CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
C. Implication
The results of this study have several implications, including: (1) the implications of the importance of verbal-linguistic intelligence and self- efficacy on students' speaking skills, (2) implications for the process of learning English, especially speaking skills, and (3) implications of the importance of improving students' speaking skills.
The first implication is the importance of verbal-linguistic intelligence and
self-efficacy to students' speaking ability. This research supports the theory and previous research, which states that verbal-linguistic intelligence is very important to encourage students' speaking ability. In this case, verbal-linguistic intelligence significantly contributes to students' speaking ability. Students with high verbal-linguistic intelligence will easily convey their ideas through speaking. At the same time, self-efficacy has an important role in improving students' speaking ability. In this case, verbal-linguistic intelligence and self- efficacy contributed 52.7% to students' speaking ability, which means that students with strong verbal-linguistic intelligence and a strong sense of self- efficacy will find it easier to communicate in English.
The second implication is the implication of the teaching and learning process, especially in speaking. The results of this study indicate that there is a high contribution of verbal-linguistic intelligence to students' speaking abilities. Therefore, teachers are expected to adopt a learning system that suits students' needs, such as lesson plans that should support students to be more active in speaking, increase students' motivation to take an active role in activities, and make students active in speaking. In addition, teachers can also use various methods to support students' speaking learning.
The third implication is the conscious efforts from institutions or the government of the importance of self-efficacy on speaking skills. The results of this study prove the importance of self-efficacy in learning speaking. In this case, students who have self-efficacy in speaking have a chance to succeed in learning because students who have a high sense of self-efficacy are usually better at speaking than those with a poor sense of efficacy. Therefore, an institution must support conditions that motivate students to speak.
REFERENCES
Abdallah, M. M. S. (2008). Multiple Ways to be Smart: Gardener’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences and its Educational Implications in English Teaching and Oral Communication. Online Submission.
Adityas, M. T. (2016). Activating Students’ Multiple Intelligences in Speaking Activities. Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies (ADJES), 3(1), 70–75.
Ahmadian, M., & Ghasemi, A. A. (2017). Language learning strategies, multiple intelligences and self-efficacy: Exploring the links. Journal of Asia TEFL, 14(4), 755.
Al-Tamimi, N. O. M., & Attamimi, R. A. (2014). Effectiveness of cooperative learning in enhancing speaking skills and attitudes towards learning English.
International Journal of Linguistics, 6(4), 27.
Alek, A., Marzuki, A. G., Farkhan, M., & Deni, R. (2020). Self-Assessment in Exploring EFL Students’ Speaking Skill. Al-Ta lim Journal, 27(2), 208–214.
Alimuddin, N. A. A. (2020). Exploring Students’self-Efficacy in Speaking Performance in Indonesian EFL Classroom. UNIVERSITAS NEGERI MAKASSAR.
Arifin, W. L. (2017). Psychological problems and challenge in EFL speaking classroom. Register Journal, 10(1), 29–47.
Arifuddin, A. (2018). Neuropsikolinguistik. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Armstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Ascd.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Irvine, C. K. S., & Walker, D. (2018). Introduction to research in education. Cengage Learning.
As’ad, M. (2019). Exploring Students’ EFL Learning through Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences Theory. UNIVERSITAS NEGERI MAKASSAR.
Asakereh, A., & Dehghannezhad, M. (2015). Student satisfaction with EFL speaking classes: Relating speaking self-efficacy and skills achievement. Issues in Educational Research, 25(4), 345–363.
Aydoğan, H., & Akbarov, A. A. (2014). The four basic language skills, whole language & intergrated skill approach in mainstream university classrooms in
Turkey. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(9), 672.
Bai, B., & Wang, J. (2020). The role of growth mindset, self-efficacy and intrinsic value in self-regulated learning and English language learning achievements.
Language teaching research, 1362168820933190.
Brown, H. D. (2010). Language Assessment, Principles and Classroom Practices, Second Edition. New York: Pearson.
Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2015). Teaching principles. P. Ed Australia.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Davoudi, M., & Chavosh, M. (2016). The Relationship between Multiple Intelligences and Listening Self-Efficacy among Iranian EFL Learners. English Language Teaching, 9(6), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n6p199 Derakhshan, A., Khalili, A. N., & Beheshti, F. (2016). Developing EFL learner’s
speaking ability, accuracy and fluency. English Language and Literature Studies, 6(2), 177–186.
Djuwita, W., & Jamaris, M. (2017). Improving Teachers’ Effectiveness s in developing 5-6 Years Old Children’s Multiple Intelligences based on Holistic Integrative Instructional Approach. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current Research, 2(12), 500–505.
Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of educational research, 83(1), 70–120.
Fariseh, L. (2020). The Effect of Linguistic Intelligence to Students’ Speaking Achievement at MA Mambaul Ma’arif Montor. INSTITUT AGAMA ISLAM NEGERI MADURA.
Fatimah, S. (2019). The Effect of Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence and Emotional Intelligence on Academic Achievement of Indonesian EFL Learners.
International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(12), 350–365.
Fernández-Martínez, F., Zablotskaya, K., & Minker, W. (2012). Text categorization methods for automatic estimation of verbal intelligence. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(10), 9807–9820.
Gai, F., & Dong, Y. (2010). A Study on College Students’ Anxiety to Spoken English. Canadian Social Science, 6(2), 95–101.
Gardner, H. (2003). Multiple intelligences after twenty years. American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois, 21, 1–15.
Gardner, H. E. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.
Hachette Uk.
Ghufron, M. A. (2017). Language learning strategies used by EFL fluent speakers: A case in Indonesian context. IJET (Indonesian Journal of English Teaching), 6(2), 184–202.
Halil, N. I. (2017). The actualization of literary learning model based on verbal- linguistic intelligence. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 5(4), 42–48.
Halimah, A., Ahmad, A., & Besse, R. (2018). Pengaruh Kecerdasan Verbal Linguistik Terhadap Hasil Belajar Pada Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Indonesia.
AULADUNA: Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Islam, 5(2), 162–169.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. London/New York, 401–405.
Hodges, C. B. (2008). Self‐efficacy in the context of online learning environments:
A review of the literature and directions for research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(3‐4), 7–25.
Hou, Y.-A. (2017). Revisit Multiple Intelligences with the Roles of Motivation, Strategy, and Anxiety in Foreign Language Learning—A Case Study in Taiwan. OALib, 04(11), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1104057
Hunt, E. (2010). Human intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, P. C. (2019). Introduction to artificial intelligence. Courier Dover Publications.
Joët, G., Usher, E. L., & Bressoux, P. (2011). Sources of self-efficacy: An investigation of elementary school students in France. Journal of educational psychology, 103(3), 649.
Juhana. (2012). Psychological factors that hinder students from speaking in English class (A case study in a senior high school in South Tangerang, Banten,
Indonesia). Journal of Education and Practice, 3(12), 100–110.
Kadir. (2018). Statistika Terapan (3rd ed.). Raja Grafindo Persada.
Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching speaking: Activities to promote speaking in a second language. The internet TESL journal, 12(11), 1–6.
Khatib, F. M. M., & Maarof, N. (2015). Self-efficacy perception of oral communication ability among English as a Second Language (ESL) Technical Students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204, 98–104.
Leong, L. M., & Ahmadi, S. M. (2017). An Analysis of Factors Influencing Learners’ English-Speaking Skill.
Lopez, S. J., Pedrotti, J. T., & Snyder, C. R. (2018). Positive psychology: The scientific and practical explorations of human strengths. Sage publications.
Lunenberg, M., Dengerink, J., & Korthagen, F. (2014). The professional teacher educator: Roles, behaviour, and professional development of teacher educators. Springer Science & Business Media.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Self-efficacy in the workplace: Implications for motivation and performance. International journal of management, business, and administration, 14(1), 1–6.
Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking Cambridge University Press. Módulo Psicopedagogía. México: CECTE–ILCE.
Madyawati, L., Zubadi, H., & Yudi, D. (2015). Multiple Intelligence Games Model Untuk Mengasah Kecerdasan Anak Di Daerah Rawan Bencana Jawa Tengah.
PROSIDING SEMINAR NASIONAL & INTERNASIONAL.
Maisyarah, H. (2016). The Correlation Between Students’ Verbal Linguistic Intelligence and Their Reading Achievement. Thesis.
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.
McKenzie, W. (2005). Multiple intelligences and instructional technology. ISTE (Interntl Soc Tech Educ.
Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2007). Self‐efficacy of college intermediate French students: Relation to achievement and motivation. Language learning, 57(3), 417–442.
Mohammed, A. (2021). Students’ Speaking Proficiency and Self-efficacy Theory.
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 8(2), 318–325.
https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.82.9660
Muthusami, M., & Jayaraman, K. (2013). Relationship Between Emotional Intelligence And Achievement Of The Teacher Trainees. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development, 2(10).
Namaziandost, E., Saray, A. A., & Esfahani, F. R. (2018). The effect of writing practice on improving speaking skill among pre-intermediate EFL learners.
Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(12), 1690–1697.
Ningrum, R. P., Husna, L., & Tanjung, F. (2017). The Correlation Between Self Confidence and Speaking Ability of The Third Year Students of English Department at Bunghatta University. Abstract of Undergraduate, Faculty of Education, Bung Hatta University, 6(1).
Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: An overview.
Parsa, M., Jahandar, S., & Khodabandehlou, M. (2013). The effect of verbal intelligence on knowledge of lexicon. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 2(2), 114–121.
Pritchard, A. (2017). Ways of learning: Learning theories for the classroom.
Routledge.
Putri, H., Fahriany, F., & Jalil, N. (2020). The Influence of Think-Pair-Share in Enhancing Students’ Speaking Ability. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 67–72.
Rachmawati, Y. (2013). Language learning strategies used by learners in learning speaking. Journal of English and Education, 1(2), 124–131.
Rahimi, M., Mirzaei, A., & Heidari, N. (2012). How do successful EFL readers bridge between multiple intelligences and reading strategies. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(9), 1134–1142.
Raoofi, S., Tan, B. H., & Chan, S. H. (2012). Self-Efficacy in Second/Foreign Language Learning Contexts. English Language Teaching, 5(11), 60–73.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge university press.
Rista, L. (2018). The Influence of Personality Traits and Self-Confidence on Students’ Speaking Ability at Islamic Senior High School Al-Qasimiyah Sorek Satu Pelalawan. Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau.
Saibani, B., & Simin, S. (2014). The relationship between multiple intelligences and speaking skill among intermediate EFL learners in Bandar Abbas Azad University in Iran. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 4(2), 43–56.
Saifuddin, A. (2020). Penyusunan skala psikologi. Prenada Media.
Sattler, J. M. (2008). Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations. JM Sattler San Diego, CA.
Sayuri, S. (2016). English speaking problems of EFL learners of Mulawarman University. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 1(1), 47–61.
Shih, H.-J., & Chang, S. (2018). Relations among L2 learning motivation, language learning anxiety, self-efficacy and family influence: A structual equation model. English Language Teaching, 11(11), 148–160.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n11p148
Skourdi, S., & Rahimi, A. (2010). The relationship of emotional intelligence and linguistic intelligence in acquiring vocabulary. California Linguistic Notes, 35(1), 1–24.
Slavin, R. E. (2019). Educational psychology: Theory and practice.
Stajkovic, A. D., Bandura, A., Locke, E. A., Lee, D., & Sergent, K. (2018). Test of three conceptual models of influence of the big five personality traits and self- efficacy on academic performance: A meta-analytic path-analysis. Personality and individual differences, 120, 238–245.
Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitaif dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Sujiono, Y. N., & Sujiono, B. (2010). Bermain Kreatif Berbasis Kecerdasan Jamak, Jakarta: PT. Indeks.
Taherdoost, H. (2017). Determining sample size; how to calculate survey sample size. International Journal of Economics and Management Systems, 2.
Thornbury, S. (2012). Speaking instruction. The Cambridge guide to pedagogy and practice in second language teaching, 198–206.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of self- efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and teacher Education, 23(6), 944–956.
Tufford, L., Katz, E., Etherington, C., & Gauthier, L. (2021). Simulation as Vicarious Learning in the BSW Classroom. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 41(3), 257–274.
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and future directions. Review of educational research, 78(4), 751–796.
Wilde, N., & Hsu, A. (2019). The influence of general self-efficacy on the interpretation of vicarious experience information within online learning.
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–20.
Zarei, A. A., & Sepehri, S. (2018). Speaking Self Efficacy: Through Audio-journals.
Scholars’ Press.
Zulkosky, K. (2009). Self‐efficacy: a concept analysis. Nursing forum, 44(2), 93–
102.
APPENDICES Appendix 1
Simple Random Sampling Results Using SPSS 26
Appendix 2
Instrument of the Research
Speaking Skills Self-Efficacy Belief Questionnaire
Name : Class :
SD = Strongly disagree; D = Disagree; N =Neutral; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence
Speaking Performance Test
Name : Class :
Appendix 2
Result of Instrument
The Score of Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence Test (X1)
Partcipant Score Participant Score
1 68.00 30 64.00
2 84.00 31 60.00
3 96.00 32 80.00
4 72.00 33 88.00
5 76.00 34 84.00
6 84.00 35 96.00
7 80.00 36 84.00
8 60.00 37 88.00
9 72.00 38 76.00
10 88.00 39 84.00
11 96.00 40 72.00
12 72.00 41 80.00
13 76.00 42 64.00
14 64.00 43 72.00
15 80.00 44 72.00
16 92.00 45 96.00
17 80.00 46 72.00
18 60.00 47 72.00
19 84.00 48 76.00
20 60.00 49 76.00
21 68.00 50 60.00
22 92.00 51 64.00
23 64.00 52 96.00
24 92.00 53 84.00
25 92.00 54 68.00
26 80.00 55 96.00
27 72.00 56 96.00
28 80.00 57 92.00
29 76.00 58 92.00
Result of Instrument
The Score Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (X2)
Partcipant Score Participant Score
1 73.00 30 82.00
2 86.00 31 76.00
3 89.00 32 82.00
4 78.00 33 89.00
5 77.00 34 84.00
6 79.00 35 93.00
7 88.00 36 83.00
8 88.00 37 89.00
9 86.00 38 82.00
10 81.00 39 85.00
11 89.00 40 84.00
12 88.00 41 90.00
13 81.00 42 72.00
14 82.00 43 88.00
15 74.00 44 76.00
16 85.00 45 92.00
17 74.00 46 80.00
18 74.00 47 79.00
19 82.00 48 83.00
20 82.00 49 78.00
21 76.00 50 79.00
22 89.00 51 80.00
23 82.00 52 94.00
24 75.00 53 89.00
25 84.00 54 74.00
26 83.00 55 89.00
27 73.00 56 82.00
28 90.00 57 91.00
29 79.00 58 84.00
Result of Instrument
The Score of Speaking Ability Test (Y)
Partcipant Score Participant Score
1 60.00 30 70.00
2 80.00 31 70.00
3 95.00 32 75.00
4 60.00 33 90.00
5 70.00 34 65.00
6 80.00 35 95.00
7 75.00 36 85.00
8 70.00 37 85.00
9 60.00 38 80.00
10 85.00 39 85.00
11 75.00 40 80.00
12 65.00 41 80.00
13 80.00 42 75.00
14 80.00 43 65.00
15 75.00 44 90.00
16 95.00 45 90.00
17 75.00 46 65.00
18 70.00 47 60.00
19 80.00 48 80.00
20 70.00 49 80.00
21 60.00 50 70.00
22 90.00 51 75.00
23 60.00 52 90.00
24 75.00 53 85.00
25 90.00 54 60.00
26 95.00 55 90.00
27 60.00 56 95.00
28 75.00 57 95.00
29 80.00 58 95.00
Appendix 3
Transcript of Video Recording Students Speaking Ability Test Some transcripts of the recorded student speaking test
P22 Assalamu’alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh, Hello everyone! I am Yana Amalia Allow me to introduce my group firstly. This group consists of me Yana Amalia, Zalva Syah Fitri and Melinda Hestiana.
Hmm.. How do you think about the simple explanation in the introduction of the video? Yes, definetly! If we talk about tourism, it is always interesting to discuss right? And in this video, we will describe about three beaches that you mus visit in Anyer, Banten. First is Mercusuar beach or in English we can call as lighthouse beach.
Mercusuar beach is wonderful beach that you must visit in Anyer, Banten. The beach is located at the village of Cikoneng, spesifically at Bojong Village, on Bandulu street in Anyer Banten. As the name implies, the main characteristic of this beach is because of the lighthouse. If you visit the beach, you will not only enjoy the view of the beach. Moreover, you will enjoy three beauties at once wow! They are the view of the beach, the old building lighthouse and the great history.
Wonderful! Hmm.. as Indonesian people, have you ever heard about Anyer-Panarukan history? Yes, definetly! The lighthouse near the beach has a connection with the history. That is the witness of the great history.
The lighthouse was buil in 1885 during the time of Wilem III. The lighthouse is a replacement for the tower that was previously destroyed in 1883 because Krakatau mountains eruption and at that time, the lighthouse server to guide ships that sail at night. The height of the lighthouse is about 75 meters and consist of 18 floors. On the top of the floor, there is a lamp with a semi-spherical cover that can rotate 360 degress. Morevover, on the top of the floor, we can see a blend of wonderful scenery between sky and sea. Besides of that, we can see Krakatau Mountain that has great history more clearly on the floor. In
conclusion, Mercusuar beach or lighthouse beach in Anyer Banten is not only has wonferful view but also it has great history as the witness of Indonesian history
P22
P2 In Banten, there is an exotic beach knows as Karang Bolong Beach. If you are visiting the city of Banten, in will be amazing to enjoy the beauty of Karang Bolong beach. Oh yeah guys, did you know that the name Karang Bolong is taken from a fairly large rock on the edge of this beach? Where the center is hollow or perforated. This perforated coral is believed to be the entrance to the magical palace on the coast of Banten.
During the reign of the Sultanate of Banten, Karang Bolong Beach was formerly knows as Karang Suraga Beach. Before becoming a popular destination as it is now, Karang Bolong Beach was a place to find, train, and put back the knowledge of Kanuragan. Thousands of years ago, Karang Bolong Beach was a place to get a high level of science called the science of Batara Karang. Krang Bolong Beach is like a magnet that attracts the attention of many tourist, especially nautical tourist. And the magnet is the cliff that has a hole in the middle. This is what makes Karang Bolong beach so strong and makes anyone curious. The hole in the reef has a diameter of about 50 meters. If you look at the coral with holes like farming the view of the ocean. This beach has a view that is so
charming and makes anyone fascinated. Especially if the weather is good and there is no fogm you can see Anak Krakatau from a distance.
P2
P33 Sambolo beach is set on Banten’s most beautiful beach. This beach is famous because it has scenery like most beaches in Bali. Sambolo beach is located in Serang, Banten, precisely on Jalan Raya Anyer, Bandulu.
And it is probably the most sought out getaway for many Jakartans because it is just a mere 100 km or around a two-hour drive from the nation’s capital. Moreover, the main attraction of Sambolo beach lies in its clean environment and there are no coral reefs at all. Therefore, its if family-friendly and safe for children to play around. This beach is divided into two beaches with different locations. Sambolo Satu and Sambolo Dua. The difference between the two Sambolo is the facilities.
Sambolo Satu has a long pier bridge jutting into the sea. Sambolo Dua is famous for the existence of inns and villas that look like temples in Bali.
Sambolo Anyer Beach combines both serenity and beauty. The water is moderate, so it is possible to perform some water sports in it. There are several fun water sports activities such as snorkeling, banana boat, jet skiing, and much more. At the seaside, you can find several food stands.
Furthermore, many sellers also sell Tradinitional Banten foods such as sate bandeng, pecak bandeng, opak, emping, and many more. I bet you
will regret if you don’t have a taste of that traditional food! On the other hand, there are also so many booths that sell Banten’s typical souvenirs such as batik, various jewelry crafts from shells, and there are also some sellers that sell the handirafts from the Baduy tribe. As a piece of addinitional information, the Baduy tribe is an indigenous Bantenese community living in the province of Banten, near Rangkasbitung.
P33
P12 The Bukit Ranca Hideung tourist park in Cijambu Village, Ciminyak Village, Muncang District is a new tourist attraction in Lebak, Banten.
Various new tourist objects continue to emerge in Lebak Regency. One of them is Ranca Hideung Hill. This tourist destination was initiated by Muhamad Rodho, a resident of Lebak Regency who is currently studying at the Department of Development Accounting, University of Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta. To achieve this, Ridho is assisted by his father, Rosyid, who currently serves as the Head of Muncang District.
Ridho's desire to build this tourist park is also a response to Lebak Regent Iti Octavia Jayabaya's invitation for young people in Lebak to contribute to the development of various sectors, including tourism.
Ranca Hideung is a place of recreation with natural tourist spots on a
hill. This tourist attraction is located in the contours of a hilly area.
Suitable for healing tours with family, because the area is quite cool.
Here it is very beautiful because the hills are surrounded by green hills and rice fields with fresh air. Ranca Hideung Hill has an area of about 2 hectares. The location is very strategic besides being on a hill, it is also close to the highway, or next to the Al-Kautsar Muncang Foundation, to be precise in Cijambu Village, Ciminyak Village, Muncang District.
Various facilities will be presented to pamper visitors, such as prayer rooms, cafes, parks for children, natural parks and waterfalls for photo spots. In addition, there are adult swimming pools and children's pools complete with rinse rooms. Other rides include therapeutic fish ponds, triangular gazebos, ATV arenas, live music. Visiting schedule is from 08.00-16.00 WIB. The existence of this tourist spot can be a solution for local residents to travel in a close location so as to save costs with a distance that is not too far away. Local residents can also be helped economically by selling in this place
Appendix 4 SPSS Analysis
Descriptive Statistics Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence, Self-Efficacy, and Speaking Ability
Statistics
Verbal_Linguisti
c_Intelligence Self_Efficacy Speaking_Ability
N Valid 58 58 58
Missing 0 0 0
Verbal_Linguistic_Intelligence
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid 60.00 5 8.6 8.6 8.6
64.00 5 8.6 8.6 17.2
68.00 3 5.2 5.2 22.4
72.00 9 15.5 15.5 37.9
76.00 6 10.3 10.3 48.3
80.00 7 12.1 12.1 60.3
84.00 7 12.1 12.1 72.4
88.00 3 5.2 5.2 77.6
92.00 6 10.3 10.3 87.9
96.00 7 12.1 12.1 100.0
Total 58 100.0 100.0
Self_Efficacy
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid 72.00 1 1.7 1.7 1.7
73.00 2 3.4 3.4 5.2
74.00 4 6.9 6.9 12.1