topics (e.g., ionic bonding vs. electrochem-istry). Chemistry self-efficacymay be defined as students beliefs about the extent to which

Res Sci Educ


3/16

they are capable of performing specific chemistry tasks. Researchers have developed severalinstruments to measure students chemistry self-efficacy (e.g., apa Aydin and Uzuntiryaki2009; Dalgety et al. 2003; Merchant et al. 2012; Smist1993; Uzuntiryaki and apa Aydin2009; Zusho et al.2003), but many items were not sufficiently specific. For example, Zusho

et al. (2003) adapted seven items from the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnairedeveloped by Pintrich et al. (1991) to measure college chemistry studentsself-efficacy forlearning course material. Two sample items are Im confident I can understand the basicconcepts taught in this courseandIm confident I can understand the most complex material

presented by the instructor in this course.In contrast, Merchant et al. (2012) constructed 15specific items to measure studentsself-efficacy for learning the valence-shell electron pairrepulsion (VSEPR) theory taught in an introductory chemistry class. Two sample items are Ican characterize a molecule or ion as obeying or disobeying the octet ruleandI am confidentthat I could explain concepts on VSEPR theory learned in this class to another person.

According to Bandura (1977,1997), students receive information about their self-efficacy

in a given domain of activity from four sources: performance accomplishments, vicariousexperiences, verbal persuasion, and physiological states. Performance accomplishmentsreferto studentsactual experiences of success in task performances. In general, repeated successesraise self-efficacy, and failures lower self-efficacy. Often, performance accomplishments arethe most influential source of information (Britner and Pajares2006; Kiran and Sungur2012;Klassen2004; Luzzo et al. 1999; Usher and Pajares2006) because they provide the mostauthentic evidence of mastery experiences. Thus, for example, a chemistry student mayincrease self-efficacy for learning the mole concept after mastering ways to solve molarity

problems.

Vicarious experiences refer to experiences gained by watching others doing something.Modeling is an effective source of information for promoting self-efficacy, particularly whenthe observer and the target person have similar characteristics (Bandura1997). Students whoobserve peers performing a task successfully are likely to believe that they, too, can accomplishit. In addition to peers, there are other sources of modeling, including symbolic modeling

provided by visual media such as television.Verbal persuasionrefers to persuasion that one can perform a task by a trustworthy source

such as the classroom teacher. For example, telling students that they are making progress inlearning chemistry can enhance their self-efficacy about this school subject, but thefeedback must be specific so that chemistry students can adequately recognize the cause

of their success.Physiological statesrefer to how students feel before, during, and after engaging in a task.

Students will evaluate the inferences from physiological and emotional reactions (e.g., rapidheart rate, trembling, sweating) associated with a task. For example, symptoms such astrembling before a chemistry achievement test or rapid heart rate before an oral presentationcould be interpreted by a student that she or he is not capable of completing the tasksuccessfully. To enhance self-efficacy for learning chemistry, students must not beoverwhelmed by negative physiological or emotional reactions.

The information from the above four sources is not, by itself, diagnostic of a students self-

efficacy; such information influences self-efficacy through cognitive processing, and theinterpretation of information is affected by many internal and external factors (Bandura1977,1997). Some sample questionnaire items used by mathematics and science educatorsto measure studentsperceived sources of self-efficacy information are shown in Table1. Forexample, Britner and Pajares (2006) adapted the instrument developed by Lent et al. (1996) toform a 31-item Sources of Science Self-Efficacy Scale. There were four subscales, corre-sponding to the four sources of self-efficacy information hypothesized by Bandura (1977,

Res Sci Educ


4/16


5/16

model how to tackle problems, frequent positive feedback from teachers, and a supportivelearning environment are likely to develop heightened self-efficacy for learning chemistry.Specifically, in this study, efficacy-enhancing teaching consisted of the following instruc-tional strategies:

& Performance accomplishmentsTeach students how to find main ideas to solve chemistryproblems successfully; give students confidence about their learning by setting chemistryassignments with appropriate levels of difficulty so that students can successfully completemost of the tasks.

& Vicarious experiencesUse peer models to demonstrate how to solve difficult chemistryproblems; provide students with opportunities to learn from classmates.

& Verbal persuasionPraise students who are showing improvement in their chemistrylearning; tell students that they have the capability to learn chemistry better.

& Physiological statesEncourage low-achieving or shy students to participate in the

learning activities; provide students with a friendly learning environment; encouragestudents to ask and answer questions.

The present study was not designed as an intervention research project by training andasking teachers to faithfully use efficacy-enhancing teaching in chemistry classrooms. Rather,students were invited to report their perceptions of the degree of implementation of the aboveinstructional strategies in their normal chemistry lessons. My previous research (Cheung et al.1996) indicated that student survey data provide valid measures of the degree of curriculumimplementation.

However, it is difficult, if not impossible, for efficacy-enhancing teaching to directly causestudents to develop chemistry self-efficacy; chemistry students themselves have to activelyparticipate in the learning process. As the reader would likely have noted, the above instruc-tional strategies typify some of the characteristics of student-centered and constructivistteaching (Jordan et al.2008; Schunk et al. 2008), which can promote students to use deeplearning strategies (Entwistle and McCune2004; Entwistle and Ramsden1983). Deep learningstrategies support students to understand important information and include elaborationstrategies, metacognitive control strategies, critical thinking, and organization strategies(Marsh et al. 2006; Pintrich et al. 1991; Winne2011). For example, elaboration supportsstudents to connect new information with prior knowledge by using strategies such as

paraphrasing, summarizing, and creating analogies. Metacognitive control strategies refer toa students awareness, knowledge, and control of his or her learning. Goal setting, taskanalysis, and self-evaluation are examples of metacognitive control strategies (Marsh et al.2006; Pintrich et al.1991). Empirical research has shown that student-centered and construc-tivist teaching can positively affect student use of deep learning strategies (Beausaert et al.2013; Lau et al.2008; Nijhuis et al.2008; Vos et al.2011; Yildirim2012; Yin et al.2009). It isnot unreasonable to hypothesize, therefore, that efficacy-enhancing teaching can encouragestudents to use deep learning strategies.

Furthermore, Schunk (1985) hypothesized that the types of cognitive processing that

students employ during learning should affect their self-efficacy. If students can effectivelyprocess instructional information to get a deep understanding of the concepts involved, thenthey may experience a heightened sense of personal control over their learning and feelefficacious enough to overcome difficulties. Schunks hypothesis has been supported byempirical research (Bandura and Schunk1981; Nbina and Viko2010; Nelson Laird et al.2008; Phan2007; Schmidt and Ford2003; Schunk and Swartz1993; Zusho et al.2003). Forexample, the correlational study by Zusho et al. (2003) revealed that students with higher

Res Sci Educ


6/16

levels of chemistry self-efficacy reported using more elaboration and organization strategies.Using a quasi-experimental design, Nbina and Viko (2010) found that students who usedmetacognitive learning skills tended to have higher levels of chemistry self-efficacy. Phan(2007) used structural equation modeling to compare the effects of undergraduate students

deep and surface learning approaches with their self-efficacy for learning educational psy-chology. They reported that only the deep learning approach could positively predict self-efficacy. In an experimental study by Schmidt and Ford (2003), undergraduate students at auniversity in the USA completed a web-based training course on how to create web pages.They found that students reporting greater levels of use of metacognitive activities duringtraining had higher levels of post-training self-efficacy for creating web pages, even aftercontrolling for ability and previous experience creating web pages.

Based on the above findings obtained in previous research studies, I hypothesized a modelof chemistry self-efficacy by integrating efficacy-enhancing teaching with student use of deeplearning strategies (see Fig. 1). No studies to date have empirically tested such a model.

Chemistry self-efficacy refers to studentsbeliefs about the extent to which they are capable ofperforming specific chemistry tasks or solving specific chemistry problems. My hypothesiswas that secondary school students who experience efficacy-enhancing teaching in theirnormal chemistry lessons are likely to develop a better habit of using deep learning strategieswhen studying chemistry. Further, when students use deep learning strategies on a regular

basis, they will experience greater control over their own learning and set challenging learninggoals for themselves and thus develop a stronger sense of self-efficacy for learning chemistry.For example, teacher use of question and answers in the chemistry classroom can triggerstudents to think deeply. Teacher questioning not only helps students construct new chemical

knowledge but also facilitates them to link new chemical knowledge to knowledge that isalready stored in their long-term memory. Effective learning and a high level of chemistry self-efficacy may result from this kind of elaboration strategy. Similarly, when a teacher teachesstudents how to find main ideas to solve difficult chemistry problems successfully, studentsmay be encouraged to think deeply and reflect on their study strategies.

In my model, student use of deep learning strategies was conceptualized as a mediator.Efficacy-enhancing teaching would not affect the self-efficacy of every student in a classuniformly because perceived self-efficacy is determined by the extent to which individual studentsuse deep learning strategies when studying chemistry. In addition, my model assumed that a directeffect of efficacy-enhancing teaching on students chemistry self-efficacy exists and that the direct

effect is weaker than the mediated effect. Further details about the mediation model are describedin the Methodologysection. The present study aimed to answer two research questions:

1. What are the psychometric properties of student data on chemistry self-efficacy, efficacy-enhancing teaching, and learning strategy use?

2. Does the hypothesized mediation model provide a good fit to the real data?

b

efficacy

enhancing

teaching

deep learning

strategies

chemistry

self-efficacy

a

c

Fig. 1 Hypothesized mediation model. Path coefficients are represented bya, b, andc

Res Sci Educ


7/16

Methodology

Participants and Procedure

In Hong Kong, secondary schooling consists of 6 years (referred to as secondary 16).Chemistry is offered as an elective subject to secondary 46 students (aged about 1618 years),and the academic year in Hong Kong begins in September. The participants (N=590; 358

boys, 230 girls, and 2 who did not report gender) were from a convenience sample ofsecondary 4 chemistry students taught by 19 teachers selected from nine schools in

November 2012. The students were of diverse academic achievement. The questionnairesurvey was administered by their chemistry teachers during regular class periods andrequired about 5 min to respond to all the items. Names of students and schools were notcollected to ensure anonymity.

Bandura (2006) pointed out that scales of self-efficacy must be tailored to the particular

domain of functioning that is the object of interest (p. 308). During the period fromSeptember to November 2012, ionic compounds, covalent compounds, and writing chemicalequations were taught in the Hong Kong secondary 4 chemistry curriculum. These three topicswere the object of interest in my study. Therefore, secondary 4 rather than 5 or 6 students wereselected to assess their self-efficacy for learning these three topics. In the USA, Merchant et al.(2012) also assessed chemistry studentsself-efficacy for learning a theory within 8 weeks.

Measures

A total of 22 items were constructed to form three measurement scales: chemistry self-efficacy,efficacy-enhancing teaching, and student use of deep learning strategies. These items werewritten in Chinese and have been translated into English for reader information in Table 2.Because no published instruments measuring studentsself-efficacy for learning ionic com-

pounds, covalent compound, and writing chemical equations could be found in the literature, Iconstructed five items to make my chemistry self-efficacy scale domain-specific and task-specific. The items were prefaced with the heading Without reviewing textbooks and notes, Iam confident that I can,and students were asked to rate each item on a 6-point scale (from 1=highly unconfident to 6=highly confident).

Using Banduras(1977) four sources of self-efficacy information as the conceptual frame-

work, 10 items were constructed to measure student perceptions of the implementation ofefficacy-enhancing teaching in their chemistry classroom. The items were prefaced with theheading In the Secondary 4 chemistry lessons since September 2012, and students wereasked to rate each item on a 4-point scale (from 1=never to 4=in most lessons).

The extent to which chemistry students engaged in deep learning when studying schoolchemistry was measured by seven items adapted from the elaboration scale and themetacognitive control scale used in the PISA project (Marsh et al. 2006). The items were

prefaced with the heading When I study,and students were asked to rate each item on a 5-point scale (from 1=never to 5=all the time).

Statistical Analyses of Measurement Scales

The reliabilities of student responses to the individual items and to the three measurementscales were examined using the SPSS program on the basis of item-total correlations andvalues for Cronbachs , respectively. To test the construct validity of data, the three measureswere separately subjected to confirmatory factor analysis. For each measure, all the items were

Res Sci Educ


8/16

allowed to load on only one factor, and the errors of measurement associated with all itemswere posited to be uncorrelated. The confirmatory factor analysis was performed using AMOSsoftware (Byrne2010). The ability of the one-factor model to fit data was evaluated using thechi-square (2), the goodness of fit index (GFI), the adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), theTucker-Lewis index (TLI), the comparative fit index (CFI), and the root mean square error ofapproximation (RMSEA). Because the 2 statistic is sensitive to sample size, I based

Table 2 Reliability estimates and item-total correlations

Scale and item Item-totalcorrelation

Chemistry self-efficacy (estimated=.93)Without reviewing textbooks and notes, I am confident that I can

1. Construct formulae of ionic compounds based on their names 0.83

2. Draw electron diagrams to show the double covalent bonds in a carbon dioxide molecule 0.77

3. Convert word equations to balanced chemical equations 0.86

4. Write the balanced chemical equation for the reaction between calcium and water 0.83

5. Write balanced ionic equations 0.84

Efficacy-enhancing teaching (estimated=.87)

In the secondary 4 chemistry lessons since September 2012,

6. I successfully completed most of the assignments (PA) 0.32

7. My teacher encouraged us, particularly shy students, to answer questions (PS) 0.58

8. I had opportunities to learn from classmates with better achievement to help me understandchemical concepts (VE)

0.52

9. My teacher taught us how to find main ideas to solve chemistry problems successfully (PA) 0.67

10. My teacher particularly encouraged students with lower academic achievement and providedthem with opportunities to participate in learning (PS)

0.70

11. My teacher invited students with better academic achievement to demonstrate how to solvedifficult problems (VE)

0.47

12. My teacher praised students who were showing improvement and encouraged others to learnfrom them (VP)

0.55

13. My teacher encouraged us to ask questions (PS) 0.70

14. My teacher said that we have the capability to learn chemistry better (VP) 0.63

15. My teacher provided us with a friendly learning environment and encouraged us to askquestions freely (PS)

0.67

Student use of deep learning strategies (estimated=.84)

When I study secondary 4 chemistry,

16. And I do not understand some content, I will look for additional information to clarify myunderstanding (MC)

0.55

17. I try to understand the most important ideas and not just memorize everything (MC) 0.51

18. I start by figuring out exactly what chemistry knowledge or laboratory skills I need to learn(MC) 0.52

19. I check to see whether I remember the content that I have learned (MC) 0.59

20. I try to find out which chemical concepts I still have not understood (MC) 0.70

21. I try to understand new content better by relating it to knowledge I have learned (EL) 0.58

22. I try to think about how the new chemical concepts can help me understand previousknowledge better (EL)

0.68

PA performance accomplishment, VEvicarious experience, VPverbal persuasion, PSphysiological state, MCmetacognitive control strategy,EL elaboration strategy

Res Sci Educ


9/16

evaluation of model fit on considerations of multiple indexes and beyond the statisticalsignificance of the 2. According to conventional criteria, an acceptable fit is indicated byGFI>.90, AGFI>.90, TLI>.90, CFI>.90, and RMSEA


10/16

chemistry self-efficacy was the largest. On a 6-point rating scale from highly unconfidenttohighly confident,the mean self-efficacy score was 4.25 (SD=1.28).

The standardized solution for the mediation model is shown in Fig. 2. The fit for thehypothesized model was good (2=517.994, df=206, p


11/16

The squared multiple correlation for chemistry self-efficacy was 0.42, indicating that 42 %of the variance in students chemistry self-efficacy was explained by efficacy-enhancingteaching and student use of deep learning strategies jointly. The squared multiple correlationfor deep learning strategies was 0.18, indicating that 18 % of the variance associated with

student use of deep learning strategies was accounted for by efficacy-enhancing teaching.

Discussion

For students to be successful in school chemistry, a strong sense of self-efficacy is essential.The present study provided an important extension to previous research on studentschemistryself-efficacy by examining the effects of efficacy-enhancing teaching on chemistry self-efficacy and the mechanism involved. The student data were found to have adequate reliabilityand validity. As hypothesized, efficacy-enhancing teaching in Hong Kong chemistry class-

rooms promoted studentschemistry self-efficacy (see Fig.2). This finding is consistent withprevious research (e.g., Lopez et al.1997) on the effectiveness of the four sources of self-efficacy information described by Bandura (1977,1997). Chemistry students who reportedthat their teachers often provided them with opportunities to succeed, learn from classmates, beverbally persuaded, and study in a friendly learning environment tended to have higher levelsof chemistry self-efficacy than those who reported that their teachers seldom created theseopportunities. This finding suggests that teachers can effectively improve studentschemistryself-efficacy by implementing efficacy-enhancing teaching in their normal chemistry lessons.

However, the mean score of efficacy-enhancing teaching was just 2.96 on a 4-point rating

scale (see Table 3), indicating that some students had less access to efficacy-enhancingteaching in the chemistry classroom. Uncovering the reasons why some teachers did not fullyengage in efficacy-enhancing teaching was beyond the scope of the present study. Yet one

plausible explanation is that they were worried about covering the content-dominated chem-istry curriculum and meeting the requirements of the public examination. Schooling in HongKong is very examination-oriented, and classroom teaching often aims at preparing studentsfor high-stakes public examinations (Cheng2010). In their empirical study, Yung et al. (2008)found that Hong Kong students also want their teachers to help them prepare for examinations.Although rote memorization does not help students understand chemical concepts, chemistryis often taught by having students memorize facts, chemical symbols, and equations. My

previous research (Cheung 2008, 2009) indicated that the major concern of Hong Kongteachers when teaching chemistry in secondary school is the lack of instructional time, andtraditional instructiona lot of teacher talk and practice in solving sample problems on the

boardis popular in chemistry classrooms. Many chemistry teachers follow a three-stepapproach to teaching (Cheung2009). First, they use textbooks or distribute notes to introducenew chemical concepts such as the equilibrium constant. Then, they demonstrate how to solvea few chemistry problems. Finally, students are asked to attempt some class work to checkwhether they have mastered the new chemical concepts. Of course, teachers do not use thisthree-step approach all the time; they may supplement it with a variety of teaching strategies,

including PowerPoint presentations, videos, and inquiry-based laboratory experiments(Cheung2011). For example, teachers can easily incorporate efficacy-enhancing teaching intotheir inquiry teaching by providing appropriately challenging problems and facilitating coop-erative team work so that students are exposed to personal mastery and vicarious experiences.

Additionally, the findings from my investigation have implications for other sciencedisciplines such as biology and physics. In the future, enhancing Hong Kong studentsself-efficacy for learning physics will become more important because physics is the least popular

Res Sci Educ


12/16

science discipline in secondary schools. In 2013, only 15,209 students selected physics in theHong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education Examination (Hong Kong Examinations andAssessment Authority HKEAA2013). Physics teachers may implement efficacy-enhancingteaching to improve their studentsself-efficacy for learning physics.

I found, as hypothesized, that when student use of deep learning strategies was conceptu-alized as a mediator in my model (see Fig.2), the direct effect of efficacy-enhancing teachingon studentschemistry self-efficacy was greatly reduced, from 0.35 to 0.10 with the mediatedeffect equal to 0.25. This finding suggests that efficacy-enhancing teaching alone cannot fullyaccount for students diverse levels of perceived self-efficacy for learning chemistry eventhough I considered instructional strategies that are consistent with Banduras(1977,1997)four sources of self-efficacy information. This is partly because not all students in a classrespond in the same way to efficacy-enhancing teaching. Student use of deep learningstrategies is a useful variable to help chemistry education researchers understand why in thesame chemistry classroom some students possess a high level of self-efficacy and others do

not. Personal use of deep learning strategies by individual students is an essential variable inexplaining the diverse levels of self-efficacy. Regularly supporting students to use deeplearning strategies will be an effective means to enhance self-efficacy. Thus, both researchersand school teachers should not just focus on Banduras four sources of information. Tosucceed in school chemistry, students need to develop metacognitive control strategies forsetting their learning goals, self-monitoring their learning process, and self-evaluating theirlearning progress (Marsh et al. 2006; Pintrich et al. 1991). According to Winne (2011),students have three basic choices for metacognitive control: changing environmental andinternal conditions, choosing content for study and for restudy, and selecting cognitive

operations for processing information and knowledge. To succeed in school chemistry,students also need to use elaboration strategies (Marsh et al. 2006) for linking new and priorchemical knowledge together.

It is worth noting that my mediation model can account for only 18 % of the variance instudentsuse of deep learning strategies, indicating that there are other factors affecting strategyuse in the chemistry classroom. For example, Walker et al. (2004) reported that classroomenvironments in which opportunities for collaborative learning were systematically scaffolded

by teachers were effective to enhance primary school students self-regulated learning. However,a quasi-experimental study by Struyven et al. (2006) revealed that a constructivist environmentalone cannot encourage students to use a deep approach to learning. In the experimental group,

the teacher provided student-activating assignments such as problem-based learning tasks, casestudies, and team work. Students were required to collaborate and share their responsibilities inorder to complete the assignments. In the control group, lectures were used by the teacher todeliver information. Struyven et al. found that in the experimental group, studentsuse of a deepapproach to learning was hindered by excessive workloads, lack of feedback and structuringsupport, fragmented knowledge, and fellow students profiting from the group work. During theinterviews, some students suggested that the student-activating assignments could be combinedwith formal lectures to provide structuring support and make the content coherent. Therefore, inaddition to efficacy-enhancing teaching, chemistry teachers need to pay attention to manageable

workload, regular feedback, and structural support to provide an overview of contents. They alsohave to consider students time constraints. Using a deep approach to learning involves asubstantial investment of time, and students always experience time pressures created by

backlogs of work, deadlines for assignments, and their own personal and social concerns(Entwistle1997).

Furthermore, numerous studies have demonstrated that students beliefs about learningaffect their use of deep learning strategies. For example, Dahl et al. (2005) surveyed a sample

Res Sci Educ


13/16

of Norwegian university students and analyzed the data using multiple regression. They foundthat the more students believed that intellectual ability is fixed at birth, the less likely theyreported using elaboration and metacognitive self-regulatory strategies. In Taiwan, Chiou et al.(2013) provided supportive evidence for a relationship between high school studentsbeliefs

about physics learning and their use of deep learning strategies. A sample item that they usedto measure deep learning strategy use reads, I try to relate new material to what I alreadyknow about the topic when I am studying physics.Results of a multiple regression analysisindicated that students who believed that learning physics is to get a new way to interpretnatural phenomena tended to use deep learning strategies, whereas students who believed thatlearning physics is to memorize definitions, formulae, laws, and special terms were less likelyto use deep strategies. Studentsachievement goals have also been shown to be related to theiruse of learning strategies. For example, Elliot et al. (1999) found that mastery goals are

positive predictors of deep processing, whereas performance goals are positive predictors ofsurface processing.

Additionally, studentsfamily environment affects their use of deep learning strategies. Forexample, Cano and Cardelle-Elawar (2008) surveyed 870 Spanish secondary students andanalyzed the data by path analysis. Family intellectual climate was shown to positively predictstudentsuse of deep learning strategies. In Israel, Kipinis and Hofstein (2008) documentedthat inquiry-type laboratory activities can support high school chemistry students to practicemetacognitive skills. Students were required to identify problems, formulate hypotheses,design experiments, gather and analyze data, and draw conclusions. Further studentspercep-tions of assessment requirements are connected to their approaches to learning. Surfaceapproaches are encouraged by assessment methods that emphasize recall of large quantities

of information presented in class, or application of trivial procedural knowledge (Ramsden2003). Recently, Lynch et al. (2012) found that students involvement in self- and peer-assessment and feedback can promote deep learning approaches.

Conclusion and Limitations

This study was conducted to address a void in the literature pertaining to secondary schoolstudentsself-efficacy for learning chemistry, with specific attention given to the effects ofregular classroom teaching. The findings support my hypothesized model of chemistry self-

efficacy (Fig.2) and suggest that one way to foster studentschemistry self-efficacy is to bothimplement efficacy-enhancing teaching, and promote studentsuse of deep learning strategies.Efficacy-enhancing teaching exerted a direct effect on studentschemistry self-efficacy as wellas an indirect effect through the mediating variabledeep learning strategies.It is important tonote that chemistry teachers are not required to implement efficacy-enhancing teaching inseparate lessons; it should be embedded within regular chemistry lessons.

As with any research, certain limitations were present in this study. First, I used a self-reportsurvey to measure studentschemistry self-efficacy and use of deep learning strategies at onlyone time point. Although causal relationships between several constructs are shown in Fig.2,

causality should be interpreted with caution. The relationships between the different constructsare probably reciprocal (Zimmerman and Cleary2006; Zusho et al.2003); that is, they canmutually affect one another. For example, the relationship between studentschemistry self-efficacy and use of deep learning strategies is likely reciprocal. But which direction ofinfluence is stronger? According to Pajares (1996), direction of causality is a chicken-or-eggquestion, and is difficult to resolve due to the reciprocal nature of human motivation and

behavior. Future research on chemistry self-efficacy could use experimental studies to

Res Sci Educ


14/16

investigate how variations in teacherslevels of implementation of efficacy-enhancing teach-ing affect studentsuse of deep learning strategies and chemistry self-efficacy.

Second, I constructed only 10 items to measure efficacy-enhancing teaching. They could notfully measure Banduras (1977, 1997) four sources of self-efficacy information. Further

research is needed to increase the number of items to form four subscales. Investigations areparticularly needed to examine the differential effects of various sources because they mayoperate differently in different contexts and result in different effects on chemistry self-efficacy.

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84,191215.

Bandura, A. (1997).Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.),Self-efficacybeliefs of adolescents(pp. 307337). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest throughproximal self-motivation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586598.

Beausaert, S. A. J., Segers, M. S. R., & Wiltink, D. P. A. (2013). The influence of teachersteaching approacheson studentslearning approaches: the student perspective. Educational Research, 55, 115.

Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students.Journal ofResearch in Science Teaching, 43, 485499.

Byrne, B. M. (2010).Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Cano, F., & Cardelle-Elawar, M. (2008). Family environment, epistemological beliefs, learning strategies, and

academic performance: a path analysis. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: epistemo-logical studies across diverse cultures(pp. 219239). Dordrecht: Springer.

apa Aydin, Y., & Uzuntiryaki, E. (2009). Development and psychometric evaluation of the high schoolchemistry self-efficacy scale.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 868880.

Chen, J. A., & Pajares, F. (2010). Implicit theories of ability of grade 6 science students: relation to epistemo-logical beliefs and academic motivation and achievement in science. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, 35, 7587.Cheng, M. M. W. (2010). Hong Kong. In B. Risch (Ed.), Teaching chemistry around the world(pp. 91110).

Mnster: Waxmann.Cheung, D. (2008). Facilitating chemistry teachers to implement inquiry-based laboratory work. International

Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 107130.Cheung, D. (2009). Developing a scale to measure students attitudes toward chemistry lessons.International

Journal of Science Education, 31, 21852203.Cheung, D. (2011). Teacher beliefs about implementing guided-inquiry laboratory experiments for secondary

school chemistry.Journal of Chemical Education, 88, 14621468.Cheung, D., Hattie, J., Bucat, R., & Douglas, G. (1996). Studentsperceptions of curriculum implementation.

Curriculum and Teaching, 11, 4960.Chiou, G. L., & Liang, J. C. (2012). Exploring the structure of science self-efficacy: a model built on high school

studentsconceptions of learning and approaches to learning in science.Asia-Pacific Education Researcher,21(1), 8391.

Chiou, G. L., Lee, M. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). High school students approaches to learning physics withrelationship to epistemic views on physics and conceptions of learning physics.Research in Science andTechnological Education, 31, 115.

Dahl, T. I., Bals, M., & Turi, A. L. (2005). Are studentsbeliefs about knowledge and learning associated with

their reported use of learning strategies?British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 257273.Dalgety, J., & Coll, R. K. (2006). The influence of first-year chemistry studentslearning experiences on their

educational choices.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31, 303328.Dalgety, J., Coll, R. K., & Jones, A. (2003). Development of chemistry attitudes and experiences questionnaire

(CAEQ).Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 649668.Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: a

mediational analysis.Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 549563.

Res Sci Educ


15/16

Entwistle, N. (1997). Reconstituting approaches to learning: a response to Webb.Higher Education, 33, 213218.

Entwistle, N., & McCune, V. (2004). The conceptual bases of study strategy inventories.Educational PsychologyReview, 16, 325345.

Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983).Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.

Fencl, H., & Scheel, K. (2005). Engaging students: an examination of the effects of teaching strategies on self-efficacy and course climate in a nonmajors physics course.Journal of College Science Teaching, 25(1), 2024.

Hampton, N. Z., & Mason, E. (2003). Learning disabilities, gender, sources of efficacy, self-efficacy beliefs, andacademic achievement in high school students.Journal of School Psychology, 41, 101112.

Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority (HKEAA). (2013). Press release: 2013 Hong Kongdiploma of secondary education examination results. Hong Kong: HKEAA.

Jackman, W. M., Townsend, M., & Hamilton, R. (2009). Improving motivation and performance in secondaryschool science. In D. H. Ellsworth (Ed.),Motivation in education(pp. 147157). New York: Nova SciencePublishers.

Jordan, A., Carlile, O., & Stack, A. (2008). Approaches to learning: a guide for teachers. London: OpenUniversity Press.

Kipinis, M., & Hofstein, A. (2008). The inquiry laboratory as a source for development of metacognitive skills.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 601627.Kiran, D., & Sungur, S. (2012). Middle school studentsscience self-efficacy and its sources: examination of

gender difference.Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 619630.Klassen, R. M. (2004). A cross-cultural investigation of the efficacy beliefs of South Asian immigrant and Anglo

Canadian nonimmigrant early adolescents.Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 731742.Koh, J. H. L., & Frick, T. W. (2009). Instructor and student classroom interactions during technology skills

instruction for facilitating preservice teachers computer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational ComputingResearch, 40, 211228.

Lacobucci, D. (2008).Mediation analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Lau, S., & Roeser, R. W. (2002). Cognitive abilities and motivational processes in high school students

situational engagement and achievement in science.Educational Assessment, 8, 139162.

Lau, S., Liem, A. D., & Nie, Y. (2008). Task- and self-related pathways to deep learning: the mediating role ofachievement goals, classroom attentiveness, and group participation. British Journal of EducationalPsychology, 78, 639662.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academicachievement and persistence.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 356362.

Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., Brown, S. D., & Gore, P. A. (1996). Latent structure of the sources of mathematicsself-efficacy.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 292308.

Lopez, F. G., Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Gore, P. A., Jr. (1997). Role of social-cognitive expectations in highschool studentsmathematics-related interest and performance.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 4452.

Luzzo, D. A., Hasper, P., Albert, K. A., Bibby, M. A., & Martinelli, E. A., Jr. (1999). Effects of self-efficacy-enhancing interventions on the math/science self-efficacy and career interests, goals, and actions of career

undecided college students.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 233243.Lynch, R., McNamara, P. M., & Seery, N. (2012). Promoting deep learning in a teacher education programme

through self- and peer-assessment and feedback.European Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 179197.MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECDs brief self-report measure of

educational psychologys most useful affective constructs: cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across25 countries.International Journal of Testing, 6, 311360.

Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Kwok, O. M., Cifuentes, L., & Davis, T. J. (2012). The learnercharacteristics, features of desktop 3D virtual reality environments, and college chemistry instruction: astructural equation modeling analysis.Computer and Education, 59, 551568.

Nbina, J. B., & Viko, B. (2010). Effect of instruction in metacognitive self-assessment strategy on chemistry

studentsself-efficacy and achievement.Academia Arena, 2, 110.Nelson Laird, T. F., Shoup, R., Kuh, G. D., & Schwarz, M. J. (2008). The effects of discipline on deep

approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49, 469494.Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2008). The extent of variability in learning strategies and students

perceptions of the learning environment.Learning and Instruction, 18, 121134.zyrek, R. (2005). Informative sources of math-related self-efficacy expectations and their relationship with

math-related self-efficacy, interest, and preference. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 145156.

Res Sci Educ


16/16

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings.Review of Educational Research, 66, 543578.Phan, H. P. (2007). An examination of reflective thinking, learning approaches, and self-efficacy beliefs at the

University of the South Pacific: a path analysis approach. Educational Psychology, 27(6), 789806.Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991).A manual for the use of the motivated

strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simplemediation models.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717731.Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. London: RoutledgeFalmer.Sawtelle, V., Brewe, E., & Kramer, L. H. (2012). Exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and retention in

introductory physics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 10961121.Schmidt, A. M., & Ford, J. K. (2003). Learning within a learner control training environment: the interactive effects

of goal orientation and metacognitive instruction on learning outcomes.Personnel Psychology, 56, 405429.Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010).A beginners guide to structural equation modeling(3rd ed.). New

York: Routledge.Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self-efficacy and classroom learning.Psychology in the Schools, 22, 208223.Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W. (1993). Goals and progressive feedback: effects on self-efficacy and writing

achievement.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 337354.

Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008).Motivation in education: theory, research, and applications(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson.Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and

recommendations.Psychological Methods, 7, 422445.Smist, J. M. (1993).General chemistry and self-efficacy. Paper presented at the national meeting of the American

Chemical Society, Chicago, IL.Struyven, K., Dochy, F., Janssens, S., & Gielen, S. (2006). On the dynamics of studentsapproaches to learning:

the effects of the teaching/learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16, 279294.Taasoobshirazi, G., & Glynn, S. M. (2009). College students solving chemistry problems: a theoretical model of

expertise.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 10701089.Tang, M., Addison, K. D., LaSure-Bryant, D., Norman, R., OConnell, W., & Stewart-Sicking, J. A. (2004).

Factors that influence self-efficacy of counseling students: an exploratory study.Counselor Education and

Supervision, 44(1), 7080.Usher, E. L. (2009). Sources of middle school studentsself-efficacy in mathematics: a qualitative investigation.American Educational Research Journal, 46, 275314.

Usher, E. L., & Pajares, S. (2006). Sources of academic and self-regulatory efficacy beliefs of entering middleschool students.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 125141.

Usher, E. L., & Pajares, S. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: critical review of the literature and futuredirections.Review of Educational Research, 78, 751796.

Usher, E. L., & Pajares, S. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: a validation study. ContemporaryEducational Psychology, 34, 89-101.

Uzuntiryaki, E., & apa Aydin, Y. (2009). Development and validation of chemistry self-efficacy scale forcollege students.Research in Science Education, 39, 539551.

Vos, N., van der Meijden, H., & Denessen, E. (2011). Effects of constructing versus playing an educational game

on student motivation and deep learning strategy use. Computers & Education, 56, 127137.Walker, R. A., Pressick-Kilborn, K., Arnold, L. S., & Sainsbury, E. J. (2004). Investigating motivation in context:

developing sociocultural perspectives.European Psychologist, 9, 245256.Winne, P. H. (2011). A cognitive and metacognitive analysis of self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H.

Schunk (Eds.),Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 1532). New York: Routledge.Yildirim, S. (2012). Teacher support, motivation, learning strategy use, and achievement: a multilevel mediation

model.Journal of Experimental Education, 80, 150172.Yin, H., Lee, J. C. K., & Zhang, Z. (2009). Examining Hong Kong studentsmotivational beliefs, strategy use

and their relations with two relational factors in classrooms.Educational Psychology, 29, 685700.Yung, B. H. W., Wong, S. L., Cheng, M. W., Lo, F. Y., & Hodson, D. (2008). Preparing students for examination.

In Y. J. Lee & A. L. Tan (Eds.), Science education at the nexus of theory and practice (pp. 181201).Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Cleary, T. J. (2006). Adolescentsdevelopment of personal agency: the role of self-efficacybeliefs and self-regulatory skills. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.),Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents(pp. 4569). Greenwich: Information Age.

Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Coppola, B. (2003). Skill and will: the role of motivation and cognition in thelearning of college chemistry.International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 10811094.

Res Sci Educ

ththe combined effects of classroom teaching and learning strategy use on students’ chemistry...

Documents