More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Self-evaluation Interventions: Impact on Self-efficacy and Performance in Introductory Programming

Authors:

Alex Lishinski,

Aman YadavAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), Volume 21, Issue 3

Article No.: 23, Pages 1 - 28

https://doi.org/10.1145/3447378

Published: 23 June 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Research has repeatedly shown self-efficacy to be associated with course outcomes in CS and across other fields. CS education research has documented this and has developed CS-specific self-efficacy measurement instruments, but to date there have been only a few studies examining interventions intended to improve students’ self-efficacy in CS, and several types of self-efficacy interventions suggested by previous research remain to be tested in CS. This study attempts to address this lack of research by reporting on the results of a trial intervention intended to improve students’ self-efficacy in an introductory programming course. Students were recruited to complete a self-evaluation task, which previous research has suggested could have a beneficial impact on self-efficacy, which should in turn have a beneficial impact on course performance. Participating students’ course outcomes and self-efficacy were compared with those of the students who did not complete the self-evaluation task, using propensity score weighting adjustments to control for differences between the groups on entering characteristics and prior values of self-efficacy and course outcomes. We found that, whereas there was only marginal evidence for the self-evaluation intervention having a direct effect on self-efficacy, students who completed the self-evaluation task had significantly higher project scores during the weeks they were asked to complete it, compared to the students who did not participate. These findings suggest that there are potential benefits to incorporating self-evaluation tasks into introductory CS courses, although perhaps not by virtue of directly influencing self-efficacy.

References

[1]

Karen Adams. 2004. Modelling success: Enhancing international postgraduate research students’ self-efficacy for research seminar presentations. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 23, 2 (2004), 115–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000206618

[2]

Paul D. Allison. 2001. Missing Data. Sage Publications.

[3]

Jesús Alonso-Tapia and Ernesto Panadero. 2010. Effects of self-assessment scripts on self- regulation and learning. Infan. Aprend. 33, 3 (2010), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1174/021037010792215145

[4]

Sharon Andrew. 1998. Self-efficacy as a predictor of academic performance in science. J. Adv. Nurs. 27, 3 (1998), 596–603. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00550.x

[5]

Albert Bandura. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.Psychol. Rev. 84, 2 (Mar. 1977), 191–215. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ /847061.

[6]

Albert Bandura. 1986. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

[7]

Albert Bandura (Ed.). 1995. Self-efficacy in Changing Societies. Cambridge University Press.

[8]

Albert Bandura. 1997. Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Macmillan.

[9]

J. Bennedsen and M. E. Caspersen. 2007. Failure rates in introductory programming. ACM SIGCSE Bull. 39, 2 (2007), 32–36.

Digital Library

[10]

Jens Bennedsen and Michael E. Caspersen. 2019. Failure rates in introductory programming—12 years later. ACM Inroads 10, 2 (2019), 30–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3324888

Digital Library

[11]

Sylvia Beyer. 2014. Why are women underrepresented in computer science? Gender differences in stereotypes, self-efficacy, values, and interests and predictors of future CS course-taking and grades. Comput. Sci. Educ. 24, 2-3 (2014), 153–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2014.963363

[12]

Jyoti Bhardwaj. 2017. In search of self-efficacy: Development of a new instrument for first year computer science students. Comput. Sci. Educ. 27, 2 (2017), 1–21.

[13]

Jo Boaler. 2013. Ability and Mathematics: The mindset revolution that is reshaping education. Forum 55, 1 (2013), 143. https://doi.org/10.2304/forum.2013.55.1.143

[14]

G. E. P. Box and D. R. Cox. 1964. An analysis of transformations. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. 26, 2 (1964), 211–252. https://doi.org/10.1079/IVPt200454()IN

[15]

British Educational Research Association [BERA]. 2018. Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (4 ed.). London. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1984.10483191

[16]

Shari L. Britner and Frank Pajares. 2006. Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 43, 5 (2006), 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20131

[17]

Gavin T. L. Brown and Lois R. Harris. 2013. Student self-assessment. In SAGE Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment, James H. McMillian (Ed.). SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 367–393. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452218649

[18]

Adam S. Carter and Christopher D. Hundhausen. 2016. With a little help from my friends: An empirical study of the interplay of students’ social activities, programming activities, and course success. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, 201–209.

Digital Library

[19]

Simon Cassidy. 2015. Resilience building in students: The role of academic self-efficacy. Front. Psychol. 6, (Nov. 2015), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01781

[20]

Dan Cernusca and Clayton E. Price. 2013. Can undergraduates learn programming with a “virtual professor”? Findings from a pilot implementation of a blended instructional strategy. Comput. Educ. J. 4, 4 (2013), 60–71.

[21]

Felix Cheung and Richard E. Lucas. 2014. Assessing the validity of single-item life satisfaction measures: Results from three large samples. Qual. Life Res. 23, 10 (2014), 2809–2818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0726-4

[22]

Jacob Cohen. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

[23]

Computing Research Association. 2017. Generation CS: Computer Science Enrollments Surge Since 2006: The Mixed News on Diversity and the Enrollment Surge. Retrieved from https://cra.org/data/generation-cs/diversity/.

[24]

AERA Council. 2011. AERA code of ethics: American educational research association. Educ. Res. 40, 3 (2011), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x11410403

[25]

Marcus Credé and L. Alison Phillips. 2011. A meta-analytic review of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Learn. Indiv. Differ. 21, 4 (2011), 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.03.002

[26]

Holger Danielsiek, Laura Toma, and Jan Vahrenhold. 2017. An instrument to assess self-efficacy in introductory algorithms courses. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, 217–225.

Digital Library

[27]

Åge Diseth, Eivind Meland, and Hans Johan. 2014. Self-beliefs among students: Grade level and gender differences in self-esteem, self-efficacy and implicit theories of intelligence. Learn. Indiv. Differ. 35 (2014), 1–8.

[28]

Christiana Drake. 1993. Effects of misspecification on the propensity score on estimatiors of treatment effects. Biometrics 49, 4 (1993), 1231–1236.

[29]

J. A. Durlak. 2009. How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 34, 9 (2009), 917–928. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsp004

[30]

Russell Feldhausen, Joshua Levi Weese, and Nathan H. Bean. 2018. Increasing student self-efficacy in computational thinking via STEM outreach programs. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 302–307.

Digital Library

[31]

David P. French, Ellinor K. Olander, Anna Chisholm, and Jennifer McSharry. 2014. Which behaviour change techniques are most effective at increasing older adults’ self-efficacy and physical activity behaviour? A systematic review. Ann. Behav. Med. 48, 2 (2014), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-014-9593-z

[32]

Viktor Gecas. 1989. The social psychology of self-efficacy. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 15 (1989), 291–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1982.tb00523.x

[33]

Marilyn E. Gist. 1992. Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Acad. Manage. Rev. 17, 2 (1992).

[34]

Katarzyna Gogol, Martin Brunner, Thomas Goetz, Romain Martin, Sonja Ugen, Ulrich Keller, Antoine Fischbach, and Franzis Preckel. 2014. “My Questionnaire is Too Long!” The assessments of motivational-affective constructs with three-item and single-item measures. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 39, 3 (2014), 188–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.04.002

[35]

Paul A. Gore. 2006. Academic self-efficacy as a predictor of college outcomes: Two incremental validity studies. J. Career Assess. 14, 1 (2006), 92–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072705281367

[36]

Jamie Gorson and Eleanor O’Rourke. 2019. How do students talk about intelligence? In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’19), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3291279.3339413

Digital Library

[37]

L. V. Hedges and E. C. Hedberg. 2007. Intraclass correlation values for planning group-randomized trials in education. Educ. Eval. Pol. Anal. 29, 1 (2007), 60–87. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373707299706

[38]

Joel M. Hektner, Jennifer A. Schmidt, and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 2007. Experience Sampling Method: Measuring the Quality of Everyday Life. Sage.

[39]

Martin W. Heymann and Iris Eekhout. 2019. Applied Missing Data Analysis with SPSS and (R)Studio. Retrieved from https://bookdown.org/mwheymans/bookmi/.

[40]

Keisuke Hirano, Guido W. Imbiens, and Ridder Geert. 2003. Efficient estimation of average treatment effects using the estimated propensity score. Econometrica 71, 4 (2003), 1161–1189. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00442

[41]

Toni Honicke and Jaclyn Broadbent. 2016. The influence of academic self-efficacy on academic performance: A systematic review. Educ. Res. Rev. 17 (2016), 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.11.002

[42]

Christopher D. Hundhausen, Anukrati Agrawal, and Pawan Agarwal. 2013. Talking about code: Integrating pedagogical code reviews into early computing courses. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 13, 3 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2499947.2499951

Digital Library

[43]

Kosuke Imai and Marc Ratkovic. 2013. Covariate balancing propensity score. J. R. Statist. Soc. B 76, 1 (2013), 243–263. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssb.12027

[44]

Guido W. Imbens. 2004. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: A review. Rev. Econ. Statist. 86, 1 (2004), 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465304323023651

[45]

Justé A. Kingston and Fiona Lyddy. 2013. Self-efficacy and short-term memory capacity as predictors of proportional reasoning. Learn. Indiv. Differ. 26 (2013), 185–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.017

[46]

Päivi Kinnunen and Beth Simon. 2010. Experiencing programming assignments in CS1: The emotional toll. Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER’10), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1145/1839594.1839609

Digital Library

[47]

Päivi Kinnunen and Beth Simon. 2011. CS majors’ self-efficacy perceptions in CS1: Results in light of social cognitive theory. Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER’11), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/2016911.2016917

Digital Library

[48]

Päivi Kinnunen and Beth Simon. 2012. My program is ok—Am I? Computing freshmen’s experiences of doing programming assignments. Comput. Sci. Educ. 22, 1 (Mar. 2012), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2012.655091

[49]

Feng Yang Kuo, Wen Hsiung Wu, and Cathy Lin. 2013. An investigation of self-regulatory mechanisms in learning to program visual basic. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 49, 2 (2013), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.2.f

[50]

Woogul Lee, Myung-jin Lee, and Mimi Bong. 2014. Testing interest and self-efficacy as predictors of academic self-regulation and achievement. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 39, 2 (2014), 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.02.002

[51]

Robert W. Lent and Gail Hackett. 1994. Sociocognitive mechanisms of personal agency in career development: Pantheoretical prospects. In Convergence in Career Development Theories: Implications for Science and Practice, M. L. Savikas and Robert W. Lent (Eds.). CPP Books, Palo Alto, CA, 77–101.

[52]

Alex Lishinski. 2017. Cognitive, Affective, and Dispositional Components of Learning Programming. Ph.D. Dissertation.

Digital Library

[53]

Alex Lishinski, Aman Yadav, and Richard Enbody. 2017. Students’ emotional reactions to programming projects in introduction to programming: Measurement approach and influence on learning outcomes. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, 30–38.

Digital Library

[54]

Alex Lishinski, Aman Yadav, Jon Good, and Richard Enbody. 2016. Learning to program: Gender differences and interactive effects of students’ motivation, goals and self-efficacy on performance. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual International ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’16).

Digital Library

[55]

Prashant Loyalka, Ou Lydia Liu, Guirong Li, Igor Chirikov, Elena Kardanova, Lin Gu, Guangming Ling, Ningning Yu, Fei Guo, Liping Ma, Shangfeng Hu, Angela Sun Johnson, Ashutosh Bhuradia, Saurabh Khanna, Isak Froumin, Jinghuan Shi, Pradeep Kumar Choudhury, Tara Beteille, Francisco Marmolejo, and Namrata Tognatta. 2019. Computer science skills across China, India, Russia, and the United States. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 14 (2019), 6732–6736. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1814646116

[56]

Howard Margolis and Patrick P. McCabe. 2006. Improving self-efficacy and motivation: What to do, what to say. Intervent. School Clin. 41, 4 (2006), 218–227.

[57]

Daniel F. McCaffrey, Beth Ann Griffin, Daniel Almirall, Mary Ellen Slaughter, Rajeev Ramchand, and Lane F. Burgette. 2013. A tutorial on propensity score estimation for multiple treatments using generalized boosted models. Statist. Med. 32, 19 (2013), 3388–3414. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5753

[58]

Daniel F McCaffrey, Greg Ridgeway, and Andrew R Morral. 2004. Propensity score estimation with boosted regression for evaluating causal effects in observational studies.Psychol. Methods 9, 4 (2004), 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.403

[59]

Karen D. Multon, Steven D. Brown, and Robert W. Lent. 1991. Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation.J. Counsel. Psychol. 38, 1 (1991), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.38.1.30

[60]

An Nguyen and Colleen M. Lewis. 2020. Competitive enrollment policies in computing departments negatively predict first-year students’ sense of belonging, self-efficacy, and perception of department. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’20), 685–691. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3366805

Digital Library

[61]

Daniel Olivares. 2019. Exploring Social Interventions for Computer Programming: Leveraging Learning Theories to Affect Student Social and Programming Behavior. Ph.D. Dissertation.

[62]

Frank Pajares and M. David Miller. 1994. Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis.J. Educ. Psychol. 86, 2 (1994), 193.

[63]

Frank Pajares and Gio Valiante. 1997. Influence of self-efficacy on elementary students’ writing. J. Educ. Res. 90, 6 (1997), 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1997.10544593

[64]

Ernesto Panadero, Jesús Alonso-Tapia, and Juan Antonio Huertas. 2014. Rubrics vs. self-assessment scripts: Effects on first year university students’ self-regulation and performance/Rúbricas y guiones de autoevaluación: Efectos sobre la autorregulación y el rendimiento de estudiantes universitarios de primer año. Infan. Aprend. 37, 1 (2014), 149–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2014.881655

[65]

Ernesto Panadero, Jesús Alonso-Tapia, and Eloísa Reche. 2013. Rubrics vs. self-assessment scripts effect on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy in pre-service teachers. Stud. Educ. Eval. 39, 3 (2013), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.04.001

[66]

Ernesto Panadero, Gavin T. L. Brown, and Jan Willem Strijbos. 2016. The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 28, 4 (2016), 803–830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9350-2

[67]

Ernesto Panadero, Anders Jonsson, and Juan Botella. 2017. Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses. Educ. Res. Rev. 22 (2017), 74–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.004

[68]

Ernesto Panadero, Anders Jonsson, and Jan Willem Strijbos. 2016. Scaffolding self-regulated learning through self-assessment and peer assessment: Guidelines for classroom implementation. In Assessment for Learning: Meeting the Challenge of Implementation, Dany Lavenault and Linda Allal (Eds.). Springer, Cham, 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39211-0_18

[69]

Ernesto Panadero and Margarida Romero. 2014. To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy. Assess. Educ.: Princip. Policy Pract. 21, 2 (2014), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2013.877872

[70]

Ernesto Panadero, Jesús Alonso Tapia, and Juan Antonio Huertas. 2012. Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in secondary education. Learn. Indiv. Differ. 22, 6 (2012), 806–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.04.007

[71]

Paul R. Pintrich and Elisabeth V. De Groot. 1990. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.J. Educ. Psychol. 82, 1 (1990), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33

[72]

Paul R. Pintrich, David A.F. Smith, Teresa Garcia, and Wilbert J. McKeachie. 1993. Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educ. Psychol. Meas. 53, 3 (Sep. 1993), 801–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053003024

[73]

Keith Quille and Susan Bergin. 2019. CS1: How will they do? How can we help? A decade of research and practice. Comput. Sci. Educ. 29, 2-3 (2019), 254–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2019.1612679

[74]

Vennila Ramalingam, Deborah LaBelle, and Susan Wiedenbeck. 2004. Self-efficacy and mental models in learning to program. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’04), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1145/1007996.1008042

Digital Library

[75]

Vennila Ramalingam and Susan Wiedenbeck. 1999. Development and validation of scores on a computer programming self-efficacy scale and group analyses of novice programmer self-efficacy. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 19, 4 (1999), 367–381. https://doi.org/10.2190/C670-Y3C8-LTJ1-CT3P

[76]

Lisa Respondek, Tina Seufert, and Ulrike E. Nett. 2019. Adding previous experiences to the person-situation debate of achievement emotions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 58(Feb.2019), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.02.004

[77]

Greg Ridgeway, Dan Mccaffrey, Andrew Morral, Lane Burgette, and Beth Ann Griffin. 2013. Toolkit for weighting and analysis of nonequivalent groups: A tutorial for the twang package. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation (2013), 1–30. https://cran.microsoft.com/snapshot/2017-07-10/web/packages/twang/vignettes/twang.pdf

[78]

Steven B. Robbins, Kristy Lauver, Huy Le, Daniel Davis, Ronelle Langley, and Aaron Carlstrom. 2004. Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis.Psychol. Bull. 130, 2 (2004), 261–288. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.2.261

[79]

James M. Robins, Miguel Angel Hernan, and Babette Brumback. 2000. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology 11, 5 (2000), 550–560.

[80]

Patrick Royston. 2004. Multiple imputation of missing values: Update of ice. Stata J. 4, 3 (2004), 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867x0500500404

[81]

Donald Rubin. 1987. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. Wiley, New York.

[82]

Jason D. Runyan, Brian N. Fry, Timothy A. Steenbergh, Nathan L. Arbuckle, Kristen Dunbar, and Erin E. Devers. 2019. Using experience sampling to examine links between compassion, eudaimonia, and pro-social behavior. J. Pers. 87, 3 (2019), 690–701. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12426

[83]

Peter Z. Schochet and Hanley S. Chiang. 2011. Estimation and identification of the complier average causal effect parameter in education RCTs. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 36, 3 (2011), 307–345. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998610375837

[84]

Dale H. Schunk. 1995. Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In Self-Efficacy, Adaptation, and Adjustment: Theory Research and Application. Springer US, 281–303.

[85]

Dale H. Schunk and Peggy A. Ertmer. 2000. Self-regulation and academic learning: Self-efficacy enhancing interventions. In Handbook of Self-regulation, Monique Boekaerts, Paul R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (Eds.). 631–649.

[86]

William R. Shadish and Peter M. Steiner. 2010. A primer on propensity score analysis. Newborn Infant Nurs. Rev. 10, 1 (2010), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.nainr.2009.12.010

[87]

Sadia Sharmin, Daniel Zingaro, Lisa Zhang, and Clare Brett. 2019. Impact of open-ended assignments on student self-efficacy in CS1. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education (CompEd’19), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1145/3300115.3309532

Digital Library

[88]

Simon, Andrew Luxton-Reilly, Vangel V. Ajanovski, Eric Fouh, Christabel Gonsalvez, Juho Leinonen, Jack Parkinson, Matthew Poole, and Neena Thota. 2019. Pass rates in introductory programming and in other STEM disciplines. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’19), 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1145/3344429.3372502

Digital Library

[89]

Phil Steinhorst, Andrew Petersen, and Jan Vahrenhold. 2020. Revisiting self-efficacy in introductory programming. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’20), 158–169. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372782.3406281

Digital Library

[90]

Elizabeth Stuart. 2010. Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Stat. Sci. 25, 1 (2010), 1–21.

[91]

Elizabeth A. Stuart and Booil Jo. 2015. Assessing the sensitivity of methods for estimating principal causal effects. Statist. Methods Med. Res. 24, 6 (2015), 657–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280211421840.Assessing

[92]

Elizabeth A. Stuart and Donald B. Rubin. 2007. Matching with multiple control groups with adjustment for group differences. J. Educ. Behav. Statist. 33 (2007), 279–306. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998607306078

[93]

Thomas R. Sullivan, Ian R. White, Amy B. Salter, Philip Ryan, and Katherine J. Lee. 2018. Should multiple imputation be the method of choice for handling missing data in randomized trials?Statist. Methods Med. Res. 27, 9 (2018), 2610–2626. https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280216683570

[94]

Thomas R. Ten Have, Sharon Lise T. Normand, Sue M. Marcus, C. Hendricks Brown, Philip Lavori, and Naihua Duan. 2008. Intent-to-treat vs. Non-intent-to-treat analyses under treatment non-adherence in mental health randomized trials. Psychiatr. Ann. 38, 12 (2008), 772–783. https://doi.org/10.3928/00485713-20081201-10

[95]

Jeffrey C. Valentine, David L. Dubois, and Harris Cooper. 2004. The relation between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educ. Psychol. 39 (Jul. 2004), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902

[96]

Stef Van Buuren. 2018. Flexible Imputation of Missing Data. CRC Press.

[97]

Frank Vanclay, James T. Baines, and C. Nicholas Taylor. 2013. Principles for ethical research involving humans: Ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part I. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 31, 4 (2013), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2013.850307

[98]

Paul T. von Hippel. 2018. How many imputations do you need? a two-stage calculation using a quadratic rule. Sociol. Methods Res. 49, 3 (2018), 699–718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124117747303

[99]

Paul T. von Hippel. 2019. How Many Imputations Do You Need? Retrieved from https://statisticalhorizons.com/how-many-imputations.

[100]

Christopher Watson and Frederick W. B. Li. 2014. Failure rates in introductory programming revisited. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education, 39–44.

Digital Library

[101]

Christopher Watson, Frederick W. B. Li, and Jamie L. Godwin. 2014. No tests required: Comparing traditional and dynamic predictors of programming success. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’14), 469–474.

Digital Library

[102]

Susan Wiedenbeck. 2005. Factors affecting the success of non-majors in learning to program. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER’05), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1145/1089786.1089788

Digital Library

[103]

Trevor Williams and Kitty Williams. 2010. Self-efficacy and performance in mathematics: Reciprocal determinism in 33 nations. J. Educ. Psychol. 102, 2 (2010), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017271

[104]

Jeffrey M. Wooldridge. 2002. Inverse probability weighted M-estimators for sample selection, attrition, and stratification. Portug. Econ. J. 1, 2 (2002), 117–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10258-002-0008-x

[105]

Barry J. Zimmerman and Rafael Risemberg. 1997. Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive perspective. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 22 (1997), 73–101. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1997.0919

[106]

Daniel Zingaro. 2014. Peer instruction contributes to self-efficacy in CS1. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’14), 373–378. https://doi.org/10.1145/2538862.2538878

Digital Library

[107]

Antonio Zuffianò, Guido Alessandri, Maria Gerbino, Bernadette Paula Luengo Kanacri, Laura Di Giunta, Michela Milioni, and Gian Vittorio Caprara. 2013. Academic achievement: The unique contribution of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning beyond intelligence, personality traits, and self-esteem. Learn. Indiv. Differ. 23, 1 (2013), 158–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.07.010

Cited By

Margulieux LPrather JReeves BBecker BCetin Uzun GLoksa DLeinonen JDenny PMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)Self-Regulation, Self-Efficacy, and Fear of Failure Interactions with How Novices Use LLMs to Solve Programming ProblemsProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653621(276-282)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653621
Chen MLi YO'Rourke E(2024)Understanding the Reasoning Behind Students' Self-Assessments of Ability in Introductory Computer Science CoursesProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671094(1-13)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671094
Ferreira DCampos DGonçalves A(2024)Regulatory Strategies for Novice Programming StudentsComputer Supported Education10.1007/978-3-031-53656-4_7(136-159)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53656-4_7
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Self-evaluation Interventions: Impact on Self-efficacy and Performance in Introductory Programming
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Student assessment

Recommendations

Impact of Open-Ended Assignments on Student Self-Efficacy in CS1
CompEd '19: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education

A goal of many Computer Science Education (CSE) researchers is reconceptualizing aspects of introductory Computer Science (CS1) to increase student engagement and retention. The measure of self-efficacy, or one's personal judgment about their ability to ...
Test Anxiety, Self-Efficacy & Prior Experience
ITiCSE 2024: Proceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 2

Studies show that both test anxiety (TA) and self-efficacy (SE) have an impact on academic performance and that different students experience TA at different levels. For example, TA has consistently been shown to be higher and SE to be lower for women ...
Computers, self-efficacy, and primary children

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computing Education

ACM Transactions on Computing Education Volume 21, Issue 3

September 2021

188 pages

EISSN:1946-6226

DOI:10.1145/3452111

Editor:
Chris Hundhausen
Washington State University, USA

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 23 June 2021

Accepted: 01 March 2021

Revised: 01 February 2021

Received: 01 January 2020

Published in TOCE Volume 21, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

7
Total Citations
View Citations
554
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)153
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)15

Reflects downloads up to 04 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Margulieux LPrather JReeves BBecker BCetin Uzun GLoksa DLeinonen JDenny PMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)Self-Regulation, Self-Efficacy, and Fear of Failure Interactions with How Novices Use LLMs to Solve Programming ProblemsProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653621(276-282)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653621
Chen MLi YO'Rourke E(2024)Understanding the Reasoning Behind Students' Self-Assessments of Ability in Introductory Computer Science CoursesProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3632620.3671094(1-13)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632620.3671094
Ferreira DCampos DGonçalves A(2024)Regulatory Strategies for Novice Programming StudentsComputer Supported Education10.1007/978-3-031-53656-4_7(136-159)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53656-4_7
Sanders KVahrenhold JMcCartney R(2023)How Do Computing Education Researchers Talk About Threats and Limitations?Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 110.1145/3568813.3600114(381-396)Online publication date: 7-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3568813.3600114
Gallagher TSlof Bvan der Schaaf MToyoda RTehreem YGarcia Fracaro SKester L(2023) Reference frames for learning analytics dashboards: The progress and social reference frame and occupational self‐efficacy Journal of Computer Assisted Learning10.1111/jcal.1291240:2(742-760)Online publication date: 29-Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12912
Benjamin MBrown LSticklen JUreel LJarvie-Eggart‡ M(2023)Engaging Novice Programmers: A Literature Review of the Effect of Code Critiquers on Programming Self-efficacy2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10342975(1-9)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10342975
Martínez-Tapia RSampieri-Cabrera R(undefined)Self-Assessment as a Strategy for the Development of Lifelong and Selfdirected Learning in Physiology in a Mexican Medical SchoolSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4172642
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4172642

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents