Survey Development: Self Efficacy

Develop an operational definition of self-efficacy
Construct a 10 item survey to measure the self-efficacy of the counseling students. The survey should
be based on one of the designs in the learning resources.
Briefly discuss your rationale for the items you included
Briefly describe your method of data collection and data analysis.
Explain the challenges of constructing a survey of this nature: Be specific and use examples.
Survey Designs can be EITHER Longitudinal Survey Designs OR Cross-Sectional Survey Designs

Survey Development: Self Efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to the measurement of an individual’s capability in completing
specific tasks and reaching the desired objectives. The aspect of self efficacy was first coined by
Bandura (2000). According to him, self-efficacy is an individual’s belief that he or she will be
able to undertake and accomplish a particular task. For instance, an individual may have a
belief of him or her being a brilliant scientist. Therefore, the individual will feel that he or she is
able to undertake any scientific project or tasks. In such a case, then he or she could be
considered as having a science self-efficacy. This owes to the fact that the person beliefs on his
or her efficiency in performing scientific experiments and related tasks. It however, does not
matter on whether his or her belief is true or not, rather what matters in this perspective are his
beliefs. According to Judge et al, (2002) the concepts of neuroticism, locus control, self-esteem
and self-efficacy are used to measure the single factor and therefore, making them to be related.
An individual’s self-efficacy may influence one’s actions, goals, successes and or failures
in life. If one’s self efficacy in a certain area appears lower than his or her capability, then it may

be hard to challenge him or herself with regard to improvement on the capabilities.
Consequently, if one’s self efficacy in a particular area is much higher in comparison to his
or her capabilities, then such a person may set objectives that may be too high for his capability.
This will subsequently lead such an individual to failure and probably to quit. A perfect self-
efficacy is one that is somewhat high on an individual’s capability. It should be designed in a
way that it is challenging to such an individual and at the same time, realistic. This survey used
ten statements, 3 from the talent subscale and the rest from the context sub scale. In addition, we
used a likert scale, which contains four intervals: strongly disagree, kind of disagree, strongly
agree and kind of agree. See the table below for this measurement.

The following table is a ten-item survey in measuring the self-efficacy of counseling students.
Students will be asked to tick the appropriate choice that relate to them.

Items Strongly

Kind of


I know that I would make a very good counselor
I could be very efficient if I worked hard in class
I find some assignments in class to be easy while
other students find them to be hard
People with good jobs are those who were good
when they were in school
I know that I am among the best in my class
It does not matter what grade I acquire in college
I do all the assignments since I want to understand
the subject more
I try as much as I can to answer hard questions since I
feel that it is important to do so
I try to do my best because that is what I am
expected to do
Most of what I learn in school today will be useful
in my career


According to Bandura, Self-efficacy is categorized as domain specific or general. For
this survey, the construct of items that measure academic self-efficacy were quite significant.
Research has indicated that learners with high degree of academic self-efficacy or attitudes
concerning their academic capability have likelihood of pursuing there academic endeavors
with vigor. This is what drives them to become more successful in their careers (Martinez, 2009).
Moreover, the items were designed using a factor analysis, which established three essential
factors to be measured. These included: talent items, as depicted in the question; “I find some
assignments in class to be easy while other students find them to be hard” Context items for
instance, “I know that I would make a very good counselor” and finally effort items such as “I
try to do my best because that is what I am expected to do”.
After completion of item analysis, the items that had correlation below 30 were removed.
The resulting scale of 30 items was found to have a coefficient of 0.82. The alpha in the talent
subscale was 66. Morgana and Jinks, (1999) established that the measures and there subscales
were correlated positive with grades that were self-reported. According to Deci and Ryan,
(2000), individual may decide to do things for multitudinous and complex objectives. On their
part, students may want to do well and work hard from factors derived from both extrinsic and
intrinsic motivations. Deci and Ryan continue that some of the reason making individuals to
behave the way they do include: relatedness and competency, their own autonomy, social
conditions and other disruptive or social conditions.

Data Collection and Analysis

This research was conducted at the university department of counseling. A hundred
students were randomly selected after being consulted and providing their consent concerning
their participation. The researcher distributed the questionnaires personally to each of the
participants and left them to fill the questionnaires. Most of them except two completed the
measures in the first day. For reasons that could not be established, the other two did not
complete the questionnaire. Therefore, 48 people successfully completed the items in the
questionnaires that were then collected by the researcher. The researcher began coding the
questionnaires immediately they were returned using SPSS software version 11.5. This was
followed by analysis of the main findings. The retest and internal reliability of the scale was
measured by intraclass and Crobach’s alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients. In the
analysis, there was a correlation between self-efficacy and student motivation.
Among the challenges that may be encountered in the construction of the self-efficacy
survey, is distinguishing self esteem with similar aspects such as locus of control, self-esteem
and the results expectancies. While perceived efficacy is an issue concerned with an individual’s
capability, self-esteem is concerned on self worth. The two elements are somewhat different. On
the other hand, locus control is related with the a perceived capability but with an assumption of
outcome contingencies, irrespective of the outcomes being instigated by an individual’s actions
or forces that are beyond his or her control. A survey involving efficacy items should be
designed in such a way that the items are a reflection of the construction. This is where the
problem arose as finding such items proved a bit cumbersome. All in all the researcher managed
to come up with items of self efficacy without mixing up with similar elements such as locus of
control, perceived efficacy or self esteem.



Bandura, A. (2000). “Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy”
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 75-78
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). “Intrinsic motivation and self -determination in human

Behavior” New York: Plenum Press.
Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). “Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem,
generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction
and job performance: A meta-analysis” Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80-92.
Jinks, J., & Morgan, V. (1999). “Children’s perceived academic self-efficacy: An
inventory scale” Clearing House, 72 , 224-230

Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-P.M. (1992). “Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role
of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting” American Educational Research
Journal, 29, 663-676.