The Effectiveness of Self-management Strategy of Cormier & Cormier Model to Increase Academic Self-efficacy of High School Students

Muhammad Asrori¹ and Awaluddin Tjalla^2,

¹Department of Guidance and Counseling, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak, Indonesia

²Department of Guidance and Counseling, Faculty of Education, State University of Jakarta

Cite this paper:
Muhammad Asrori and Awaluddin Tjalla. The Effectiveness of Self-management Strategy of Cormier & Cormier Model to Increase Academic Self-efficacy of High School Students. American Journal of Educational Research. 2018; 6(6):816-821. doi: 10.12691/education-6-6-34

Abstract

The common symptom experienced by high school students is the lack of ability to find the effective ways to complete the school work and tasks. They are generally lacking in self-efficacy, meaning that they are not quite sure about their capability to determine the ways that can make themselves a success in completing the tasks. This study aims to examine the effectiveness of self-management strategy, one of the contemporary behavior-changing strategies to improve the self-efficacy of high school students. There are three combination of techniques (1) a combination of self-monitoring with self-reward; (2) a combination of self-monitoring with stimulus-control; and (3) a combination of self-monitoring with self-reward and stimulus-control. The present experimental study with a pretest-posttest-control group design found that the combination of self-monitoringing with stimulus control techniques was the most effective to improve the self-efficacy of high school students while the other combinations of techniques were less effective.

Keywords:
self-management self-monitoring self-reward stimulus-control self-efficacy

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Elliot, E.S. & Dweck, C.S. (2008). “Goals: an approach to motivation and achievement.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5-12.
[2]	Dweck, C.S. (2006). “Motivational processing affecting learning.” American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.
[3]	Cormier, L.J. & Cormier, L.S. (2005). Interviewing strategies for helpers. Second Edition, Monterey: California, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
[4]	Yates, B.T. (2005). Self-management: the science and art of helping yourself. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, A Division of Wadsworth, Inc.
[5]	Wittrock, M.C. (2006). “Students’ thought processes.” handbook of research on teaching, New York: Macmillan.
[6]	Forsterling, F. (2006). “Attribution conception in clinical psychology.” American Psycho-logist, 41, 275-285.
[7]	Weiner, B. (2002). “Motivation.” dalam Marvin C. Alkin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research, 3, 860-865.
[8]	Berk, L.E. (2002). Child development. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
[9]	Gredler, M. (2002). Learning and instruction: theory into practice. New York: Macmillan.
[10]	Schunk, D.H. (2002). “Effect of effort attributional feedback on children’s perceived self-efficacy and achievement.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 548-556.
[11]	Schunk, D.H.; Hanson, A.R.; & Cox, P.D. (2007). “Peer-model attributes and children’s achievement behaviors.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 54-61.
[12]	Bandura, A. (2006). “Recycling misconcep-tions of perceived self-efficacy.” Cognitive Therapy and Research, 8, 235-255.
[13]	Sanna, L.J. (2002). “Self-efficacy theory: implication for social facilitation and social loafing.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 774-786.
[14]	Ryckman, R.M. et al., (2002). “Development and validation of a physical self-efficacy scale.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 754-766.
[15]	Juvonnen, J.A. (2008). “Outcome and attributional disagreement between students and their teachers.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 330-336.
[16]	Shelton, J.L. (2006). Behavior modification for counseling centers: a guide for program development. Washington DC.: ACPA/ APGA.
[17]	Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: towards a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
[18]	Graham, S. (2011). Self-efficacy and academic listening. Journal of English for Academic Purposes’ 10, 113-117.
[19]	Kirk, W.D. (2013). Self-efficacy: helping students believe in themseleves. Professional Development, 14, 163-168.
[20]	Borg, W.R. & Gall, M.D. (1993). Educational research: an introduction. New York: Longman.
[21]	Gay, L.R. (2007). Educational research: competencies for analysis and application. Third Edition, Columbus, Ohio: Charless E. Merril Publishing Company.
[22]	Tuckman, B.W. (2008). Conducting educational research. New York: Harcourt Brace Javanovich, Inc.
[23]	Cozby, P.C. (2005). Methods in behavioral research. Third Edition, Hayfield Publishing Company.
[24]	Heppner, P.P. et al. (2002). Research design in counseling. Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
[25]	Asrori, M. (2009). Pengaruh lokus-kendali terhadap perilaku proaktif remaja. Pontianak: Laporan Penelitian.
[26]	Rotter J.B. (2009). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: a case history of a variable, American Psychologist, 4, 490-493.