Writing Self-efficacy of Thai EFL Students


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Writing Self-efficacy of Thai EFL Students

  1. 1. Understanding Writing Bangladeshi women Self-Efficacy Perceived Nutritional Status, Perceived Dietary Self-Efficacy and Dietary Behavior among pregnant of Thai EFL students Rapassak Hetthong Assoc. Prof. Adisa Teo, Ph.D. Teaching English as an International Language, Faculty of Liberal Arts
  2. 2. Rationale of the study• Writing is perceived among EFL learners as a demanding and difficult language skills (Lavelle, 2006).• Student writers’ beliefs about their writing ability (writing self-efficacy) influence theirwriting performance (Latif, 2007).
  3. 3. Rationale of the study (2)• Self-efficacy is claimed to be the mostconsistent and reliable predictor ofstudent’s task performance (Bandura1986; Bandura, 1997; Zimmerman, 2000).
  4. 4. Self-efficacy…?Self-efficacy is an individuals confidencein his/her ability to successfully performa particular task (Bandura 1977).
  5. 5. Model of Reciprocal DeterminismIn social cognitive learning theory, there are three factors whichall influence and are influenced by each other (Bandura, 1977):1. Personal factors:(beliefs and attitudes that affectlearning, especially in responseto environmental stimuli.)2. Behavioral factors:(responses one makes in a givensituation)3. Environmental factors:(the role of stimuli whichsurround the person) Self-efficacy
  6. 6. What does self-efficacy do? Self-efficacy • Mastery Goals • Commitment Self-evaluation • Effort • Persistence • Resilience Success
  7. 7. Rationale of the study (3)• Concept of self-efficacy has beenexplored and confirmed in the field ofSLA worldwide, yet only few studieshave been done in Thailand.• Writing is the language skill that needsa new paradigm of exploration in Thairesearch context.
  8. 8. Purpose of the Study1. To investigate sources of writing self-efficacyamong the students of with different levels of writingperformance.2. To explore how the sources of writing self-efficacyimpact students as writers.3. To investigate the relationship between students’writing self-efficacy and their writing performance.4. To validate a questionnaire for sources of writingself-efficacy in Thai, a new instrument for examiningstudents’ sources of writing self-efficacy.
  9. 9. Research Questions RQ 1: What are the sources of writing self-efficacy of the students? Is there difference insources of writing self-efficacy among studentswith different levels of writing performance? RQ 2: In what way do the sources of writingself-efficacy impact students as writers?
  10. 10. Research Questions RQ 3: Is there a relationship between the students’writing self-efficacy and writing performance? Basedon the score of the seven aspects in the students’writing performance, are there any aspectsincongruent with their self-rated writing self-efficacy? RQ 4: To what extent is the questionnaire forsources of writing self-efficacy a valid and reliableinstrument for identifying sources of writing self-efficacy?
  11. 11. Scope and Limitations1. This study is limited to an investigation of writingself-efficacy of EFL students in Thai context. Findings ofthis study may or may not be applicable to learners ofEnglish in other contexts.2. The questionnaire used for collecting data on writingself-efficacy is a quantitative instrument. The data canbe subjected to the respondents’ bias or experience injudging themselves in a self-rating questionnaire.
  12. 12. Significance of the Study1. This study functions as an additionalinvestigations for the self-efficacy theory in thearea of second language education.2. English language educators in Thailand canuse the empirical data from this study asreference to consider applying thequestionnaire for writing self-efficacy as one oftheir motivational treatments.
  13. 13. Definition of Terms1. Writing self-efficacy includes learners’ beliefs abouttheir judgments of their ability to write different writingtasks and of their possession of various writing skills(Pajares, 2003).2. Sources of Self-efficacy (Bandura,1977, 1997) :1) Mastery experience2) Vicarious experience3) Social persuasions4) Emotional state
  14. 14. Sources of self-efficacy 1. Mastery experience 2. Vicarious experience Self-efficacy 3. Social persuasions 4. Emotional states
  15. 15. Definition of Terms3. Writing Performance: the students’ score in aparagraph writing test.4. Thai EFL students: third-year English majors atPrince of Songkla University, Hat Yai campus in 2013.All of them have taken academic writing courses, andhave previous exposures to English writing coursesand paragraph writings.
  16. 16. Conceptual Framework Sources of Writing Writing Writing Self-efficacy Self-efficacy Performance
  17. 17. Research Methodology1. Subjects :54 students third-year English majors atPrince of Songkla University, Hai Yai Campus in 2013.(Purposive sampling technique)2. Design:• A cross-sectional design.• A mixed approach between quantitative andqualitative methods(questionnaires and a focus group discussion)
  18. 18. Instruments1. Questionnaire for sources of writing self-efficacy-20 items, 6-points likert scale representing the extent towhich the statement is true of themselves:
  19. 19. InstrumentsExample item and the scale in English and ThaiA . I admire people who are good writers. (item 6) ฉันชื่นชอบคนที่เขียนภาษาอังกฤษเกง0 = never true of me / ไมเปนจริงเลย1 = rarely true of me /มักจะไมเปนจริง2 = sometimes true of me/เปนจริงนาน ๆ ครั้ง3 = often true of me/เปนจริง บอย ๆ4 = usually true of me/มักจะเปนจริง5 = always true of me/เปนจริงเสมอ
  20. 20. Instruments2. Paragraph writing test and the scoring criteria• Paragraph writing test- A single argumentative paragraph of150 words (with a clear instruction and a writing prompt)• 7 Scoring criteria 1. Content of your answer 2. Organization of your ideas 3. Cohesion 4. Vocabulary 5. Grammar 6. Punctuation 7. Spelling
  21. 21. Instruments3. Focus group discussion protocol and the consent form• Focus group discussion protocol 3 questions for each source of writing self-efficacy except social persuasions which has 4 questions.• Consent Form To give an overview and the purpose of the discussion To make the respondents feel comfortable to share their experiences.
  22. 22. Instruments4. Questionnaire for writing self-efficacy- Based on 7 writing aspects(the 7 scoring criteria of the paragraph writing test) 1. Content of your answer (2 questions) 2. Organization of your ideas (2 questions) 3. Cohesion (2 questions) 4. Vocabulary (2 questions) 5. Grammar (2 questions) 6. Punctuation (1 question) 7. Spelling (1 question)- Scale is from 0 to 100- Rate their judgment about their ability to write aparagraph
  23. 23. Procedures1. Validation of the Questionnaire for sources ofwriting self-efficacy1.1. Construct Validity1.2. Validity of Thai Translation1.3. Reliability (after pilot)2. Pilot Study60 students from Walailak University50 students from Prince of Songkla University, Pattani Campus40 students from Taksin University (the paragraph writing testis piloted with this group)
  24. 24. Sequence of Administration 1. Paragraph writing test ( 1 hour) •Break (10 minutes) 2. Questionnaire of sources of writing self-efficacy (15 minutes) 3. Questionnaire of writing self-efficacy (10 minutes)
  25. 25. Data analysisRQ1: What are the sources of writing self-efficacy of the students? Isthere difference in sources of writing self-efficacy among students withdifferent levels of writing performance? Group High Medium LowSources Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.1. Mastery ? ? ? ? ? ?experience2. Vicarious ? ? ? ? ? ?experience3. Social ? ? ? ? ? ?persuasion4. Emotional ? ? ? ? ? ?State
  26. 26. Data analysisRQ2: In what way do the sources of writing self-efficacyimpact students as writers? Coding the data Analysis Synthesis
  27. 27. Data analysisRQ2: Is there a relationship between the students’ writing self-efficacyand writing performance?Based on the score of the seven aspects in the students’ writingperformance, are there any aspects incongruent with their self-ratedwriting self-efficacy?