The Influences of Feedback and Praise on the
Academic Self-Efficacy and Self-Perception
Skills of Primary Elementary Aged Students in
the Area of Mathematics
Atiya R. Smith
University of Baltimore
Fall 2007
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to:



test, in part, Albert Bandura’s Social
Cognitive Theory,
examine the various beliefs about academic
efficacy and mathematic self-efficacy, and
determine the effects of feedback versus
feedback plus praise in an academic setting
on children’s perception of their own selfefficacy and achievement skills.
Theory used for this study
Albert Bandura’s
Social Cognitive Theory
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory defines self-efficacy
as an individual’s beliefs about their own capabilities to
successfully complete various tasks being asked of
them.
This theory implies that one’s self-efficacy greatly influences how
much effort they put into a task, the choices that they make, how
they feel about themselves, their thought patterns, their emotional,
psychological and behavioral reactions before and after the task is
completed, and their own beliefs about how long they can
persevere when faced with a task that is challenging to them.
Albert Bandura’s Beliefs
Bandura believed that an individual’s self-efficacy skills
are one of the best predictors of successful
academic achievement.
He stated that students with a high sense of self-efficacy are more
likely to have a “heightened sense of optimism that they can
succeed, show greater interest in and attention to working
towards solving problems, attempt more challenging tasks,
show greater perseverance in the face of adversity, adopt more
adaptive cognitive and emotional patterns daily throughout their
academic careers, and display a stronger sense of academic
performances overall” (Bandura, 1997).
Albert Bandura’s Beliefs contd…
Bandura also stated that students whose sense of
academic self-efficacy was raised, actually “set
higher aspirations for themselves, showed greater
strategic flexibility in the search for solutions,
achieved higher intellectual performances, and were
more accurate in evaluating the quality of their
performances than students of equal cognitive ability
who were led to believe that they lacked such
capabilities”. (Bandura, 1997)
Literature Review
Mathematic self-efficacy and academic
achievement…



students who were classified as having low and average
mathematical abilities, but had high self-efficacy, worked on
unsolvable mathematical problems much longer than students
who had low self-efficacy but had average and high
mathematical abilities (Schunk, 1991; Cox 1982).
students who had high instances of mathematical
accomplishments also had a higher level of self-efficacy in
mathematics than students with low instances of mathematical
accomplishments. (Matsui, Matsui, and Ohnishi, 1990)
students’ self-efficacy levels in mathematics also related
significantly to their interest in mathematics, beliefs about a
successful outcome in mathematics, and overall performance in
mathematics. (Lent, Lopez, and Bieschke, 1993)
Perception and academic
achievement…
An individual’s self-perception skills, relating to
their academic competence, help to
determine what they do with the knowledge
and skills they that gain in school (Pajares &
Valiante, 1999), and have a significant
influence over their motivation, choice of
activities, effort given on tasks, persistence to
complete a task, and task accomplishment.
(Schunk & Gunn, 1986).
Effects of Feedback…



Feedback is considered to be significantly important within
many theories of learning, performance, and instruction and is a
highly effective tool that can significantly increase the academic
skill level of students at any educational or developmental level.
(Narciss, 2004).
students who received feedback showed more motivation, selfefficacy, and skill increase than students who did not receive
feedback. (Schunk, 1991)
The most effective function of feedback is one-on-one tutoring
or assisting in guiding the learner to steer the learning process
to a successful outcome (Hoska, 1993).
Effects of Praise…



In classrooms that portrayed a positive encouraging climate,
students reported positive emotions related to the academic
content being taught, high intrinsic motivation, and significant
perceptions of task-specific competencies. (Stipek and
colleagues,1998)
praise is necessary in enhancing students’ self-esteem and
should include focusing on improvement, effort, using sincere
comments, and recognizing students’ feelings about the task
being asked of them. (Hitz and Driscoll,1994)
students are more likely to participate in activities and engage
in them willingly if the activities are linked to positive affects and
results in forms of praise (Schweinle, Meyer, & Turner, 2006).
Effects of Feedback and Praise
together…
Studies by Burnett (2001) and Merrett & Tang (1994)
both measured elementary school students’
preferences about teacher praise and feedback.
Results from both studies indicated that:
 over 90% of students preferred to be praised “often” or
“sometimes”
 over 80% of students preferred to be praised for their efforts
rather than actual academic ability, and
 Over half of students preferred to receive praise individually
and without too much focus being on them while in the
presence of other students
Now, back to the study
Hypothesis
It is hypothesized that students who
receive feedback with praise will
have higher self-efficacy skills in
mathematical ability than the
students who only receive
feedback.
Participants




Boys (n=15) and girls (n=15) from a predominately middle-class
background whose age ranged from 7 years and 2 months to 8
years and 10 months.
Ethnic composition of the population sample was: 12 African
American (40%), 3 Asian (10%), 5 Caucasian (17%), and 10
Hispanic (33%).
Students were drawn from 4 second grade classrooms within a
medium-sized public elementary school
Teachers were asked to identify students with “low-average
mathematical abilities” (i.e. children who have encountered
some difficulties in grasping addition and subtraction operations
but were not considered to be low achievers, did not received
remedial instruction, and were not receiving services from the
school’s special education team)
Procedure




Participants were randomly assigned to one of two tutoring
groups:
1. a group that was just given feedback (n=15) or,
2. a group that was given feedback with praise (n=15).
In each group, pretests were given that assessed students’
beliefs about their own mathematical abilities and assessed
actual mathematical skill before treatments were provided.
After students were provided with praise and/or feedback on
assignments, students were asked if they would like to
complete a short extra credit assignment and could either
respond “yes” or “no”. Responses were noted.
After 10 weeks, posttests were given. that were similar to the
pretest. to see if changes had occurred in the students’ beliefs
about their mathematical abilities and if their actual skills had
increased.
Results
Results from a one-way ANOVA assessing students’
self-efficacy scores showed that:
 Students in the Feedback plus Praise group had
higher self-efficacy skills in mathematical ability than
students in the Feedback Only group.
 Students in the Feedback plus Praise group not only
scored higher than students in the Feedback Only
group on the posttest and chose to complete the
extra credit assignment at a higher rate, but they
also scored higher than their individual pretest
scores.
One-way ANOVA assessing students’
self-efficacy scores
Table 1
Analysis of Variance (One-Way ANOVA)
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean
Square
F
Sig.
Between
Groups
1241.633
1
1241.633
9.873
.004
Within
Groups
3521.333
28
125.762
Total
4762.967
29
Note: In order for differences to be significant, the sig. score must fall between.05 and .001
Means and Standard Deviation of SelfEfficacy Scores
Table 2
Means and Standard Deviation Scores of Self-Efficacy Scores
Using the 2- Leveled Consequence Independent Variable
SelfEfficacy
Std.
Error
Mean
Consequence
N
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Feedback
ONLY
15
21.6000
10.94662
2.82641
15
34.4667
11.47585
2.96305
Praise &
feedback
Table 2 shows that the mean score for the students who were randomly
assigned to the Feedback Only group (M=21.60, SD=10.95) was
significantly lower than mean score for the students who were randomly
assigned to the Feedback with Praise group (M=34.46, SD=11.47).
There were also differences in regards to
students’ gender…
Two-way ANOVA conducted on
participants’ self-efficacy scores by
treatment condition and gender
Results of a two-way ANOVA
showed that:
 the independent variables
of Treatments and Gender,
together, both have an effect
on self-efficacy,
 the treatment of Feedback
Only had a greater effect on
boys than it did on girls, and
 the treatment of Feedback
with Praise had a greater
effect on girls than it did on
boys.
Conclusions

Results strengthen Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory and support his belief
that students will be more likely to attempt, persevere, and be successful at
tasks at which they have a sense of efficacy.
Findings support conclusions that:

boys prefer praise responses and concrete straightforward responses, while
girls prefer encouragement responses and words that are personally
empowering (Kelly, 2002),

females have higher levels of math anxiety and that overall differences in math
performance was in fact due to a difference in math self-efficacy (Pajares &
Miller, 1994),

an effective function of feedback is one-on-one tutoring or assisting in guiding
the learner to steer the learning process to a successful outcome (Hoska,
1993),

students preferred to be praised often (Burnett, 2001),

that boys had significantly higher perceptions of self-efficacy in mathematics
than girls (Junge & Dretzke 1995), and

that students who received feedback showed more motivation, self-efficacy,
and skill increase than students who did not receive feedback. (Schunk, 1991).
Limitations









Population sample
Lack of repeated measures
Considering other variables that contribute to an individual’s
self-efficacy and self-perception skills
Discrepancies amongst past researchers results about gender
and self-efficacy
Assessments used
Availability of tutors for replications of this study
How students felt about tutor (gender, age) and if they were
comfortable with the tutor
How students respond to and process feedback
Individual preferences in regards to praise
Final Statement
This study highlights the importance of providing
students with praise, in addition to feedback, in order
to increase their self-efficacy and self-perception
skills in the area of mathematics. In order for
students’ self-efficacy and self-perception skills to
increase, a variety of areas need to be assessed in
order to accurately provide students with ways to
reach their highest potential in the classroom and
beyond. Future studies should investigate these
various areas thoroughly.
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Burnett, P.C., (2002). Teacher Praise and feedback and students’ perceptions of the classroom
environment. Educational Psychology, 22, 5-16.
Hitz, R., & Driscoll, A.(1994). Give Encouragement. Texas Child Care, Spring 1984, 3-11.
Hoska, D.M. (1993). Motivating learners through CBI feedback: Developing a positive
learner perspective. In J.V. Dempsey, & G.C. Sales (Eds.) Interactive Instruction and
Feedback (pp. 105-132). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J. (1993). Predicting mathematics-related choice and success
behaviors: Test of an expanded social cognitive model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 223236.
Matsui, T., Matsui, K., & Ohnishi, R. (1990). Mechanisms underlying math self-efficacy learning of
college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37, 225-238
Narciss, S. (2004). The impact of informative tutoring feedback and self-efficacy on motivation and
achievement in concept learning. Experimental Psychology, 51, 214-228.
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1999). Grade level and gender differences in the writing self-beliefs of
middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 390-405.
Schweinle, A., Meyer, D.K., & Turner, J.C., (2006). Striking the right balance: Students’ motivation and
affect in elementary mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 99, 271- 293.
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231.
Schunk, D. H., & Gunn, T. P. (1986). Self-efficacy and skill development: Influence of task strategies
and attributions. Journal of Educational Research, 79, 238-244.
The End