Advertisement

The Influence of Task Difficulty on Engagement, Performance and Self-Efficacy

  • Jason PowerEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Issues in Technology Education book series (CITE)

Abstract

My research examined the impact of a person’s belief about their own capabilities and how this influences their performance. In order to examine this, I needed a task that was both relatively enjoyable, so that participants would engage with it in their own free time without pressure to do so, and a task that was not heavily linked to a particular subject as this would influence performance. That is the line of thinking that led to a PhD examining self-efficacy theory by getting hundreds of children to play Pacman, a popular arcade game. The research showed that task properties, such as difficulty, can have a considerable impact on how students perceive their own ability. This in turn impacts their likelihood to persist in the face of adversity and ultimately their performance.

References

  1. Artino, A. R. (2012). Academic self-efficacy: From educational theory to instructional practice. Perspectives on Medical Education, 1(2), 76–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  4. Bates, R., & Khasawneh, S. (2007). Self-efficacy and college students’ perceptions and use of online learning systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 175–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caprara, G. V., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Del Bove, G., Vecchio, G. M., Barbaranelli, C., & Bandura, A. (2008). Longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived self-efficacy for self-regulated learning in academic continuance and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 525–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hattie, J. (2013). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Hattie, J. (2015). The applicability of visible learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In E. Mayer & P. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York: Educational Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hertberg-Davis, H. (2009). Myth 7: Differentiation in the regular classroom is equivalent to gifted programs and is sufficient: Classroom teachers have the time, the skill, and the will to differentiate adequately. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 251–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lee, C. Y. (2015). Changes in self-efficacy and task value in online learning. Distance Education, 36(1), 59–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sitzmann, T., & Ely, K. (2011). A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: What we know and where we need to go. Psychological Bulletin, 137(3), 421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom: Strategies and tools for responsive teaching. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  14. Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2002). Predictors of web-student performance: The role of self-efficacy and reasons for taking an on-line class. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(2), 151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LimerickLimerickIreland

Personalised recommendations