The Role of Self-Efficacy in Service-Learning Research

1. The Community Service Self-Efficacy Construct in Engaged Scholarship and Service-Learning Research Roger N. Reeb Susan F. Folger Stacey Langsner Brigitte Beale University of Dayton Presented at the Tenth Annual International Research Conference on Service Learning and Community Engagement

2. Purpose of Presentation • To briefly review research and theory on the self-efficacy construct • To explain the role of self-efficacy in service-learning and engaged scholarship. • To review over 10 years of research on the Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale (CSSES). • To provide recommendations for future research.

3. Definition of Self-Efficacy • “…an expectation of personal mastery…” • Source: Bandura (1977, p. 191) • “…self-appraisal of operative capability…” • Source: Bandura (1982, p. 123) • “…a conviction that one can execute the behavior required to produce the [desired] outcomes…” • Source: Bandura (1977, p. 193) • “…a belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations…” • Source: Bandura (1995, p. 2)

4. Sources of Efficacy Information • Enactive Mastery Experiences • Past success and failure in the situation • Vicarious Experiences • Observations of how others cope in the situation • Verbal Persuasion • Encouragement and discouragement from others • Anticipatory Arousal • Emotional and physiological reactivity

5. Self-Efficacy vs. Outcome Expectations • Bandura’s Distinction: • “…self-efficacy is a judgment of one’s ability to organize and execute given types of performances, whereas an outcome expectation is a judgment of the likely consequences such actions would produce…” • Source: Bandura (1997, p. 21) • Relevance of Distinction for Service-Learning: • “…In the area of service-learning,…a student may believe that a particular set of actions (e.g., performing as a literacy tutor) would make a positive difference in the community, but if the student has serious doubts as to whether he or she has the capacity to perform the set of actions, such information would not influence the student’s behavior…” • Source: Reeb et al. (1998, p. 48)

6. Self-Efficacy: Overview of Research • Three decades of research supports Bandura’s (1977) original hypothesis: • “…expectations of personal efficacy determine whether coping behavior is initiated, how much effort will be expended, and how long it will be sustained in the face of obstacles and aversive experiences…” • Across situations, circumstances, and populations, research indicates that: • Self-efficacy improves in individuals over the course of interventions, treatments, or training experiences. • Self-efficacy is positively correlated with future performance attainments and inversely correlated with anxiety during performance.

7. Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale(CSSES) - See Appendix A • Purpose: • “The CSSES was constructed to assess the individual’s confidence in his or her own ability to make clinically significant contributions to the community through service.” • Source: Reeb et al. (1998, p. 48) • Intended Uses: • The CSSES was intended for use as an outcome variable, mediating variable, or moderator variable in service-learning, engaged scholarship, and other community action research.

8. Rationale for the CSSES • The construct of self-efficacy is inherently pertinent to the goals of service-learning. • CSSES fills a void, since most measures used in service-learning research focused on… • Motives (e.g., reasons to engage in service) • Values (e.g., social responsibility) • Beliefs and Attitudes (e.g., obligation to serve) • Perceived community needs • Self-Efficacy is considered a core element of the civic-minded graduate (Bringle & Steinberg, in press).

9. The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10Quite Certain Uncertain • ____ 1. If I choose to participate in community service in the future, I will be able to make a meaningful contribution. • ____ 2. In the future, I will be able to find community service opportunities which are relevant to my interests and abilities. • ____ 3. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting social justice. • ____ 4. I am confident that, through community service, I can make a difference in my community. • ____ 5. I am confident that I can help individuals in need by participating in community service activities. • ____ 6. I am confident that, in future community service activities, I will be able to interact with relevant professionals in ways that are meaningful and effective. • ____ 7. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting equal opportunity for citizens. • ____ 8. Through community service, I can apply knowledge in ways that solve “real-life” problems. • ____ 9. By participating in community service, I can help people to help themselves. • ____10. I am confident that I will participate in community service activities in the future.

10. Psychometric Properties of the CSSES

11. Reliability of CSSES • Internal Consistency • Coefficient alpha consistently above .90 • Test-Retest Reliability (Temporal Consistency) • The pre- to post-semester reliability coefficient was high in magnitude (r = .68) and statistically significant in studies of college students. • Over a six-month period, the coefficient was high in magnitude (r = .93) and statistically significant in a study of adolescents on probation.

12. Reliability of CSSES (continued) • Alternate-Forms Reliability • Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale – Sensitive to Change (CSSES-SC) (see Appendix B) • An alternate form that prevents ceiling effects by asking participants to compare themselves to “an individual with 10 years of community service experience” as they rate items • Reliability Coefficient: N = 272, pr= .57, p < .001

13. Reliability of CSSES (continued) • Alternate-Forms Reliability • Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale - Retrospective Version (CSSES-RV) (Appendix C) • An alternate form designed to assess students’ retrospective perceptions of a course’s contribution to their self-efficacy for service. • Reliability Coefficient: N = 272, pr = .52, p < .001

14. Factor Structure of CSSES • A factor analysis was conducted with a large sample of college students (N = 676). • CSSES items and items reflecting related constructs were factor analyzed. • CSSES items loaded heavily on a separate unique factor, suggesting that the CSSES is unidimensional.

15. Defining the Nomological Network of the CSSES • As first explained by Cronbach and Meehl (1955), defining the nomological network for a measure involves examining… • Discriminant Validity • Convergent Validity

16. Discriminant Validity of CSSES • Social Desirability • Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) • N = 394, r = .09, p > .05 • Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (Paulhus, 1988) • Total: N = 272, r = .16, p < .007 • Self-Deception: N = 272, r = .07, p > .05 • Impression Management: N = 272, r = .19, p < .002

17. Discriminant Validity of CSSES (continued) • Social Alienation • Powerlessness Scale (Neal & Groat, 1974) • N = 121, pr = -.37, p < .001 • Dean Alienation Scale (Dean, 1961) • N = 608, pr = -.14, p < .01 • Anomia Scale (Srole, 1956) • N = 121, pr = -.29, p < .01 • Alienation Scale (Maddi et al., 1979) • N = 121, pr = -.23, p < .05

18. Convergent Validity of CSSES • Generalized Self-Efficacy • New General Self-Efficacy Scale (Chen et al., 2001) • N = 608, r = .29, p < .001 • General Self-Efficacy Scale (Sherer et al., 1982) • N = 608, r = .24, p < .001

19. Convergent Validity of CSSES(continued) • Behavioral Intentions for Civic Action • Civic Action Scale (Moely et al., 2002) • N = 608, pr = .65, p < .001

20. Convergent Validity of CSSES(continued) • Hope • The Hope Scale (Snyder et al., 1991) • N = 608, pr = .27, p < .001

21. Convergent Validity of CSSES(continued) • Self-Esteem • CSSES and Rosenberg (1965) Self-Esteem Scale • N = 608, pr = .17, p < .001

22. Convergent Validity of CSSES(continued) • Generativity • Loyola Generativity Scale (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992) • N = 272, pr = .42, p < .001

23. Convergent Validity of CSSES(continued) • Growth Motivation • Growth Motivation Index (Park et al., 2009) • N = 272, pr = .36, p < .001

24. Convergent Validity of CSSES(continued) • Empathy • Multidimensional Emotional Empathy Scale (Caruso & Mayer, 1998) • N = 272, pr = .47, p < .001 • Interpersonal Reactivity Scale (Davis, 1983) • N = 272, pr = .32, p < .001

25. Criterion-Related (Concurrent) Validity of CSSES • Across studies, the method of contrasting groups indicates that students who pursue service-learning have higher CSSES scores than those who do not. • For example, one study reported by Reeb et al. (1998) demonstrated a direct linear pattern: the more types of service that students participated in, the higher were their CSSES scores. • In that study, multiple regression analyses indicated: Among several measures of service-related beliefs or values, the CSSES was the best predictor of service involvement and satisfaction.

26. Sensitivity in Detecting Changes • In quasi-experimental research (i.e., service-learning students vs. non-participants), the CSSES has detected changes in self-efficacy during service. • However, when students have strong service backgrounds at pre-test, a CSSES ceiling effect may preclude detection of self-efficacy improvements. • An alternate form (Appendix B) is more sensitive in detecting changes in this situation. • When pre-test assessment is not possible, an alternate retrospective form is useful (Appendix C).

27. Sensitivity in Detecting Changes(Continued) • Adolescents with felony offenses (N = 40) were matched for age and randomly assigned to conditions (Reeb, 2006): • Community Service Diversion Program (n = 20) • Routine Probation (n = 20) • Results: • Adolescents in the Community-Based Diversion Program had increases in CSSES scores over a six-month period. • Adolescents in Routine Probation did not show changes in CSSES scores. • Recidivism was more likely for adolescents in Routine Probation (13 out of 20 cases) than for adolescents in the Community Service Diversion Program (5 out of 20 cases).

28. CSSES: Gender Differences • Across studies, females score higher on the CSSES. • The gender difference is small-to-moderate, statistically significant, and consistently observed. • While males score higher on measures of general self-efficacy, the current finding is consistent with the finding that females score higher on measures of… • intentions for community service • obligation for community service • positive attitudes toward community service

29. Recommendations for Future • Two General Sets of Research Recommendations: • Further validation research on psychometric properties of CSSES • Research capturing the complexities of the self-efficacy construct in service-learning and engaged scholarship • In general, prospective longitudinal research would be ideal. It would allow consideraton of Bandura’s (1978) principle of reciprocal determinism in examining changes in self-efficacy that emerge over time in individuals involved in community service.

30. CSSES: Future Validation Research • Fully define the nomological network of the CSESS by continuing to examine convergent and discriminant validity. • Further validation of alternate CSSES versions to assure that they address assessment problems as intended. • Translate CSSES into different languages. • Cross validation research with diverse populations and individuals in different cultures. • Determine utility of CSSES for assessing changes in community members within the context of service-learning and engaged scholarship.

31. Research Capturing Complexities of the Self-Efficacy Construct • How does community service self-efficacy change in students as they encounter success and failure experiences during service provision? • Does community service self-efficacy moderate or mediate other student outcomes (or community outcomes) during service-learning? • How do different reflection methods influence the community service self-efficacy of students in service-learning? • Does self-efficacy predict future community service? • Does self-efficacy predict community service effectiveness?

32. References Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33, 344-358. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147. Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Bringle, R. G., & Steinberg, K. (in press). Educating for informed community involvement. American Journal of Community Psychology. Caruso, D. R., & Mayer, J. D. (1998). A Measure of Emotional Empathy for Adolescents and Adults.  Unpublished Manuscript.  Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 62-83. Crohnbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302. Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1964). The approval motive: Studies in evaluation dependence. New York: Wiley. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113-126. Dean, D. (1961). Alienation: Its meaning and measurement. American Sociological Review, 26, 753-758. Maddi, S. R., Kobasa, S. C., & Hoover, M. (1979). An alienation test. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 19, 73-76. McAdams, D. P., de St. Aubin, E. (1992). A theory of generativity and its assessment through self-report, behavioral acts, and narrative themes in autobiography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 1003-1015. 

33. References (continued) Moely, B. E., Mercer, S. H., Ilustre, V., Miron, D., & McFarland, M. (2002). Psychometric properties and correlates of the Civic Attitudes and Skills Questionnaire (CASQ): A measure of students’ attitudes related to service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 8, 15-26. Neal, A. G., & Groat, H. T. (1974). Social class correlates of stability and change in levels of alienation. Sociological Quarterly, 15, 548-558. Park, S. W., Bauer, J. J., & Arbuckle, N. B. (2009). Growth motivation attenuates the self- serving attribution. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 914-917. Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of social desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598-609. Reeb, R. N. (2006a). The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale: Further evidence of reliability and validity. In R.N. Reeb (Ed.), Community action research: Benefits to community members and service providers (pp. 97-113). New York: The Haworth Press, Inc. Reeb, R. N. (2006b). Community service self-efficacy: Research review. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10, 242-248. Reeb, R. N., Folger, S. F., Langsner, S., Ryan, C., & Crouse, J. (in press). Self-efficacy in service-learning community action research: Theory, research, and practice. American Journal of Community Psychology. Reeb, R. N., Katsuyama, R. M., Sammon, J. A., & Yoder, D. S. (1998). The Community Self-Efficacy Scale: Evidence of reliability, construct validity, and pragmatic utility. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 5, 48-57. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Sherer, M., Maddus, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The Self-Efficacy Scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51, 671. Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M., Sigmon, S. T., et al. (1991). The will and the ways: Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 570-585. Srole, L. (1956). Social integration and certain corollaries. American Sociological Review, 21, 709-716.

34. Appendix A: The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10Quite Certain Uncertain • ____ 1. If I choose to participate in community service in the future, I will be able to make a meaningful contribution. • ____ 2. In the future, I will be able to find community service opportunities which are relevant to my interests and abilities. • ____ 3. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting social justice. • ____ 4. I am confident that, through community service, I can make a difference in my community. • ____ 5. I am confident that I can help individuals in need by participating in community service activities. • ____ 6. I am confident that, in future community service activities, I will be able to interact with relevant professionals in ways that are meaningful and effective. • ____ 7. I am confident that, through community service, I can help in promoting equal opportunity for citizens. • ____ 8. Through community service, I can apply knowledge in ways that solve “real-life” problems. • ____ 9. By participating in community service, I can help people to help themselves. • ____10. I am confident that I will participate in community service activities in the future.

35. Appendix B: The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale – Sensitive to Change Version (CSSES-SC)1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10 Less than the Greater than the experienced participant experienced participant Compared to an individual with 10 years of community service experience, how confident are you about… ____ 1. …making a meaningful contributions to the community through service?  ____ 2. …finding community service opportunities that are relevant to your interests and abilities? ____ 3. …helping to promote social justice through community service?  ____ 4. …making a difference in your community through service? ____ 5. …helping individuals in need by participating in community service activities? ____ 6. …interacting with professionals in meaningful and effective ways in future community service? ____ 7. ...helping to promote equal opportunity for citizens? ____ 8. …applying knowledge in ways that solve “real-life” problems? ____ 9. …helping people to help themselves? ____ 10. …being willing to participate in community service in the future? 

36. Appendix C: The Community Service Self-Efficacy Scale - Retrospective Version (CSSES-RV)1-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------10 Quite Certain Uncertain This course increased or strengthened my confidence that, in the future, I will be able to… ____ 1. …make meaningful contributions to the community through service.  ____ 2. …find community service opportunities which are relevant to my interests and abilities. ____ 3. …help in promoting social justice through community. ____ 4. …service.make a difference in the community through community service. ____ 5. …help individuals in need by participating in community service activities. ____ 6. …interact with relevant community professionals in ways that are meaningful and effective. ____ 7. …help in promoting equal opportunity for citizens through my community service activities. ____ 8. …apply my knowledge to community service in ways that help to solve “real-life” problems. ____ 9. …help people to help themselves as I engage in community. ____ 10. …commit myself to community service.