The development of self-efficacy is supported through a variety of experiences and strategies including: opportunities to develop and acknowledge mastery of a skill or topic; vicarious experiences (observing peers accomplish/demonstrate their mastery); and social or verbal persuasion and feedback for accomplishment of the task (Bandura, 1986). Instructors, advisors, coaches, and students themselves can all contribute to the development of self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy in a particular domain can be developed through the successful completion of tasks central to that domain. To create opportunities for students to develop and assess mastery at the skill and sub-skill level, instructors should be clear about the knowledge and skills to be learned, and should communicate why the particular knowledge and skills are of value (Margolis & McCabe, 2010; Schunk, 1991).
In order to support self-efficacy students should be given tasks and assignments that are in their zone of proximal development, i.e., that are appropriately challenging; neither too difficult or too easy for their developmental stage and current understanding (Vygotsky, 1978; Wass & Golding, 2014). In addition, tasks that are broken down into smaller, scaffolded tasks, accompanied by feedback, support self-efficacy (Wass & Golding, 2014).
In order to develop appropriate tasks and assignments, it is important for instructors to know students’ level of prior knowledge. Pre-tests at the beginning of the semester, or at the beginning of a unit of study, along with ongoing formative assessments (including active learning activities) can provide key information for the design of subsequent assignments and the associated scaffolding required by students.
When students are required to work at a problem, or sub-task, and succeed they receive positive feedback about their ability – and their self-efficacy increases. Students are essentially collecting data that confirms their mastery. Note that students do not have to always be given assignments on which they can be successful without significant effort or without any feedback and iteration. Instructors should carefully consider the type and frequency of the feedback they provide. Types of feedback that can be particularly effective in the development of self-efficacy include:
Finally, when appropriate and accurate, instructors can explicitly tell students that they have acquired, or are capable of acquiring the stated skills. This can occur via written feedback on an exam, or verbally in class or group settings e.g., “Great question! This shows that you are really thinking about the mechanism for this process – and not only about the end state” or, on a written exam, “You have made an algebraic error – but your reasoning is excellent – and your comment about the unreasonableness of the magnitude of your answer shows that you have a solid understanding of the underlying phenomena”. Students can also receive positive feedback and encouragement (social persuasion) from their peers after successfully completing particularly challenging tasks (Margolis & McCabe, 2006).
Strategies that promote a growth mindset can also support the development of self-efficacy. Students may need reassurance that struggling to complete a task, or acquire a skill is common and expected. Instructors can help students build self-efficacy by being explicit about the fact that struggling (not “getting it” immediately) is common and by providing resources and means for the student to ultimately “get it”. Through this narrative, students learn that others have struggled and succeeded, and that their failures do not, in and of themselves, indicate that they cannot succeed. See the Skills, Beliefs, Behaviors: Mindset section of this resource.
Higher degrees of course structure and organization can encourage the development of self-efficacy. After controlling for variation in student ability, Freeman, et al. found that “failure rates were lower in a moderately structured course design and were dramatically lower in a highly structured course design.” They argue that active-learning exercises can make students more skilled learners and help bridge the gap between poorly prepared students and their better-prepared peers (Freeman, Haak, & Wenderoth, 2011).
In recent years, the use of intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) as both primary learning tools, and as supplemental support for face-to-face instruction has grown considerably. Some of the newest, and perhaps most promising work in this area involves the creation of intelligent tutoring systems with the ability to: diagnose the user’s self-efficacy; predict what problems and sub-problems a student will select to solve; predict how long a student will persist on a given problem; and estimate how much overall effort the student will expend. With these predictions, the ITS can tailor the subsequent tutorial action accordingly and ultimately increase the student’s level of self-efficacy, their motivation, and their ability to persevere in the face of learning obstacles (McQuiggan, Lester, Ikeda, Ashley, & Chan, 2006).
In their study of the effects of teaching strategies on self-efficacy in a non-majors physics course, Fenci & Scheel have identified specific teaching strategies that are particularly effective in building self-efficacy (Fenci & Scheel, 2005). These strategies include: question and answer, collaborative learning, electronic applications, and assignments that focus on conceptual problems.
In general, when instructors utilize active, interactive and collaborative learning they help students:
See the MIT Practices section, below for examples of how these ideas are put into practice at MIT.
First-year advisors play a large role in helping new students develop self-efficacy. They can support students’ course selection by providing accurate information about work-load, course requirements and prerequisites. Advisors can help students to better align their prior knowledge and goals with the courses selected.
Advisors, like instructors can reinforce the idea that all students struggle at various points in their studies. Like instructors, advisors can share personal stories and/or stories from others about how they initially struggled, what they learned and how they grew and succeeded.
When appropriate, instructors and advisors can help students identify external influences on a student’s lower than expected performance or level of mastery (Margolis & McCabe, 2006).
It is important to note that, although it is difficult for an individual student to increase their self-efficacy completely on their own, there are specific practices and strategies that a student can employ to increase their self-efficacy. If a student has accurate and honest understanding of their prior knowledge, they can select learning experiences that will provide the appropriate level of challenge, will allow them to be successful in the experience (gain mastery), and will help them build self-efficacy.
For example, at MIT 18.100-Real Analysis is required for all Physics majors, but the requirement can be filled by completing one of 4 subjects: 18.100A, 18.100B, or 18.100P or 18.100Q. Each subject is challenging in its own right, but each has its own emphasis (and reputation). If a student has an accurate and realistic of view of their prior knowledge, they are more likely to choose the subject with most appropriate level of challenge – the one that is best aligned with their zone of proximal development - and that will help gain self-efficacy.