For all of us, believing in our ability to succeed influences our eventual success. In this study, a single email was enough to change students’ belief in their ability to succeed. We are not suggesting that you copy and paste the email above and send it to your students, but we do recommend finding ways to influence your students, children, and even yourself using the four components of self-efficacy listed above. Do it authentically and in a way that is natural to you and makes sense for the people you’re working with. And that little bit of extra encouragement and belief might make a big difference.

“It is particularly exciting to note that teaching strategies used in the classroom can and do make a difference to students' self-efficacy." (Fencl and Scheel, 2005)

Research shows that the type of learning environment and teaching method can improve self efficacy in the classroom (Bandura). A similar result was reported by Fencl and Scheel. They describe a required, nonmajors' physics course where the effects of different teaching methods on the classroom climate and self-efficacy were measured. The students' response indicated that a question and answer format, inquiry-based lab activities and conceptual (rather than quantitative) problems had a significant effect on creating a positive climate in the classroom. In addition to those pedagogies, collaborative learning and the use of electronic applications showed a positive correlation with increased self-efficacy in their student sample. Fencl and Scheel point out that the teaching methods that showed a measurable positive effect share the common feature of engaging students in a comfortable or creative manner. Moreover, pedagogies such as collaborative learning and inquiry-based activities have also been shown to have a strong correlation with how well students learn physics [Fencl and Scheel, 2005].

Understanding how to support students’ feelings of self-efficacy is important because when students have developed self-efficacy in a course, they show greater motivation and better performance (Bandura & Locke, 2003). Past research has demonstrated the critical role of self-efficacy for these key outcomes in STEM domains and for groups who have been traditionally viewed as being less interested, confident, or successful in STEM (e.g., women; Pajares, 2005). While self-efficacy is important to attend to, it can also feel like one of the more difficult aspects of the student experience to support. That is because students’ feelings of self-efficacy are often informed by multiple factors outside of instructors’ control. For example, when students participating in SEP courses are asked to explain the way that they respond to self-efficacy questions in our surveys, they commonly cite performance in past courses, mental health challenges, and responsibilities outside of school as factors that contribute significantly to their feelings of self-efficacy in their current courses. With so many outside factors impacting students’ feelings of self-efficacy, it’s reasonable to wonder – how much can instructors really do?

Strong self-efficacy, associated with confidence and a willingness to take risks in learning, has been positively correlated with strong student achievement. While some element of self-efficacy is determined by the learner’s psychological underpinning, self-efficacy can be developed over time through a combination of mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, and positive social persuasions. This report identifies and examines six best practices for developing student self-efficacy in the classroom.

[T]here were some notable differences between the two instructors… who saw significant increases in student self-efficacy for course tasks scores and the other three instructors…. The differences identified directly relate to the main factors theorized to impact self-efficacy. All of the instructors indicated that they tried to encourage and motivate students with their words in addition to providing opportunities to have mastery experiences with the course content. However, the degree of mastery experiences, type of verbal persuasion provided, and the opportunities students had for vicarious experiences of success seemed to differ. This difference may have, in turn, accounted for the variation in self-efficacy for course tasks between the instructors’ classes.