3.4 Theoretical framework
3.4.1 Social Cognitive Theory
3.4.1.5 Self-efficacy
Self-reflective capability: Self-reflective capability refers to the ability of an individual to
‘meditate’ on, or analyse, one’s own characteristics and thought processes and make adjustments where necessary.
One important concept related to self-reflective capability, and which has become a central focus point in Bandura’s research because of its key role as a determinant of self-regulation, is ‘self-efficacy’. Given the importance of this construct for this study, it is discussed in detail in the following section.
their sense of capability will be when confronted with the same or a similar task in future.
Conversely, if a person regularly fails at a task, they will likely develop a weakened sense of self-efficacy and are more likely to doubt their own capabilities when confronted with a similar challenge in future (Koul and Rubba, 1999, Kurbanoglu, 2003).
2. Social Models: According to Bandura: “Seeing people similar to oneself succeed by sustained effort raises observers' beliefs that they too possess the capabilities to master comparable activities required to succeed” (Bandura, 1994). The importance of observer- model similarity is a recurring theme in Bandura’s SCT. Bandura drives this point home by noting as follows: “The impact of modeling on perceived self-efficacy is strongly influenced by perceived similarity to the models. The greater the assumed similarity the more persuasive are the models' successes and failures. If people see the models as very different from themselves their perceived self-efficacy is not much influenced by the models' behaviour and the results it produces. Modeling influences do more than provide a social standard against which to judge one's own capabilities. People seek proficient models that possess the competencies to which they aspire. Through their behaviour and expressed ways of thinking, competent models transmit knowledge and teach observers effective skills and strategies for managing environmental demands. Acquisition of better means raises perceived self- efficacy” (Bandura, 1994, Koul and Rubba, 1999, Kurbanoglu, 2003).
3. Social Persuasion: Bandura also asserted that people could be persuaded to belief that they have the skills and capabilities to succeed, or conversely, persuaded that they do not have the capabilities to succeed. As Bandura puts it, “people who have been persuaded that they lack capabilities tend to avoid challenging activities that cultivate potentialities and give up quickly in the face of difficulties. By constricting activities and undermining motivation, disbelief in one's capabilities creates its own behavioural validation” (Bandura, 1994, Koul and Rubba, 1999, Kurbanoglu, 2003).
4. Psychological Responses: Bandura expresses the thought that psychological factors such as mood, emotional states and stress levels can also influence an individual’s sense of self- efficacy (Bandura, 1994, Koul and Rubba, 1999, Kurbanoglu, 2003).
Teachers and self-efficacy
When discussing the factors (‘agencies’) that influence the development of self-efficacy over an individual’s life-span, Bandura notes the impact of social structures, such as schools, and of models that operate within these structures, such as teachers. Acknowledging the importance of an individual’s experiences at school in the development of a positive (or negative) sense of self-
efficacy, Bandura points out that ‘during the crucial formative period of children's lives, the school functions as the primary setting for the cultivation and social validation of cognitive competencies”
(Bandura, 1994). Moreover, Bandura states that ‘many social factors, apart from the formal instruction, such as peer modeling of cognitive skills, social comparison with the performances of other students’ contribute to the development of learners’ sense of intellectual efficacy (Ashton and Webb, 1986, Bandura, 1994, Koul and Rubba, 1999, Tamir and Mauss, 2011).
One very important influence in the development of a learner’s sense of self-efficacy is the teacher.
Bandura focuses on the role of teacher as agent in self-efficacy development as follows: “The task of creating learning environments conducive to development of cognitive skills rests heavily on the talents and self-efficacy of teachers. Those who are have a high sense of efficacy about their teaching capabilities can motivate their students and enhance their cognitive development. Teachers who have a low sense of instructional efficacy favor a custodial orientation that relies heavily on negative sanctions to get students to study” (Bandura, 1994, King et al., 2001, Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2001, Angle and Moseley, 2009, Moseley and Taylor, 2011)
Collective self-efficacy
‘Collective self-efficacy’ is a term Bandura uses to refer to a group's ‘shared belief in its conjoint capabilities to attain their goals and accomplish desired tasks’ (Bandura, 1986, 1994, 2000). According to Bandura, perceptions of collective efficacy may be a predictor of group performance, and it is expected that a community's collective efficacy will influence the group's dialogue, goal setting, collective effort and especially their persistence when barriers arise.
The concept of a sense of ‘collective efficacy’ (i.e. a group rather than an individual having a sense of the capability of the group as a whole) is alluded to by Bandura in describing the impact of the social context in which the teachers and learners operate: “Teachers operate collectively within an interactive social system rather than as isolates. The belief systems of staffs create school cultures that can have vitalising or demoralising effects on how well schools function as a social system.
Schools in which the staff collectively judge themselves as powerless to get students to achieve academic success convey a group sense of academic futility that can pervade the entire life of the school. Schools in which staff members collectively judge themselves capable of promoting academic success imbue their schools with a positive atmosphere for development that promotes academic attainments regardless of whether they serve predominantly advantaged or disadvantaged students”
(Bandura, 1994). This principle would apply by extension for the broader social milieu both teachers and learners are a part of. If the pervasive social environment were to condition a certain race, for
example, to believe they were less capable than other races, it would create a sense of weakened self- efficacy, not only for individuals of that race, but also for the collective (i.e. all people who belong to that race, including teachers and learners) (Bandura, 1995, Oettingen, 1995, Tschannen-Moran and Barr, 2004).