Читать книгу New Perspectives on Older Language Learners - Miriam Neigert - Страница 25

The slogan “Yes, we can!“ used in the US presidential elections in 2008 nicely captures what self-efficacy is all about. The way we evaluate our capabilities to perform a task depends on our self-efficacy regarding that particular task: “Self-efficacy differs from self-concept in that it is concerned less with the skills and abilities one thinks one has but more with what one can do with whatever skills one possesses.” (Skaalvik & Skaalvik 2008: 224). Linked to this, self-efficacy can also be considered to be more cognitive than self-concept in that it contains more concrete or explicit judgments of one’s own perceived abilities (Mercer 2011a: 15; Leary & Tangney 2012: 10).

Self-efficacy can guide and predict people’s behaviour, motivation, and decision-making. Thus, it can influence the way we think about our abilities, e.g. whether a language learner approaches the experiences of language learning with an optimistic or pessimistic mindset (Bandura 2001, 2012). But prior to that self-efficacy already comes into effect: when making the decision to attend a language class, a person is convinced that she has what it takes to learn a language. Bandura (2001: 10) writes: “It is partly on the basis of efficacy beliefs that people choose what challenges to undertake, how much effort to expend in the endeavour, how long to persevere in the face of obstacles and failures, and whether failures are motivating or demoralizing.” Whether at the moment a person takes on language learning or in the midst of the common ups and downs of the language learning experience, self-efficacy beliefs continuously act as guides.

Several researchers see the difference between self-concept and self-efficacy beliefs in terms of specificity. Self-efficacy is measured at a more context- or task-specific level than self-concept (Mills 2014: 11; Pajares & Schunk 1994: 194). Mercer (2011a: 15) orders the three concepts of self-esteem, self-concept, and self-efficacy on a scale from global (self-esteem) to tightly context-specific (self-efficacy), with self-concept being in-between. Bandura (2012: 17), however, points out that in many studies the understanding of self-efficacy is often too narrow, being merely on a task-specific level. While he does not doubt the validity or accuracy of studies measuring self-efficacy, he nevertheless reminds us that self-efficacy should be measured in terms of ‘activity domains’ rather than of reducing it simply to the level of tasks. He illustrates this as follows:

[I]n the standard self-efficacy assessment, an activity domain is measured by a set of specific items representing gradations of challenge, but the self-efficacy score is for the totality of items encompassing the domain of activities, not for a specific item within it. […] It is time to retire the misleading claim that self-efficacy theory is inherently wedded to ‘narrow measures’. (2012: 17)

What he calls “activity domains” can encompass different degrees of complexity. It is, for example, possible to measure efficacy beliefs regarding learning a new language (broad scope efficacy) or to measure efficacy beliefs regarding making a booking over the phone in another language (limited scope efficacy). This means that it is more difficult than anticipated at first sight to differentiate self-concept and self-efficacy measures in terms of their specificity (Mercer 2011a: 15). Concluding from this, the primary remaining difference between the two concepts lies in the fact that self-efficacy is more closely bound to “can-do”-appraisals than self-concept. Measuring via a can-do appraisal in this study by asking if a young-old participant can, for instance, envision him- or herself communicating successfully with a native speaker in the near future (see chapter 6) tells us primarily something about his or her self-efficacy regarding that task. Nevertheless, we can draw conclusions – together with the results of similar questions – regarding his or her self-concept in the domain of using (or speaking) English in the future.