Volume : 10, Issue : 12, DEC 2024

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SELF EFFICACY AMONG HINDU AND MUSLIM STUDENTS

DR. SOMYA

Abstract

The present study objective at assessing the comparative analysis of self-efficacy among Hindu and Muslim students Ranchi. The sample of the study consists of 100 subjects classified as 50 Hindu and 50 Muslim (all females) were selected randomly. The entire Sample Was collected from Nirmala college. The tools were used to achieve the goal of present study Personal Data Questionnaire and Manual of Self efficacy scale. The result revealed that student academic self-efficacy affects student satisfaction but only indirectly, by fulfilling the latent variable expectancy value beliefs.

Article : Download PDF

Cite This Article

-

Article No : 11

Number of Downloads : 266

References

1. A.R. (2008). Motivational beliefs and perceptions of instructional quality: predicting satisfaction with online training. J. Compute. Assist. Learn. 24, 260-270. Do i: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007. 00258.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

1. Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychol. Rev. 64(6 Pt 1), 359-372. doi: 10.1037/h0043445

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

1. Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An Introduction to Motivation. Princeton, NJ:Van Nostrand. Google Scholar

2. Azar, H. K., Lavasani, M. G., Malahmadi, E., and Amani, J. (2010). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning approaches and mathematics achievement. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 5, 942-947. doi: CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

4. Bandura, A. (1990). "Mechanisms of moral disengagement," in Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of mind, ed W. Reich (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 161-191.

Google Scholar

1. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educ. Psychol. 28, 117-148. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2802 3 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY: Freeman.

3. Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychology research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51, 1173-1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

4. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 23 Seaned wh Canscne 10.1016/jsbspro.2010.07.2 14

5. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Fit indexes, langrage multipliers, constraint changes and incomplete data in structural models. Multivariate Behav. Res. 25, 163-172. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_3

6. PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 Structural Equations Program Manual. Ecino, CA: Multivarite Sotware Inc.

7. Boekaerts, M. (1999). Motivated learning: studying student situation transactional units. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 14, 41-55. doi: 10.1007/BF03173110

CrossRef Full Text || Google Scholar

1. Bong, M. (2001). Between- and within-domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: self-efficacy, task-value, and achievement goals. J. Educ. Psychol. 93, 23-34. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.23 CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Bong, M., Cho, C., Ahn, H. S., and im, H. J. (2012). Comparison of self-beliefs for predicting student motivation and achievement. J. Educ. Res. 105, 336-352. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2011.62 7401

3. Booker, Q. E., and Rebman, C. E. (2005). E-Student retention: factors affecting customer loyalty for online program success. Issues Inform. Syst. 6, 183-189. Google Scholar

4. Browne, M. W, and Cudeck, R. (1993). "Alternative ways of assessing model fit," in Testing Structural Equation Models, eds K. A. Bollen and J. S. Long (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage), 136-162. Google Scholar

5. Byrne, B. (2012). Structural Equation Modeling with Mplus. Basic Concepts. Apllications and Programing. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar 24 Scarmed th CarnScarmet

6. Chemers, M. M., Hu, L, and Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and tirst year college student performance and adiustment. J. Educ. Psychol. 93, 55-64. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.55 

7. Cudeck, R., and Browne, M. WN. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures. Multivariate Behav. Res. 18, 147-167. doi: 10.1207/s1532 7906mbr1802_2

PubMed Abstract| CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

1. Cummins, R., and Tomyn, A. (2011). The subjective wellbeing of high-school students: validating the personal wellbeing index-school children. Soc. Indic. Res. 101, 405-418. doi: 10.1007/s11205-010-9668-6

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

1. Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuit: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol. Ing. 11, 227-268. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

1. Deci, E., and Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York, NY: Plenum.

2. DeWitz, S. J., and Walsh, W. B. (2002). Self-efficacy and college student satisfaction. J. Career Assess. 10, 315-326. doi: 10.1177/10672702010003003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

1. Diep, A. N., Zhu, Ch., Struyven, K., and Blieck, Y. (2016). Who and What contributes to student satisfaction in different blended learning modalities? Br. J. Educ. Technol 48, 473-489. doi: 10.1111/bjet. 12431

2. Doménech, F. (2006). Testing an instructional model in a university educational cotting from the student's perspective. Learn. Instr. 16, 450-466. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.09.005

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar 25