First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over Time

This research explored whether academic self-efficacy calibration (the match between self-efficacy beliefs and academic outcomes) in first-year psychology students (n=197) differed as a function of task type (written assignment/multiple-choice exam), domain specificity (task level/subject level), ov...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kate Talsma, Kimberley Norris, Benjamin Schüz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Queensland University of Technology 2020-10-01
Series:Student Success
Subjects:
Online Access:https://studentsuccessjournal.org/article/view/1677
id doaj-d5f63d132ce2445f932359165e79aa42
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d5f63d132ce2445f932359165e79aa422020-11-25T03:40:45ZengQueensland University of TechnologyStudent Success2205-07952020-10-0111210912110.5204/ssj.16771677First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over TimeKate Talsma0Kimberley Norris1Benjamin Schüz2University of TasmaniaUniversity of TasmaniaUniversity of BremenThis research explored whether academic self-efficacy calibration (the match between self-efficacy beliefs and academic outcomes) in first-year psychology students (n=197) differed as a function of task type (written assignment/multiple-choice exam), domain specificity (task level/subject level), over time (mid-semester/end of semester) and according to student achievement level (high achievers/low achievers). Lower-achieving students were overconfident across both the written assignment and the exam, while higher-achieving students were accurately calibrated on both tasks. The subject-level calibration of lower-achieving students improved between mid-semester and the end of semester (though students remained overconfident). Higher-achieving students’ subject-level calibration remained stable over the semester, and they were about half as overconfident as the lower-achieving students. Both groups of students were more overconfident at subject-level than at task-level overall. On the whole, overconfidence was prevalent, especially for low achievers, and at subject level. Findings suggest that a one-size-fits-all approach to self-efficacy is unlikely to be beneficial for all learners.https://studentsuccessjournal.org/article/view/1677self-efficacystudent experienceacademic performancefirst-year students
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kate Talsma
Kimberley Norris
Benjamin Schüz
spellingShingle Kate Talsma
Kimberley Norris
Benjamin Schüz
First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over Time
Student Success
self-efficacy
student experience
academic performance
first-year students
author_facet Kate Talsma
Kimberley Norris
Benjamin Schüz
author_sort Kate Talsma
title First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over Time
title_short First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over Time
title_full First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over Time
title_fullStr First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over Time
title_full_unstemmed First-Year Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy Calibration: Differences by Task Type, Domain Specificity, Student Ability, and Over Time
title_sort first-year students’ academic self-efficacy calibration: differences by task type, domain specificity, student ability, and over time
publisher Queensland University of Technology
series Student Success
issn 2205-0795
publishDate 2020-10-01
description This research explored whether academic self-efficacy calibration (the match between self-efficacy beliefs and academic outcomes) in first-year psychology students (n=197) differed as a function of task type (written assignment/multiple-choice exam), domain specificity (task level/subject level), over time (mid-semester/end of semester) and according to student achievement level (high achievers/low achievers). Lower-achieving students were overconfident across both the written assignment and the exam, while higher-achieving students were accurately calibrated on both tasks. The subject-level calibration of lower-achieving students improved between mid-semester and the end of semester (though students remained overconfident). Higher-achieving students’ subject-level calibration remained stable over the semester, and they were about half as overconfident as the lower-achieving students. Both groups of students were more overconfident at subject-level than at task-level overall. On the whole, overconfidence was prevalent, especially for low achievers, and at subject level. Findings suggest that a one-size-fits-all approach to self-efficacy is unlikely to be beneficial for all learners.
topic self-efficacy
student experience
academic performance
first-year students
url https://studentsuccessjournal.org/article/view/1677
work_keys_str_mv AT katetalsma firstyearstudentsacademicselfefficacycalibrationdifferencesbytasktypedomainspecificitystudentabilityandovertime
AT kimberleynorris firstyearstudentsacademicselfefficacycalibrationdifferencesbytasktypedomainspecificitystudentabilityandovertime
AT benjaminschuz firstyearstudentsacademicselfefficacycalibrationdifferencesbytasktypedomainspecificitystudentabilityandovertime
_version_ 1724533029827772416