first-year college students’ stem-related self-efficacy ... · social cognitive theory behaviors...

First-Year College Students’

STEM-Related Self-Efficacy:

Longitudinal Measurement Invariance

and Trajectories by Gender

Jaeyun HanKelsey A. Corcoran

Dr. Caihong R. LiCalah J. Ford

Xiao-Yin ChenCara E. Worick

Dr. Ellen L. UsherDr. Christia S. Brown

Social Cognitive Theory

Behaviors

Environmental

Factors

Personal

Factors

College campus Self-efficacy

(Bandura, 1997)

(Larson et al., 2015)

(Richardson et al., 2012)

Postsecondary Achievement

Persistence

Literature Review

• Little research has investigated

how college students’ self-efficacy

changes over time (Lent et al., 2018)

• Women have reported lower

self-efficacy than men in STEM-

related fields (Huang, 2013)

Research Questions

RQ1

Are STEM-related self-efficacy items stable over time?

RQ2

How does STEM-related self-efficacy change over time?

RQ3

Does the change in STEM-related self-efficacy differ by gender?

Participants and Procedure

• Participants (N = 3,040; 60% women) were first-year

students enrolled at a land-grant public institution

• In 2017-2018, students completed three online surveys on their academic motivation

T1

August

T2

December

T3

April

Self-Efficacy Measure

“How confident are you that you can do the following tasks in your

quantitative classes, which include subjects such as science,

technology, math, and engineering?”

Strongly

Disagree

Strongly

Agree

1. Understand the most difficult concepts

taught in my quantitative classes.1 2 3 4

2. Master the skills taught in my quantitative

classes.1 2 3 4

3. Do well on the assignments in quantitative

subjects.1 2 3 4

4. Do well on tests in quantitative subjects. 1 2 3 4

Analyses

Longitudinal

Measurement

Invariance

Linear Growth

Model

RQ1 RQ2

Linear Growth

Model by Gender

RQ3

Results: Measurement Invariance (RQ1)

Configural

Invariance

Weak

Invariance

∆ χ2 = 7.68, p = .26 ∆ χ2 = 6.47, p = .17

Partial Strong

Invariance

Self-efficacy was measured equivalently over time.

Model Fit: χ2 = 455.592, df = 63, p < .001, CFI = .983,

RMSEA = .045, SRMR = .026

Quantitative

Self-Efficacy

(T1)

Quantitative

Self-Efficacy

(T2)

Quantitative

Self-Efficacy

(T3)

Intercept

Linear Slope

(Mslope = .05,

p < .001)

-.27

Results: Change in Self-Efficacy (RQ2)

Negative correlation between intercept

and slope, r = -.30, p < .001.

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.1

3.3

3.5

August, 2017 December, 2017 April , 2018

Women Men

• Men’s initial self-efficacy

scores were significantly

higher than women’s.

• Men had a slower rate of

change than women.

Results: Self-Efficacy Change By Gender (RQ3)

Discussion and Future Directions

Which factors are responsible for

closing the gap?

Want more information?

Please contact Jaeyun Han at jaeyun.han@uky.edu

Visit the P20 Motivation and Learning Lab at p20motivationlab.org

Thank you!