Blogging self-efficacy in a natural learning environment within

higher educationClay Davis

Vivian H. Wright, Ph.D.Gordon Coleman, Ph.D.University of AlabamaTuscaloosa, Alabama

What is this paper about?

• Introduction to the research• Statement of the problem• Purpose of the study• Significance of the study• Research Hypotheses• Theoretical/Operational terms• Assumptions• Limitations

Introduction to the research

• Self-Efficacy – a belief in one’s competency

• Blogging – single author post, many author commented online discussions

• Natural Learning Environment – accidental/collaborative environment

What’s the problem?

• People are scared of technology!

Purpose of the study

• To gain a better understanding of how (if at all) the learning environment affects self-efficacy towards blogging.

Significance of study

• Natural Learning environment =

• Increase in self-efficacy toward blogging =

• Greater chance for learners to overcome fear of blogging =

• Greater chance for learners to interactively learn through blogging =

• Greater student success

Research Hypothesis

mean post-test scores of self-efficacy toward

blogging would increase from that of the pre-

test.

Terms

• Theoretical– Self efficacy = inner belief of competency– Natural learning environment =

collaborative/accidental learning

• Operational– Self-efficacy = survey instrument asking

agreement in “I believe I can…” statements– Natural learning environment = teacher

provides framework and boundaries for class, and classmates teach each other

Assumptions

• The class is normally distributed

• “Response sets” are not being exhibited– Social desirability– Aquiescence– Deviance

• The sample is representative of the population

Limitations

• Small population/sample size• I work with the professor that taught the

class• No observational/qualitative data was

collected• No prior measures exist for self-efficacy

towards blogging• Self-efficacy is self-report (not easily

measured)

Literature Review (condensed)

• Articles on Self-efficacy

• Articles on Blogging

• Articles on Learning Environments

Self-efficacy

• Bandura– Inner belief of competency in an area– observed outcomes – how I view others

competency and how I compare with them– prior experiences – not related– outcome predictions – could the bad outweigh

the good?– and socialization – how well could we do

together?

Articles on Blogging

• Oravec / Dearstyne– one author, with many comments– Cheap– Easy to setup & use– Multiple blogs can be read from one interface– Anytime online = blogs can be used

Articles on Learning Environments

• Directed learning Cohen & Sheer,Hess et al– Teacher centered– Student is blank slate to be filled by teacher

• Natural learningMcCombs & Whistler, & Iran-Nejad– Student centered– Learning is a journey of discovery that has no

ending

Methodology

• Sample

• Research Design

• Data Collection Procedures

• Instrumentation

• Data Analysis

Sample

• Total Active SLIS population = 100 students

• Enrollement for LS 500 = 49

• Participation in study = 26(mortality, incomplete surveys, non-participation)

Research Design

• One group pre-test post-test design

• Measurement (O) self-efficacy instrument

• Treatment (X) class with nat. learn. Env. + blogging

• Measurement (O) self-efficacy instrument

Data Collection Procedures

• 15 question likert instrument asking agreement with “I believe I am able to…” statements ordered by Magnitude, Strength, Generalizability

• Used Pre-test / Post-test

• Used research assistant & coding sheet to insure anonymity of respondents

  SDA DA Neither A SA

magnitude          

I believe I am able to post a blog.          

I believe I am able to comment on another's blog.          

I believe I am able to change the skin on a blog.          

I believe I am able to use a blog reader.          

I believe I am able to search for other blogs that might interest me.          

strength          

I believe I am able to post a blog very well.          

I believe I am able to comment on another's blog very well.          

I believe I am able to change the skin on a blog very well.          

I believe I am able to use a blog reader very well.          

I believe I am able to search for other blogs very well that might interest me.          

generalizability          

I believe I am able to post a blog very well, even if the interface has changed.          

I believe I am able to comment on another's blog very well, even if the interface has changed.          

I believe I am able to change the skin on a blog very well, even if the interface has changed.          

I believe I am able to use a blog reader, very well, even if the interface has changed.          

I believe I am able to search for other blogs very well that might interest me, even if the interface has changed.          

Demographics1. Gender MALE_____ FEMALE______2. AgePlease list your age: ______________ 

3. Prior ExperienceI have been blogging for this many years: __ 0 __ 1 __ 2 __ 3 __ More than 3 4. My favorite topic of discussion is: ___ Math/Science ___ English ___ Social Studies

Data Analysis

• Survey:– Item-total correllations (reliability)– Cronbach’s alpha (reliability)– Standard Measurement of Error (reliability)– exploratory factor analysis using a principal

components analysis with a varimax, orthogonal rotation (construct validity)

• Study:– Paired Samples t-test to determine if significant

difference existed between pre-test and post-test– Chi-square, to determine if there were any differences

between gender, age group, prior experience level, favorite subject and the individual items.

Results

• How reliable was the survey?

• How valid was the survey?

• Was overall self-efficacy toward blogging raised during this class?

• What other sub-groups within this overall group showed differences?

Survey: Reliability

• Cronbach’s alpha = .898

• Internal Consistency = all but one .680 for item-to-total correlations (one fell at .280)

• Standard Error of measurement = 4.04

Survey: Validity

• Of the 15 factors, there were three factors extracted with an Eigenvalue of 1.00 or greater. The first factor explained 57.723 % of the variance with all three factors explaining 76.853 % of the variance. – I) blogging communication self-efficacy ( How self-

efficacious am I towards communication with blogs?),– II) blogging flexibility self-efficacy ( How self-

efficacious am I toward the flexibility of blogs?) , – III) blogging search self-efficacy( How self-efficacious

am I toward searching for blogs?).

Was overall self-efficacy toward blogging raised during this class?

• No, not by looking at the entire groupt(25) = -1.184, p = .248

• However, yes in subgroup of respondents claiming they had less than one year of experience with blogging, t(17) = -2.211, p = .041

What about relationships with demographics to questions?

• Chi-square found significant relationships between: – age group and item 5 (I believe I am able to search for other

blogs that might interest me) 2 (8, N = 26) = 22.635, p = .004 ; [older ↓ younger ↑]

– prior experience level and item 14 (I believe I am able to use a blog reader very well even if the interface has changed) 2 (12, N = 26) = 24.796, p = .016; [less exp ↓ more exp ↑]

– prior experience level and item 13 (I believe I am able to change the skin on a blog very well even if the interface has changed) 2 (12, N = 26) = 25.037, p = .015; [less exp ↓ more exp ↑]

– and prior experience level and item 7 (I believe I am able to change the skin on a blog very well) 2 (12, N = 26) = 27.183, p = .007. [less exp ↓ more exp ↑]

Discussion, Conclusions, & Implications

• Threats to Internal Validity

• Threats to External Validity

• Recommendations for further research

Threats to Internal Validity

• Mortality (3 participants did drop out)• History (students were taking other classes)• Maturation (the biology of the brain could have

matured during this time (kind of a stretch)) • Testing (not measuring a skill, so this is kind of a

stretch as well)• Instrumentation (objective measurement so

probably a stretch here as well) • and interaction of selection and maturation

(possibly, because age varies from 22-50)

Threats to external validity

• interaction of testing and self-efficacy (pre-test sensitization)—I should improve, so I will improve when I get the post-test

• and interaction of history and self-efficacy.—not advisable to generalize beyond this one time frame for self-efficacy increase

• Experimenter effect– I work with the professor teaching the class, he could want the study to go well.

Other limitations

• Small sample/population

• Only one group studied

Recommendations for the future• Try to do a Solomon 4 group design

– R O X O random sample group w/pre-test, post-test and treatment

– R O O random sample with pre-test, post-test and no treatment

– R X O random sample with post-test and treatment

– R O random sample with post-test and no treatment

Do this for each learning environment: natural, and directed. The “no treatment group” would be a non-specific learning environment—not purely natural or directed, and use multiple universities, and use an online instrument instead of paper