CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background to the Study

Performance is highly interesting and an important issue in education. It is a

fundamental premium upon which all teaching-learning activities are measured using

some criteria of excellence like good academic performance, poor academic

performance or academic failure. Academic performance has special importance for

both the students and the people around them.

Concern on the issue of improving performance or achievement has increased

in recent years. The reason for this can be attributed to the performance of the

students at the secondary school level in recent time which is not encouraging.

Among all school subjects, Mathematics plays significance roles in the cognitive

development of the students. This in turn helps the students to develop their affective

and psychomotor domain in their daily life and to contribute their quota to the

development of the nations. Despite the importance of Mathematics to any given

nation, the reviews on performance of students in Mathematics in public

examinations have revealed poor performance. According to the report by one of the

public examination bodies in charge of secondary school certificate examination in

Nigeria; West African Examination Council (WAEC), more than half of the

1
candidates who took the examinations between 2008 and 2013 in Mathematics failed

the subject. It revealed that in the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, the

percentage pass with credit and above in Mathematics in Nigeria were 23.0%, 31.0%,

24.94%, 38.98%, 38.90% and 30.0% respectively. (Kurumeh & Imoko 2008,

Ashikhia 2010, Moseri, Onwuka & Iweka 2010, Iyi, 2011 www.weacnigeria.org). It

is worthy to note that in Nigeria, the six successful years of secondary education is

the foundation or the basis of studentship in the university, Colleges of Education or

Polytechnics.

The above background has given rise to research efforts to find strategies for

tackling the poor performance of Nigerian candidates in the public examinations.

Researchers like (Adeyemo 2002; Aremu 2005; Zimmerman 2001; Bong & Skaalvik

2004; and Emanuel, Ruramayi & Ifeoma, 2013) have reported that academic

performance is associated with socio-psychological variables as well as other notable

variables. These socio-psychological variables according to them may include self-

concept, self-esteem, self-confidence, self-regulation, locus of control, self-efficacy,

interest in schooling, study-habits and so on. The question of how those variables can

be used to improve academic performance of the secondary school students is still a

complex one.

2
 However, Bandura (1997) defines the concept of self-efficacy as the

confidence that people have in their abilities for success in a given task. Bernhard

(1997) also defines the self-efficacy as learners beliefs about their abilities to

accomplish a task. Pajares (2000) opines that it is the students judgments of their

academic competence. He assumed that personal self-efficacy beliefs were "the very

foundation of human agency", "vital forces in their success or failure in all

endeavors", and "critical forces in their academic achievement". The concept is also

defined by Arnold & Brown (1999) as the degree to which the student thinks he or

she has the capacity to cope with the learning challenges. Oxford & Shearin (1994)

defined the term self-efficacy as ones judgment of how well one can execute courses

of action required to deal with prospective situations. Bandura (1985) observed that

out of all beliefs, self-efficacy is the most influential in human agency and plays

powerful role in determining the choices people make, the effort they will persevere

in the face of challenge, and the degree of anxiety or confidence they will bring to the

task giving to them. It is this perceived self-efficacy that helps explain why peoples

behaviours differ widely even when they have similar knowledge and skills.

Therefore, previous researches revealed that self-efficacy and other notable

self beliefs are strong predictors of academic performance and this calls for attention

3
of educational psychologists to look for how these self beliefs can be used to improve

academic performance.

Four factors that determine self-efficacy was identified by Bandura (1986 and

1997). These factors are: enactive mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal

persuasion, and physiological and emotional states. The most influential of these

factors is enactive mastery experience, which refers to individuals experiences with

success or failure in past situations. Information gathered from these experiences is

then internalized. Past successes raise self-efficacy and repeated failures lower it,

which indicates to individuals their levels of capability (Bandura, 1986 & 1997).

In a vicarious experience, individuals compare themselves to peers whom they

perceive are similar in ability and intelligence to themselves. Watching peers succeed

raises observers self-efficacy and seeing them fail lowers it. Exposure to multiple

successful role models helps increase self-efficacy in observers (Bandura, 1986 and

1997).

Verbal persuasion tries to convince individuals, who may doubt their

capabilities, that they possess the skills needed for success at a given task. In

education, verbal persuasion delivered by teachers often takes the form of verbal

feedback, evaluation, and encouragement. Physiological and emotional state can

4
either positively or negatively affect interpretation of an events outcome (Bandura,

1986 and 1997).

Therefore, the bone of contention of this research work is to examine Self-

efficacy as a predictor of academic performance of students in mathematics. Hitherto,

researches on socio-psychological variables have not been done much in Nigeria in

relating to self-efficacy especially in Ilorin metropolis.

The relationship between self-efficacy of male students and their performance

and that of female students and their performance have been the focus of research.

Researchers reported that boys and men tend to be more confident than girls and

women in academic areas related to mathematics, science, and technology (Meece,

1991; Pajares & Miller, 1994; Wigfield, Eccles, & Pintrich, 1996), despite the fact

that achievement differences in these areas either are diminishing or have

disappeared (Eisenberg, Martin, & Fabes, 1996). Conversely, in areas related to

language arts, male and female students exhibit similar confidence despite the fact

that the achievement of girls typically is higher (Pajares, 2006).

More so, research also interested in the relationship between self-efficacy of

private school students and their performance and that of self-efficacy of public

school students and their performance since researchers such as Adeyemo (2005)

5
reported that school environment is a predictor of academic self-efficacy of

secondary school students.

In the light of the above mentioned influences and studies, this study was

designed to find out the extent to which self-efficacy can predict academic

performance of the secondary school students. If this is possible, then; the researcher

will make recommendations for individual student to be in proper self-efficacy. It

should also be noted that researches on socio-psychological variables and their

relationship with academic achievement or learning outcome are still very limited

particularly from the Nigeria population of secondary school students. This

necessitates the conduct of this research at this time. It is expected that the outcome

of this study will assist the secondary school educational stakeholders in Nigeria,

particularly the two examinations bodies earlier mentioned together with secondary

school teachers and educational authorities on how best to improve academic

achievement from the socio-psychological variables perspective.

Statement of the Problem

The standard of education is said to be falling due to poor performance of

secondary school students in public examinations such as West African Examination

Council (WAEC) on yearly basis as evidenced in the background. This has over the

years prompted many scholars to conduct several researches in an attempt to proffer

6
solutions to the problem but none has yielded the expected significant result. For

instance, several studies have been done in the area of teacher factors (Adewumi &

Bada 2007), and school environments as they relates to poor students academic

performance (Babalola, 2000).

Researchers like Adedeji, Adeyinka and Olufemi (2009) based on their

findings, Locus Control, Interest in Schooling and Self-Efficacy jointly and relatively

contributed significantly to the prediction of Academic Performance of the Junior

Secondary School Students. More so, based on her study on the key variables in

language learning, Cotterall (1999) considered self-efficacy as a crucial variable in

success of language learners. Wigfield, Eccles, and Pintrich (1996) are those of the

scholars who investigated the role of self-efficacy construct in achievement. Their

study showed that learners self-perception of ability and their expectancies for

success are the strongest predictors of subsequent grades in Mathematics and

English.

David (2010) evaluates the Mathematics self-efficacy of post-secondary

developmental Mathematics students and after a developmental Mathematics course

and to determine if a relationship existed between self-efficacy and age, gender,

course and grade. His study did not find any of the independent variables to be

7
 significant predictors of Mathematics self-efficacy. Thus, students can develop their

Mathematics self-efficacy irrespective of their age, gender, course or grade.

More so, Magogwe and Oliver (2007) also did a study on 480 students from

primary schools, secondary schools, and a tertiary institution. Findings of the

research indicated that there is a significant and positive relationship between self-

efficacy beliefs and overall use of language learning strategies for the students.

However, self-efficacy is not part of any subject curriculum including

Mathematics. This gap in knowledge exists in the midst of poor performance of

students in schools as revealed by a review of their performance in Mathematics

Junior Secondary School Certificate Examination (JSSCE). See table below

A C D F
Year Total (%) (%) (%) (%)

2009 34866 13% 34% 44% 8%

2010 33743 23% 30% 24% 23%
2011 32900 18% 36% 30% 16%
2012 34343 17% 38% 31% 14%
2013 36914 17% 37% 31% 15%

Source: Kwara State Ministry of Education, Science and Technology Ilorin.

Table 1: Trends of Kwara State students Academic Performance in Junior
Secondary School Examination (JSSCE) in Mathematics

8
 Table one revealed that less than 60 per cent of the students who sat for the

examinations passed Mathematics from 2009 to 2013.

In view of this, numerous studies have been carried out on self-efficacy while

none of them has been carried out on students self-efficacy, gender, and school type

with the students performance in Ilorin, Kwara State. It is on this basis that this study

was investigated into predicting the level of students Mathematics self-efficacy on

secondary school students performance in Mathematics.

Purpose of the Study

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between Self-

efficacy and Performance of the secondary school students in Mathematics.

Specifically, the study intends to examine:

a. The general level of the Performance of the students

b. The general Self-efficacy level of the students

c. The relationship between Self-efficacy of Secondary School Male Students

and their Performance.

d. The relationship between Self-efficacy of Secondary School Female Students

and their performance.

e. The relationship between Self-efficacy of Public Secondary School students

and their performance.

9
 f. sThe relationship between Self-efficacy of Private Secondary School students

and their performance.

Research Questions

From the purpose of the study of this work, the following research questions

were raised.

a. What is the general level of performance of the secondary school students in

Ilorin metropolis?

b. What is the general level of Self-efficacy of the secondary school students in

Ilorin metropolis?

c. Is there any relationship between Self-efficacy and performance of Secondary

School students in Mathematics in Ilorin metropolis?

d. Is there any relationship between Self-efficacy of secondary school male

students and their Performance?

e. Is there any relationship between Self-efficacy of secondary school female

students and their Performance?

f. Is there any relationship between Self-efficacy of public secondary school

students and their Performance?

g. Is there any relationship between Self-efficacy of private secondary school

students and their Performance?

10
 Research Hypotheses

In line with the research questions, the following hypotheses have been drawn.

H01: There is no significant relationship between Self-efficacy and

Performance of Secondary School Students in Ilorin metropolis.

H02: There is no significant relationship between Self-efficacy of male

students and their Performance.

H03: There is no significant relationship between Self-efficacy of female

students and their Performance

H04: There is no significant relationship between Self-efficacy of public

school students and their Performance.

H05: There is no significant relationship between Self-efficacy of private

school students and their Performance

Scope of the Study

This study focused on the relationship between self-efficacy and performance of

kwara state secondary school students in Mathematics. This is because Mathematics

is a compulsory subject for all secondary school students and equally ranked among

the pre-requisite subjects for further education in Nigeria.

The study covered all Senior Secondary School one (SSS1) students in Ilorin

metropolis. The SSS1 students were deliberately selected because the researcher

11
assumes that they might have acquired good understanding of English language

which would enable them to respond to the questionnaires appropriately. They were

also assumed to be matured enough to be able to understand their confidential

feelings. Similarly, they have equally sat for Junior Secondary School Certificate

Examination (JSSCE) of which their results score was used as a standard to measure

their performance.

Despite that it is not possible for the researcher to reach all senior secondary

school one (SSS1) in Ilorin metropolis, stratified random sampling techniques was

used to select twelve (12) Senior Secondary Schools within Ilorin metropolis while

taking private and public schools into consideration.

The data from the study was subjected to appropriate statistical analysis.

Frequencies count and percentage was used to describe the demographic data, while

Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC) coefficient was used to analyze all

hypotheses generated. All hypotheses were tested at alpha, 0.05, level of significance.

Operational Definition of Terms

The following terms have been operationally defined as used in this study.

Self-Efficacy: Is the students judgment of their capacities to organize and execute

courses of action required to attain good performance in Mathematics.

Performance: refers to the performance of the students in Mathematics

12
Private Schools: are the registered schools with the Kwara state ministry education

which are owned and controlled by private individual or group of individuals.

Public Schools: are the registered schools that are owned and controlled by the

government of Kwara State.

Gender: refers to the male and female student of senior secondary school one (SSS1)

who to respond to the questionnaire.

Significance of the Study

The outcomes of this research are very useful to the curriculum designers,

teachers, educational psychologists, Government policy makers, parents, religion

bodies, school administrators, community leaders and other relevant stakeholders.

Quite number of researchers in education have noticed that the pursuit of an

exclusively performance leave the students ill-equipped for their life both as

individual and as a member of the society. Based on this notice, researchers such as

Paraje (2000), and Arnod and Brown (1999) recommended that education should be

expanded to include development of self-efficacy and other socio-psychological

variables so as to equip the learners to be healthy minded. To this end, it is necessary

to develop self-efficacy among learners.

Considering learners effect, it offers significant implications for curriculum

designers. Through designing a learner-centered Mathematic curriculum, which takes

13
effect into account in many ways, they may help Mathematics learners develop

positive beliefs of their ability. Regarding the role that, this kind of curriculum may

play in fostering positive self-beliefs.

Coupled with this knowledge, significance of this research to teachers and

educational psychologists cannot be overemphasized. It will help them to be able to

device better ways of handling students and create conducive environment that

develop learners efficacy. This will help learners to confront their enormous

problems with confidence as it has rightly been done in most of the advanced

countries of the world. The study is also meant to awake the consciousness of

parents, policy makers, religion bodies as well as the community leaders to the vital

roles self-efficacy plays in shaping education and understanding of the man in

general.

In conclusion, school administrators need to harness different strategies or

programmmes that will give room to both teachers and parents to understand various

ways of improving the learners self-efficacy.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents a review of literature on self-efficacy and academic

performance under the following sub-heading:

14
 1. Social Cognitive Theory

2. Definition and Description of Self-efficacy

3. Self-efficacy and its Related Constructs

4. Social Influence on Development of Self-efficacy

5. Self-efficacy and Gender

6. Concept of Academic Performance

7. Self-efficacy and Academic Performance

8. Appraisal of the Literature Reviewed.

Social Cognitive Theory

Self-efficacy research originated with Dr. Albert Bandura in the field of social

cognitive theory. Social cognitive theory centered on human agency as the vehicle of

change (an agentic perspective) and the efficacy belief system as the foundation of

human agency (Bandura, 2004).

Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory (1986, 1997) emphasizes how cognitive,

behavioral, individual and environmental factors interact to determine motivation and

behavior. The theory covers four processes of goal attainment, self observation, self

evaluation, self reaction and self efficacy (Redmond, 2009). Banduras (1986) Social

Cognitive Theory states that how a person functions is determined by the interaction

of (a) personal factors, such as cognition, affect and biological events, (b) behaviour

15
factors and (c) environmental factors. Human functioning is the result of the

interaction of all three of these functions, known as Bandura's Triadic Reciprocal

Determinism. As Pajares (2002) states,

People are viewed as self-organizing, proactive, self-reflecting and

self-regulating rather than as reactive organisms shaped and
shepherded by environmental forces or driven by concealed inner
impulses.

Social cognitive theory identified four core features of human agency:

Intentionality, forethought, self-reactive elements, and self-reflective elements

(Bandura, 2004). Intentionality concerned the intentions, action plans and strategies

for realizing them. Forethought concerned goals and anticipated outcomes to guide

and motivate efforts. Self-reactive elements consisted of the adoption of personal

standards and monitoring and regulating actions by self-reactive influence. Self-

reflective elements consisted of reflection on efficacy, the soundness of thoughts and

actions, the meaning of the pursuits, and the making of necessary adjustments.

Bandura's theory stated that "psychological procedures, whatever their form,

alter the level and strength of self-efficacy" (Bandura, 1977). He found the

contributions of self-beliefs as a determinant of human behavior to be a missing link

in social cognitive theory research (Pajares, 2002). Bandura sought a paradigm shift

from the psychodynamic model of human behavior prevalent in the 1950s. Variants

of this model shared three characteristics (Bandura, 2004). First, the causes of

16
behavior were not seen as residing within the individual. Second, behavior deviating

from prevailing social norms was treated as a kind of "disease". Third, practitioners

relied heavily on the interpretive interview as the vehicle of change and provider of

client insight. That is, the practitioner would interpret data and provide insight to the

individual, contributing to the perception that causality and insight must come from

external sources.

The viewpoints researchers in 1960 on the causes of behavior shifted to

transactional social dynamics (personal, behavioral, environmental). Troublesome

behavior was represented as divergent rather than diseased, and action-oriented

treatments replaced interpretive interviews (Bandura, 2004). Pajares (2002) said it

this way: "People are viewed as self-organizing, proactive, self-reflecting and self-

regulating rather than as reactive organisms shaped and shepherded by environmental

forces or driven by concealed inner impulses". The determinants of human behavior

included both personal and environmental factors (Pajares, 2002).

The importance of this shift was the modification in the content, locus, and

agent of change (Bandura, 2004). Guided mastery experiences were used to equip

people with competencies, enabling beliefs and social resources. Treatments were

carried out not in the practitioner's office, but in the locations where the problems

arose: In homes, schools, and the larger community. Talented people implemented

17
change programs under professional guidance; professionals were not considered the

exclusive dispensers of treatments. Self-efficacy theory was the final necessary

component to the "research puzzle" (Bandura, 2004).

Definition and Description of Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy, also called perceived ability, refers to the confidence people

have in their abilities for success in a given task (Bandura, 1997). If they possess the

ability to successfully perform, then that task will be attempted. The task will be

avoided if it is perceived to be too difficult (Bandura, 1986 and1997). Although

inefficacious individuals usually avoid challenging tasks, when they do attempt them

they give up more easily than individuals with high efficacy. When inefficacious

individuals fail, they attribute the unsuccessful result to a lack of ability and tend to

lose faith in their capabilities. When they succeed, they are more likely to attribute

their success to external factors (Badura 1986, Bandura 1997, Shibeli and Riley

1986). If students master a challenging task with limited assistance, their levels of

self-efficacy rise (Bandura, 1986).

Similarly, Bernhard (1997) defines the concept of self-efficacy as learners

beliefs about their abilities to accomplish a task. Pajares (2000) opines that, it is the

students judgments of their academic competence. The concept is also defined by

Arnold & Brown (1999) as the degree to which the student thinks he or she has the

18
capacity to cope with the learning challenge. If people have high positive self-

efficacy about learning a second language, then they believe that they have the power

and abilities to reach this goal. On the other hand, people with low self-efficacy feel

that they do not have the power and abilities to learn a language, thus admitting

failure from the start (Bernhard, 1997).

Research revealed that self beliefs are strong predictors of academic

achievements so that new waves of educational psychologists are calling for attention

to self-beliefs related to their academic pursuits (Pajares, 2000). Of all beliefs, self-

efficacy is the most influential arbiter in human agency and plays powerful role in

determining the choices people make, the effort they will persevere in the face of

challenge, and the degree of anxiety or confidence they will bring to the task at hand

(Bandura, 1986). It is this perceived self-efficacy that helps explain why peoples

behaviors differ widely even when they have similar knowledge and skills.

The concept of self-efficacy is recognized by Oxford and Shearin (1994) as a

broadened view of expectancy which is drawn from social cognition theory. They

define the term as ones judgment of how well one can execute courses of action

required to deal with prospective situations (ibid). According to Bandura (1977),

self-efficacy refers to "an individuals judgment about his or her ability to accomplish

a given task or activity." (Choi, N. , Fuqua, D. & Griffin, B. 2001). For him, self-

19
efficacy is a much more consistent predictor of behavior than any of the other closely

related variables. This view is supported by Graham and Weiner (1995) who

observed that the acquisition of new skills and the performance of previously learned

skills have been related to efficacy beliefs at a level not found in any of the other

expectancy constructs.

According to Pajares (2000), beliefs that individuals create and develop and

hold to be true are vital forces in their success or failure in school. This would lead

one to infer that research on achievement, on why students achieve or fail to achieve,

and on why they do things they do in school should naturally focus, at least in great

part, on students self-efficacy beliefs.

Individuals who possess a high degree of self-efficacy are more likely to

attempt challenging tasks, to persist longer at them, and to exert more effort in the

process. If highly efficacious individuals fail, they attribute the outcome to a lack of

effort or an adverse environment. When they succeed, they credit their achievement

to their abilities. It is the perception that their abilities caused the achievement that

affects the outcome rather than their actual abilities (Bandura, 1986).

Four factors determine self-efficacy or four source of information that people

base their efficacy on: enactive mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal

persuasion, and physiological and emotional states (Bandura, 1986 and 1997). The

20
most influential of these factors is enactive mastery experience, which refers to

individuals experiences with success or failure in past situations. Information

gathered from these experiences is then internalized. Past successes raise self-

efficacy and repeated failures lower it, which indicates to individuals their levels of

capability (Bandura, 1986 and 1997). In a vicarious experience, individuals compare

themselves to peers whom they perceive are similar in ability and intelligence to

themselves. Watching peers succeed raises observers self-efficacy and seeing them

fail lowers it. Exposure to multiple successful role models helps increase self-

efficacy in observers (Bandura, 1986 and 1997). Verbal persuasion tries to convince

individuals, who may doubt their capabilities, that they possess the skills needed for

success at a given task. In education, verbal persuasion delivered by teachers often

takes the form of verbal feedback, evaluation, and encouragement. Persuasion must

be realistic, sincere, and from a credible source; otherwise it can negatively affect

student self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1986). Emotional state can either positively or

negatively affect interpretation of an events outcome (Bandura, 1986 and 1997).

Giving a speech in front of a large group of people, making a presentation to an

important client, taking an exam. All of these tasks can cause agitation, anxiety,

sweaty palms and a racing heart. Although this source is the least influential of the

21
 four, it is important to note that if one is more at ease with the task at hand they will

feel more capable and have feelings of high self -efficacy.

In addition to the four factors that determine general self-efficacy, aptitude,

attitudes, and attributions are found to predict science self-efficacy (Smist,

Archambault, and owen 1997)

Fig. 1: Illustration of four source of information that people base their efficacy

Enactive mastery experience

Vicarious Experience

Self-efficacy judgment Behaviour

/performance
Verbal persuasion

Physiological and emotional states

22
Source: Brian (2009)

In addition to theoretical evidences, the relevant literature holds practical

evidences of strong effects of self-efficacy beliefs on academic performances too.

David (2010) evaluates the Mathematics self-efficacy of postsecondary

developmental mathematics students and after a developmental mathematics course

and to determine if a relationship existed between self-efficacy and age, gender,

course and grade. His study did not find any of the independent variables to be

significant predictors of Mathematics self-efficacy. Thus, students can develop their

Mathematics self-efficacy irrespective of their age, gender, course or grade.

Similarly, Adedeji, Adeyinka and Olufemi (2009) based on their findings,

Locus Control, Interest in Schooling and Self-Efficacy jointly and relatively

contribute significantly to the prediction of Academic Performance of the Junior

Secondary School Students. More so, based on her study on the key variables in

language learning, Cotterall (1999) considered self-efficacy as a crucial variable in

success of language learners. Wigfield, Eccles, & Pintrich (1996) are scholars who

investigated the role of self-efficacy construct in achievement. The subjects in his

study were given self-report measures of self-perceptions of ability and expectancy

for success in mathematics and English at the beginning of one school year and at the

end of that same year. At the same time, the researcher also collected data on the

23
students actual achievement on standardized tests and course grades. The study

showed that learners self-perception of ability and their expectancies for success are

the strongest predictors of subsequent grades in math and English.

More so, Magogwe and Oliver (2007) also did a study on 480 students from

primary schools, secondary schools, and a tertiary institution. A modified version of

the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) developed by Oxford (1989)

for collecting information on strategies and the Morgan-Jinks Student Efficacy Scale

(MJSES) developed by Morgan and Jinks (1999) for collecting information on self-

efficacy were used in this study. Findings of the research indicated that there is a

significant and positive relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and overall use of

language learning strategies for the students with the three proficiency levels

mentioned.

Chen and Deborah (2007) also contributed to this literature by conducting a

research on the relationship between EFL learners self-efficacy beliefs and English

listening achievement. The study was conducted within college-level English

listening comprehension classes at two large universities in Taiwan. The students

listening course grades were used as the students listening proficiency level. A survey

questionnaire which consisted of two sub-scales of 1) English listening self-efficacy

scale constructed by the researcher, and 2) English anxiety and perceived English

24
value scale adapted respectively from Betzs, (1987) Mathematics Anxiety Scale

(MAS) and Eccles, (1983) Student Attitude Questionnaire was performed in this

study. Results of this study indicated that there was a significant and positive

relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and listening achievement. The results also

showed that students self-efficacy beliefs were much stronger predicators of

language performance in the area of listening than students anxiety and perceived

value were.

Self-efficacy and its Related Constructs

There are motivation constructs that seem conceptually similar to self-efficacy.

These closely related constructs are outcome expectations, self-concept, and

perceived control. Outcome Expectance is the consequences expected from ones

own actions, are related to self-efficacy beliefs but they are not synonymous. For

example, an efficacious student may believe that she has the capability to learn

mathematics. Nonetheless, she may also believe that despite her perceived capability

she will not earn a good grade in mathematics class because the instructor does not

like her. The conceptual distinction that Bandura (1986) drew between academic self-

efficacy and outcome expectancies was studied psychometrically in research on

reading and writing achievement. Shell, Murphy, and Bruning (1989) measured self-

efficacy in terms of perceived capability to perform various reading and writing

25
activities, and they assessed outcome expectancies regarding the value of these

activities in attaining various outcomes in employment, social pursuits, family life,

education, and citizenship. Efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancies jointly

predicted 32% of the variance in reading achievement, with perceived efficacy

accounting for virtually all the variance. Only perceived self-efficacy was a

significant predictor of writing achievement. These results not only show the

discriminant validity of self-efficacy measures, they support Banduras contention

that self-efficacy plays a larger role than outcome expectancies in motivation.

Another closest construct is Self Concept. Self concept is ones collective self-

perceptions that are formed through experiences with, and interpretations of the

environment, and which are heavily influenced by reinforcements and evaluations by

significant others (Shavelson & Bolus, 1982). Whereas self-efficacy is concerned

with judgments about capabilities, self-concept includes the feelings of self-worth

that accompany competence beliefs (Pajares & Schunk, in press). Thus Self concept

is more general self-descriptive construct that incorporates many forms of self-

knowledge and self-evaluative feelings (Marsh & Shavelson, 1985).

Historically, self-concept was defined by phenomenologists (e.g., Rogers,

1951) as a global perception of oneself and ones self-esteem reactions to that self-

perception, but this global measure of self-belief was not found to be related

26
consistently to students academic performance (Hattie, 1992; Wylie, 1968). Perhaps

as a result, a number of theorists (e.g., Harter, 1978; Marsh & Shavelson, 1985)

reconceptualized self-concept as a hierarchical construct, with a global self-concept

at the apex of a self-hierarchy but added subcategories such as academic self-concept

in the middle of the hierarchy and academic domain-specific self-concepts at the

bottom. The latter self-concept measures emphasize self-esteem reactions by posing

self-evaluative questions, such as How good are you in Mathematics? By contrast,

self-efficacy items focus exclusively on task-specific performance expectations, such

as How certain are you that you can solve a Mathematics task? Although prior task

reactions and future performance expectations are often correlated, Bandura (1997)

notes it is possible conceptually to have high self-efficacy about a capability that one

does not particularly esteem as well as the reverse.

There is growing evidence that, although self-efficacy beliefs are correlated

with domain-specific self-concepts, self-efficacy measures offer predictive

advantages when a task is familiar and can be specified precisely. For example,

Pajares and Miller (1994) used path analysis procedures to examine the predictive

and mediational roles of these two constructs in mathematical problem solving by

college students. Math self-efficacy was more predictive of problem solving than was

math self-concept or, for that matter, perceived usefulness of mathematics, prior

27
experience with mathematics, or gender. The effect of prior math experiences on

math problem solving was mediated primarily by self-efficacy beliefs, but self-

concept played a small but significant role. Thus, when self-concept and self-efficacy

beliefs are both included in regression equations, self-efficacy beliefs display

discriminant validity by independently predicting future academic achievement.

Although self-efficacy questionnaire items should be adapted to specific tasks, the

scope of these tasks can vary on the basis of the users intended purpose, ranging

from proficiency in an academic domain (e.g., writing or mathematics) to proficiency

in a sub skill (e.g., grammar or fractions). This second criterion for developing self-

efficacy measures involves their correspondence to the performance capability in

question. Pajares (1996a) demonstrated that the predictiveness of self-efficacy

measures increases as a function of both their specificity and correspondence to a

skill. Thus, self-efficacy differs from self-concept in both its specificity and

correspondence to varying performance tasks and contexts. (Zimmerman, 2000).

Perceived Control is another closely related construct to Self-Efficacy.

Perceived control emerged from research on locus of control (Rotter, 1966).

Perceived control refers to general expectancies about whether outcomes are

controlled by ones behavior or by external forces, and it is theorized that an internal

locus of control should support self-directed courses of action, whereas an external

28
locus of control should discourage them. Locus-of-control scales are neither task nor

domain specific in their item content but rather refer to general beliefs about the

internality or externality of causality. Bandura (1986) has questioned the value of

general control beliefs because students may feel anxious about controlling one type

of subject matter or performance setting (e.g., solving mathematical problems in a

limited time period) but not others. In support of this contention, Smith (1989) found

that locus of control measures did not predict improvements in academic

performance or reductions in anxiety in highly self-anxious students who underwent

an intensive coping skills training program, but self-efficacy scales did predict such

improvements.

In summary, measures of self-efficacy are not only conceptually distinctive

from closely associated constructs such as outcome expectancies, self concept, and

perceived control, they have discriminated validity in predicting a variety of

academic outcomes. (Zimmerman, 2000).

Social Influences on Development of Self-efficacy

Schunck and Pajare (1996) identified five influences on the development of

Self-Efficacy; Familial influence, peer influence, role of schooling, Transitional

Influence and Developmental Changes in Self-Appraisal Skill

29
 Beginning in infancy, parents and caregivers provide experiences that

differentially influence childrens self-efficacy. Home influences that help children

interact effectively with the environment positively affect self-efficacy (Bandura,

1997; Meece, 1997). Initial sources of self-efficacy are centered in the family, but the

influence is bidirectional. Parents who provide an environment that stimulates

youngsters curiosity and allows for mastery experiences help to build childrens self-

efficacy. In turn, children who display more curiosity and exploratory activities

promote parental responsiveness.

When environments are rich in interesting activities that arouse childrens

curiosity and offer challenges that can be met, children are motivated to work on the

activities and thereby learn new information and skills (Meece, 1997). There is much

variability in home environments. Some contain materials such as computers, books,

and puzzles that stimulate childrens thinking. Parents who are heavily invested in

their childrens cognitive development may spend time with them on learning. Other

homes do not have these resources and adults may devote little time to childrens

education.

Parents who provide a warm, responsive and supportive home environment,

who encourage exploration and stimulate curiosity, and who provide play and

learning materials accelerate their childrens intellectual development (Meece, 1997).

30
Parents also are key providers of self-efficacy information. Parents who arrange for

varied mastery experiences develop more-efficacious youngsters than do parents who

arrange fewer opportunities (Bandura, 1997). Thus, educated parents are likely to

provide enabling environment to develop more efficacious youngsters than less

educated parents due to their levels of experiences. Therefore, self-efficacy occurs in

homes enriched with activities and in which children have freedom to explore.

With respect to vicarious sources, parents who teach children ways to cope

with difficulties and model persistence and effort strengthen childrens self-efficacy.

As children grow, peers become increasingly important. Parents who steer their

children toward efficacious peers provide further vicarious boosts in self-efficacy.

Homes also are prime sources of persuasive information. Parents who encourage

their youngsters to try different activities and support their efforts help to develop

children who feel more capable of meeting challenges (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy

suffers in homes in which novel activities are discouraged.

Peers influence childrens self-efficacy in various ways. One means is through

model similarity. Observing similar others succeed can raise observers self-efficacy

and motivate them to perform the task if they believe that they, too, will be successful

(Schunk, 1987). Conversely, observing others fail can lead students to believe that

they lack the competence to succeed and dissuade them from attempting the task.

31
Model similarity is most influential for students who are uncertain about their

performance capabilities, such as those lacking task familiarity and information to

use in judging self-efficacy or those who have experienced difficulties and hold

doubts (Bandura, 1986; Schunk, 1987). Model similarity is potent among children

and adolescents because peers are similar in many ways and students at these

developmental levels are unfamiliar with many tasks. Peer influence also operates

through peer networks, or large groups of peers with whom students associate.

Students in networks tend to be similar to one another (Cairns, Cairns, & Neckerman,

1989), which enhances the likelihood of influence by modeling. Networks help

define students opportunities for interactions and observations of others interactions,

as well as their access to activities (Dweck & Goetz, 1978). Over time, network

members become more similar to one another. Discussions between friends influence

their choices of activities and friends often make similar choices (Berndt & Keefe,

1992).

Peer groups promote motivational socialization. Changes in childrens

motivational engagement across the school year are predicted accurately by their peer

group membership at the start of the year (Kindermann, McCollam, & Gibson, 1996).

Children affiliated with highly motivated groups change positively across the school

year; those in less-motivated groups change negatively. Steinberg, Brown, and

32
Dornbusch (1996) tracked students from high school entrance until their senior year

and found developmental patterns in the influence of peer pressure on many activities

including academic motivation and performance. Peer pressure rises during

childhood and peaks around grade 8 or 9 but then declines through high school. A

key time of influence is roughly between ages 12 and 16, a time during which

parental involvement in childrens activities declines. Steinberg et al. also found that

students who begin high school with similar grades but who become affiliated with

academically oriented crowds achieve better during high school than do students who

become affiliated with less-academically oriented crowds.

The role of Schooling is another influence of students self-efficacy. The

finding that, self-efficacy beliefs tend to decline as students advance through school

(Pintrich & Schunk, 1996) has been attributed to various factors, including greater

competition, more norm-referenced grading, less teacher attention to individual

student progress, and stresses associated with school transitions. These and other

school practices can weaken academic self-efficacy, especially among students who

are less academically prepared to cope with increasingly challenging academic tasks.

Lock-step sequences of instruction frustrate some students who fail to grasp skills

and increasingly fall behind their peers (Bandura, 1997). Ability groupings can lower

self-efficacy among those relegated to lower groups. Classrooms that allow for much

33
social comparison tend to lower the self-efficacy of students who find their

performances inferior to those of their peers.

Students involvement and participation in school depend in part on how much

the school environment contributes to their perceptions of autonomy and relatedness,

which in turn influence self-efficacy and academic achievement. Although parents

and teachers contribute to feelings of autonomy and relatedness, peers become highly

significant during adolescence. The peer group context enhances or diminishes

students feelings of belonging and affiliation (Hymel, Comfort, Schonert-Reichl, &

McDougall, 1996).

Transitional Influences

Periods of transition in schooling bring additional factors into play that affect

self-efficacy. Eccles and her colleagues (Eccles & Midgley, 1989; Eccles, Midgley, &

Adler, 1984) have reported that the transition to middle school brings several

changes. Elementary students remain with the same teacher and peers for most of the

school day, children receive much attention, and individual progress is stressed.

Because many elementary schools typically feed into the same middle school and

because students change classes, middle school students are exposed to peers whom

they do not know. At this academic level, most evaluation is normative and there is

less teacher attention to individual progress. The widely expanded social reference

34
group, coupled with the shift in evaluation standards, requires that students reassess

their academic abilities. As a consequence, perceptions of academic competence

typically begin to decline during middle school (Harter, 1996; Midgley, Feldlaufer, &

Eccles, 1989).

Developmental Changes in Self-Appraisal Skill

Self-appraisal skills improve with development. Most children are

overconfident about what they can do. In self-efficacy research it is not uncommon

for children to feel highly efficacious about accomplishing difficult tasks; even being

provided with feedback indicating low performance may not decrease self-efficacy

(Schunk, 1995). Less frequently, children underestimate their capabilities and believe

that they cannot acquire basic skills.

The incongruence between childrens self-efficacy and their actual

performance may be due to various causes. Children often lack task familiarity and

do not fully understand what is required to execute a task successfully. As they gain

experience their accuracy improves. Children may be unduly swayed by certain task

features and decide based on these that they can or cannot perform the task while

ignoring other features. In subtraction, for example, children may focus on how many

numbers the problems contain and judge longer problems more difficult than those

35
with fewer numbers, even when the longer ones are conceptually simpler. As their

capability to focus on multiple features, improves so does their accuracy.

Children also may have faulty knowledge about their performance

capabilities. In writing, for example, it is difficult for children to know how clearly

they can express themselves or whether their writing skills are improving (Schunk &

Swartz, 1993). Teacher feedbackespecially at the elementary levelis intended to

encourage and stress what children do well. Children may believe they can write well

when in fact their writing is far below normal for their grade level. As they grow,

children gain task experience and engage more often in peer social comparisons,

which improve the accuracy of their self-assessments.

The preceding discussion should not imply that younger childrens self-

appraisal skills cannot become more accurate. Instruction and opportunities to

practice self-evaluation enhance accuracy of self-perception (Schunk, 1995).

Instructional interventions that convey clear information about childrens skills or

progress raise efficacy-performance correspondence (Schunk, 1981, 1995).

Self-Efficacy and Gender

The relationship between gender and self-efficacy has been a focus of

research. In general, researchers report that boys and men tend to be more confident

than girls and women in academic areas related to mathematics, science, and

36
technology (Meece, 1991; Pajares & Miller, 1994; Wigfield, Eccles, & Pintrich,

1996), despite the fact that achievement differences in these areas either are

diminishing or have disappeared (Eisenberg, Martin, & Fabes, 1996). Conversely, in

areas related to language arts, male and female students exhibit similar confidence

despite the fact that the achievement of girls typically is higher (Pajares, 1996).

Gender differences in self-efficacy are confounded by a number of factors.

First, these differences often are nullified when previous achievement is controlled

(Pajares, 1996). Boys and girls also have a tendency to adopt a differing stance when

responding to self-efficacy instruments. Researchers have observed that boys tend to

be more self-congratulatory in their responses whereas girls are more modest

(Wigfield et al., 1996). A third confounding factor is related to the manner in which

gender differences typically are assessed and reported. Students usually are asked to

provide confidence judgments that they possess certain academic skills or can

accomplish academic tasks. Differences in the average level of confidence reported

are interpreted as gender differences in self-efficacy. Pajares and his colleagues asked

elementary and middle school students to provide self-efficacy judgments in the

traditional manner (confidence in possessing writing skills) but also to make

comparative judgments regarding their writing ability versus that of other boys and

girls in their class and school (Pajares, Miller, & Johnson, 1999; Pajares & Valiante,

37
1999). Although girls outperformed boys, girls and boys reported equal writing self-

efficacy. When students were asked whether they were better writers than their peers,

however, girls judged themselves to be better writers than the boys.

Some researchers have argued that gender differences in social, personality,

and academic variables may actually be a function of gender orientationthe

stereotypic beliefs about gender that students holdrather than of gender (Eisenberg

et al., 1996; Hackett, 1985; Harter, Waters, & Whitesell, 1997; Matsui, 1994).

Eccles's (1987) model of educational and occupational choice posits that cultural

milieu factors such as students' gender role stereotypes are partly responsible for

differences in course and career selection and in confidence beliefs and perceived

value of tasks and activities. Pajares & Valiante (in press) found that gender

differences favoring middle school girls in writing self-efficacy were nullified when

gender orientation beliefs were controlled.

Gender differences are related to developmental level. There is little evidence

for differences in self-efficacy among elementary-aged children. Differences begin to

emerge following childrens transition to middle or junior high school (Eccles &

Midgley, 1989; Wigfield, Eccles, MacIver, Reuman, & Midgley, 1991; Wigfield et

al., 1996), with girls typically showing a decline in self-efficacy beliefs.

38
 Among adolescents, gender differences in self-efficacy should not be expected

when students receive clear performance information about their capabilities or

progress in learning. Schunk and Lilly (1984) had students in Grades 6 and 8 judge

self-efficacy for learning a novel mathematical task, after which students received

instruction, practice opportunities, and performance feedback. Although girls initially

judged self-efficacy for learning lower than did boys, following the instructional

program girls and boys did not differ in achievement or self efficacy for solving

problems. The performance feedback conveyed to students that they were learning

and raised girls self-efficacy to that of boys.

Social cognitive theory does not endow either gender or gender self-beliefs

with agentic and motivating properties (Bussey & Bandura, 1999). Researchers have

observed that students typically view such areas as mathematics, science, and

technology as male domains (Eisenberg et al., 1996). In these areas, a masculine

orientation is associated with confidence and achievement because masculine self-

perceptions are imbued with the notion that success is a masculine imperative

(Eccles, 1987; Hackett, 1985). Language arts typically is associated with a feminine

orientation because writing is viewed by most students as a female domain. A

feminine orientation is associated with motivational beliefs related to success in

39
writing. One challenge before educators is to alter students' views of academic

subjects so that they are perceived as relevant and valuable both to girls and boys.

Concept of Academic Performance

The concept of academic performance refers to the tendency for individuals to

strive to excel when the individuals are aware that the performance will be evaluated

in relation to the set standards for norms, (Handy and Aitkin, 1986). The standard

may be the attainment of general goals and performance. The meaning of academic

performance is in terms of the actualization of educational objectives. As against

academic performance, Yoloye (1978) posited that the concept of academic

achievement is a reflection of intellectual task and the realization of educational

objectives. In 1999, The New England School Development Council (NESDEC)

produced a report on "Thinking Differently: Recommendations for 21st Century

School Board/Superintendent Leadership, Governance, and Teamwork for High

Student Performance." The report defines student Performance or achievement to

include the following:

40
a. Academic attainment reaching beyond what a state test or other standardized

Test currently measures (e.g., higher order thinking skills, intellectual

Curiosity and creativity).

b. jobs skills and preparation.

c. Citizenship (e.g., volunteerism, voting, community service, abiding by laws).

d. Appreciation of the arts.

e. Development of character and values (e.g., integrity, responsibility, courtesy,

Patriotism and a work ethic). Sound physical development and optimal health

of all children throughout their formative years to prepare them for healthy

productive lives as adults.

f. helping our children and youth understand and value the growing diversity of

American society (NESDEC, 2003).

Students academic performance can be evaluated in many different ways, but

in a developing country like Nigeria, where about 40 percent of the adult population

is illiterate, parents use the performance of their children in public educations to pass

judgments on the schools and teachers (Nwagwu, 2002). Studies indicate that so

many factors affect academic achievement of students at school. A host of scholars

are of the opinion that all kinds of experiences are educative, whether in or outside

school and therefore influence student academic performance. Studies in

41
socioeconomic status and motivation showed that parental motivation and parents

socio-economic status (Emunemu, 2000) have positive effect on students academic

performance. The qualities of intake also influence the quality of output and

performance of students at school. Other variables that affect academic performance

are enrolment (Alabi, 2001), location of the school (Adepoju, 2001), age of the

school, adequacy of human, material, physical and financial resources.

Self-Efficacy and Academic Performance

Students perceived self-efficacy influences their ability to pick up particular

skills by being more persistent. This is based on the belief that the more persistent

one is, the greater the likelihood of successful task accomplishment (Bandura, 1993).

Students with a high self-belief show greater effort are persistency and resiliency

when challenged by difficult tasks and circumstances. Such self-beliefs are strong

predictors of the successes that students can eventually achieve (Bandura, 1997).

Thus, self belief has an important role in the process of an individuals intellectual

development and is a significant factor in academic achievement (Alfassi, 2003;

Bandura, 1995). This theory lends credence to the association between academic self-

efficacy and academic performance. McCoach (2002) asserted that students develop

confidence in many ways, and those who are confident about their skills are more

likely to engage in a variety of activities, which lead to high academic achievement.

42
 Self-efficacy predicts intellectual performance better than skills alone, and it

directly influences academic performance through cognition. Self-efficacy also

indirectly affects perseverance (Bandura, 1986, and Multon, Brown and Lent 1991).

Although past achievement raises self-efficacy, it is student interpretation of past

successes and failures that may be responsible for subsequent success. Perceived self-

efficacy predicts future achievement better than past performance (Bandura, 1986;

Tippin, 1991; Miller, 1996; Chemmer and Garcia 2001; and Garcia, Yu and Coppola,

1993). Self-efficacy beliefs also contribute to performance since they influence

thought processes, motivation, and behavior (Bandura 1997). Fluctuations in

performance may be explained by fluctuations in self-efficacy. For example, varying

beliefs in self-efficacy may alter task outcome, whether it involves two similarly-

skilled individuals or the same person in two different situations (Bandura 1997).

Individuals in high self-efficacy attempt challenging tasks more often, persist

longer at them, and exert more effort. If there are failures, highly efficacious

individuals attribute it to a lack of effort or an adverse environment. When they

succeed, they credit their achievement to their abilities. The perception that their

abilities caused the achievement affects the outcome rather than their actual abilities

(Bandura 1986). Those who regard themselves as inefficacious shy away from

difficult tasks, slacken their efforts and give up readily in the face of difficulties,

43
dwell on their personal deficiencies, lower their aspirations, and suffer much anxiety

and stress. Such self misgivings undermine performance ( Bandura 1986, p.395).

Conversely, individuals with high self-efficacy frequently persevere despite difficult

tasks or challenging odds and often succeed because perseverance usually results in a

successful outcome (Bandura 1986). Numerous studies (Bandura 1991, Pintrich and

DeGroot 1990) link self-efficacy to academic achievement. For example, in seventh

grade Science and English classes, self-efficacy was positively related to cognitive

engagement and academic performance (Tippin 1991). Self-efficacy, self-regulated

learning, and test anxiety also were found to be the best performance predictors

(Tippin 1991).

Appraisal of the Literature Reviewed

In this review, efforts have been made to see what other researchers have

published on Self-efficacy. It was revealed in this review that Self-efficacy research

originated with Dr. Albert Bandura in the field of social cognitive theory. Social

cognitive theory centered on human agency as the vehicle of change (an agentic

perspective) and the efficacy belief system as the foundation of human agency

(Bandura, 2004). Bandura, (2004) also identified four core features of Social

cognitive theory of human agency. These are: Intentionality, forethought, self-

reactive elements, and self-reflective elements. Self-efficacy, as defined by Albert

44
Bandura (1986), is peoples judgment of their capabilities to organize and execute

courses of action required attaining designated types of performance. Bandura

(1986) clarified that self efficacy is concerned not with the skills one has but with

judgments of what one can do with whatever skills one possesses. Perceived self-

efficacy beliefs may impact a person in either a positive, empowering way, or in a

negative, demoralizing way. It is the individuals beliefs about being able to carry out

the necessary actions to achieve a desired result that determine the impact

(Bandura,1997, 1986, 1977). Similarly, Bernhard (1997) defines the concept of self-

efficacy as learners beliefs about their abilities to accomplish a task. For Pajares

(2000), it is the students judgments of their academic competence. There is no doubt

that self-efficacy centered on human behaviour regarding confidence in a given task

and it helps an individual to judge themselves.

This work also reviewed self-efficacy and its related constructs. These closely

related constructs are outcome expectations, self-concept, and perceived control.

More so, development of self-efficacy also revealed. Schunck & Pajare (1996)

identified five influences on the development of Self-Efficacy; Familial influence,

peer influence, role of schooling, Transitional Influence and Developmental Changes

in Self-Appraisal Skill. Thus self-efficacy can be developed among the students when

45
taking into consideration the five influences that were stated by Schunck & Pajere

(1986).

Self-efficacy and gender also reviewed. It was revealed that researchers report

that boys and men tend to be more confident than girls and women in academic areas

related to mathematics, science, and technology (Meece, 1991; Pajares & Miller,

1994; Wigfield, Eccles, & Pintrich, 1996), despite the fact that achievement

differences in these areas either are diminishing or have disappeared (Eisenberg,

Martin, & Fabes, 1996). Conversely, in areas related to language arts, male and

female students exhibit similar confidence despite the fact that the achievement of

girls typically is higher (Pajares, 1996). Male students perform more better than

female in area of Mathematics and Sciences subjects as it was revealed by Bandura,

(1986 and 1997) that girls are undermined by sex-role stereotypes in many cultures

intimating that females are not as able as males, especially in such disciplines as

math and science. It is true by nature that boys and men tend to be stronger than girls

and women in area of some challenges. Therefore women likely to avoid highly

challenge task such as science subjects like Mathematics and this lower their efficacy

while men likely go for highly challenge task and this increases their efficacy.

Similarly, the concept of academic performance also reviewed as the tendency

for individuals to strive to excel when the individuals are aware that the performance

46
will be evaluated in relation to the set standards for norms, (Handy and Aitkin, 1986).

More so, Nwagwu, (2002) reviewed that Students academic performance can be

evaluated in many different ways, but in a developing country like Nigeria, where

about 40 percent of the adult population is illiterate, parents use the performance of

their children in public educations to pass judgments on the schools and teachers.

Thus every member of society understand what academic performance is but those

that lacked deep knowledge of what academic performance is, they use it to judge the

standard of a school alone.

Finally, the reviewed of the past researchers also cleared the ground that self

belief has an important role in the process of an individuals intellectual development

and is a significant factor in academic achievement (Alfassi, 2003; Bandura, 1995).

Therefore, the trend of the literature reviewed above was designed purposely to

investigate on relationship between Self-efficacy and Performance of Kwara state

secondary school students in Mathematics.

47
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter focuses on the modalities adopted for this research in which specific

attention is directed on the following:

1. Research Design

2. Population, Sample and Sampling Techniques

3. Instrumentation

4. Procedure for Data Collection

5. Data Analysis Techniques.

Research Design

This research is a correlation survey type. A correlation survey type was used to

investigate relationship between self-efficacy and performance of secondary school

students in mathematics in Ilorin. It is useful to collecting adequate data and has

ability to produce reliable and objective result regarding to this research which does

not call for the manipulation of any variables.

According to Daramola (2006), survey research is the collection of data for the

purpose of analyzing conditions as they exist. Hassan (1995) noted that a correlation

study is a study in which the investigator sets out to find the extent to which variation

48
in one factor correspond with variation in one or more other factors based on

correlation co-efficient. Correlation study therefore, consists of measuring two or

more variables together so as to determine the degree of relationship between these

variables. Hence, correlation survey method was considered appropriate for this

study, since it would assist researcher to find out the extent or degree of relationship

between self-efficacy and academic performance of secondary school students in

Ilorin Metropolis.

Population, Sample and Sampling Techniques

The population of this research was all the Secondary School Students in

Ilorin metropolis, whilst the target population was all Senior Secondary School

Students one (SS1) within Ilorin metropolis. As at 2014 academic session, there were

101 public and 153 private secondary schools making total of 254 secondary schools

in Ilorin metropolis and 649 secondary schools in entire kwara state. The students

population of secondary schools within Ilorin metropolis stood at 102, 282. (Source:

Kwara State Ministry of Education and Human Capital Development).

Stratified Sampling Technique was used in the selection of respondents.

Daramola (2006) opined that stratification is the process by which educational

research variables are classified into group according to desire characteristics such as

gender, school type and so on. Rasaq and Ajayi (2001) also noted that Stratified

49
Sampling Technique is a research process in which variables are classified into group

according to desired characteristics. Thus, Stratified Sampling Technique is a

sampling procedure in which the member of the target population are divided into

different group of interest such as school type, location, gender, age group and so no,

after which simple random sampling technique is carried out to select individual who

we participate in the study.

In the first stage, Stratified Sampling Technique was used to select twelve

(12) secondary schools in Ilorin metropolis. The selection of schools would be done

by putting into consideration the school type (private and public schools).

Selection of actual sample of the respondents was done through Stratified

Sampling Techniques by taking gender of the respondents into consideration.

Thereafter, simple random sampling technique was used to select the required sample

from each stratum using dip-hat method. A total of fifty students were drawn from

each of the twelve (12) schools to give a total of six hundred students within

secondary schools in Ilorin metropolis. Thereby, the total number of respondents for

this research was Six Hundred students (50 x 12 = 600). We should bear in mind that

the aforementioned procedure would only give a fair representation of the

respondents (students) in Ilorin metropolis. The study focused on students self-

efficacy and their performance.

50
Instrumentation

Instrumentation was defined by Daramola, (2006) as the process of selecting

or developing measuring devices for gathering the desire data in educational studies.

He equally defined a questionnaire as a kind of instrument used to elicit information

from respondents who are normally drawn from the target population of a given

study.

As this study is designed purposely to measure the predicting level of self-

efficacy on performance of students in mathematics, a twenty four items of

mathematics self-efficacy which was developed by Usher and Pajares (2009) was

adopted. The instrument was purposely developed to develop and validate the items

with which to assess A. Bandura (1997) theorized source of self-efficacy among

middle school mathematics students. The items were statistically correlated.

Correlation between the source and self-efficacy were all statistically significant and

range from absolute value of .32 to .77 and it was consistent with the previous

research. Further reliability was also conducted by the researcher by using Split Half

Method. The researcher administered the instrument for fifty (50) students of the

similar characters with the sample of the study, selected from another school. The

two scores of the test were then correlated using Pearson Product Moment

Correlation (PPMC) coefficient and yielded a co-efficient of 0.69.

51
 The questionnaire was divided into two sections; A and B sections. Section A

of questionnaire eliciting respondents data such as gender and school type. Section

B of questionnaire contained twenty four (24) items on Mathematics Self-Efficacy

Scale (MSES). The respondents were expected to respond to the items base on their

confidences.

The instrument used for this study was given to the experts in the Department

of Social Sciences Education (SSE) for critical assessment to ascertain both the

content and face validity, and their final modifications were noted for necessary

adjustment.

Abodunrin, (1999) described validity as the extent to which the instrument

does what it purports to do. This implies that validity is the predictive level of a

given test on how extent it measures what it designed or purposed for. He equally

described reliability as the degree of accuracy and precision of a measurement

procedure. That is, the degree to which two measures of the same thing is consistent;

the extent to which we can depend on the test result. In other words, reliability has to

do with accuracy, dependability, and reproducibility of the result.

The scoring of the questionnaire was based on a four point likert type of scale

and the respondents was required to respond to all items by ticking an appropriate

52
column for each item based on their experience. The items were rated as indicated

below.

Often - 4points

Sometimes - 3points

Seldom - 2points

Never - 1point

The maximum scores of the items were 4x24=96 points while the minimum

scores of the items were 1x24=24. Meanwhile the cut-off point was 96-48=48.

Therefore, the respondents whose scores or points fall in between 24 to 48 were

considered as respondent (student) with low level of self-efficacy while respondents

whose scores or points range between 49 to 96 were considered as respondents with

high level of self-efficacy.

In conclusion, the state Junior Secondary School Certificate Examination

(JSSCE) results in mathematics were collected from the authority of the schools

where questionnaire was administered using a Profoma designed. The examination

was a summative standardized text and uniform throughout Ilorin metropolis and

even in the whole Kwara state. Therefore, the research hopes that the scores are

standardized enough to measure the performance of the students. However, the

53
results which were collected through a designed profoma prepared by the researcher

were graded as thus; A, C, P, and F with 85, 60, 45, and 39 respectively.

Procedure for Data Collection

An introduction letter was collected from the Department of Social Sciences

Education which was tendered before the authorities of the twelve (12) schools that

were selected for their permission to administering the questionnaire to the

respondents. The researcher personally administered the questionnaire with the help

of a trained assistant.

In order to ensure adequate responses from the respondents, the researcher and

his trained assistant administered the questionnaires which consist of twenty four

(24) items. This is to ensure adequate interaction between the researcher and the

respondents so as to explain unclear items to them. Each respondent was required to

complete the questionnaire and return it immediately. Confidentiality of the

respondents was guarantee and they were made know that their responses would be

for research purpose alone.

Data Analysis Techniques

In order to find out the relationship between the Mathematics Self-Efficacy

and Performance of Senior Secondary School Students one (SSS 1) in mathematics in

Ilorin metropolis, the data from the study were subjected to the appropriate statistical

54
analysis. Frequency counts and percentage were used to describe the demographic

data of the respondents while on the other hand, the null hypotheses generated were

analyzed using Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient (PPMC) to

determine the not rejected or rejected hypotheses at 0.05 alpha level of significance.

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULT

55
 This chapter focuses on the results and interpretation of the findings coupled

with the summary of the study. The results provide information on the descriptive

and inferential statistics applied in analyzing the data collected based on the

investigation on self-efficacy and academic performance of secondary schools

student in mathematics in Ilorin metropolis. The study also investigated the

relationship between self-efficacy of other variables (such as gender and school type)

and academic performance of secondary school student in mathematics in Ilorin

metropolis.

Five null hypotheses were tested at 0.05 alpha levels. The results were

presented in sections. Section one deals with descriptive aspect of the findings of the

study where information about the number of the participants and their schools were

revealed, section two deals with inferential statistics where the results of the

hypotheses were tested while the summary of the study were presented in the third

section.

Descriptive Data

Table 2: Frequency distribution of the respondents by Gender and School type

56
 Gender(sex) Frequency Percentage (%)
Male 309 51.5
Female 291 48.5
TOTAL 600 100
School type Frequency Percentage (%)
Private 300 50.0
Public 300 50.0
TOTAL 600 100

Table 2 above revealed that Six Hundred respondents participated in this

study. The section of the table is divided into two parties which comprised Gender

and School Type.

In the gender part, there were 309 male students and 291 female students

representing 51.5% and 48.5% respectively. It also shown that 300 respondents

which equivalent to 50% were drawn from the Public Schools while the remaining

50% of the participants were drawn from the Private Schools.

Table 3: Overall Academic Performance Status of the Respondents

Variables No of Cases Percentage (%)

Distinction (A) 60 10.5

57
Credit (C) 406 67.7

Pass (P) 132 22.0

Fail (F) 2 0.3

Total 600 100

The analyses of the students performance in the state Junior Secondary

School Certificate Examination (JSSCE) in Kwara State in Mathematics was

revealed in table 3 above. It was recorded that 60 out of 600 respondents result

collected from the selected schools had distinction (A ) representing 10%, 406

respondents had credit (C) estimated to be 67.7%, 132 respondents accounted for

ordinary pass with 22%, while the remaining 2 participants representing 0.3% failed

the examination.

Table 4: Self-Efficacy Status of the Respondents

Variables No of Cases Percentage (%)
High Level of Self-Efficacy 570 95.0
Low Level of Self-Efficacy 30 5.0
Total 600 100
Table 4 shows the levels of the students self-efficacy. 570 (95%) students

possessed high levels of self-efficacy by scoring above the cut-off point which is 48

while only 30 (5%) of the students possessed low level of self-efficacy by scoring

lesser, ranged downward 48.

58
Hypotheses Testing

Basically, this study was designed purposely to investigate into the

relationship between Self-Efficacy and performance of the students in Mathematic.

To this end, inferential statistics was used to test the hypotheses at significant level of

0.05. The result of the hypotheses is presented below.

Hypothesis One: there is no significant relationship between Self-Efficacy and

Performance of Secondary School Students in Ilorin metropolis.
In order to test this hypothesis, responses of the students to items in the

questionnaire were correlated with their performance. The output of the analysis

reveals as thus:

Table 5: (Pearson r) relationship between self-efficacy and performance of the

respondents
Variables No Mean Std r-value df sig(2tailed) Decision
Self-Efficacy 600 66.53 10.13
0.121 598 0.003 Rejected
Performance 600 59.13 10.63
P<0.05

Table 5 shows the summary of the relationship between Self-Efficacy and

Performance of the respondents in Mathematics in Ilorin metropolis. It vividly shows

that the significant level of 0.05 is greater than sig (2tailed) of 0.003level. Since the

hypothesis is tested at 0.05 level of significant, therefore the null hypothesis is

59
rejected while the alternative hypothesis which says there exist significant

relationship between Self-Efficacy and Performance of Secondary School Student in

Ilorin metropolis is accepted or not rejected.

Hypothesis Two: there is no significant relationship between Self-Efficacy of male

students and their performance.

In order to test this hypothesis, responses of the male students to items of the

questionnaire and their performance were correlated. The output of the analysis

shows below.

Table 6: (Pearson r) relationship between self-efficacy of male students and their

performance
Variables No Mean Std r-value df sig(2tailed) Decision

Self-Efficacy 309 67.00 10.13

0.155 307 0.006 Rejected

Performance 309 59.46 10.91
P<0.05
Table 6 shows the summary of the relationship between the Male Self-

Efficacy and their Performance. The table reveals that significant level of 0.05 upon

which the hypothesis is tested is greater than sig (2tailed) of 0.006 (i.e. 0.05 > 0.006).

Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.

60
 In other words, alternative hypothesis which says there exist a significant

relationship between self-efficacy of male students and their performance is not

rejected or accepted.

Hypothesis Three: there is no significant relationship between Self-Efficacy of female

students and their Performance
In order to test this hypothesis, responses of the female students to items of the
questionnaire and their performance were correlated. The output of the analysis
shows below.

Table 7: (Pearson r) relationship between self-efficacy of the female students and

their performance

Variables No Mean Std r-value df sig(2tailed) Decision

Self-Efficacy 291 66.23 9.92

0.090 289 0.124 Accepted

Performance 291 58.78 10.32
P>0.05

Table 7 shows the summary of the relationship between the female Self-

Efficacy and their Performance where the sig (2tailed) of 0.124 is greater than 0.05

significant level upon which the hypothesis is tested. Therefore, the null hypothesis is

accepted. This implies that there is no significant relationship between Female Self-

Efficacy and their Performance.

61
 In other words, the alternative hypothesis which says there exist significant

relationship between Self-Efficacy and their Performance is rejected.

Hypothesis Four: there is no significant relationship between Self-Efficacy of Public

School Students and their Performance.

In order to test this hypothesis, responses of the public school students to

items in the questionnaire and their performance were correlated. Hence, the output

of the analysis reveals as below:

Table 8: (Pearson r) relationship between self-efficacy of Public School students

and their performance
Variables No Mean Std r-value df sig (2tailed) Decision

Self-Efficacy 300 66.31 9.81

0.086 289 0.135 Accepted
Performance 300 59.38 10.47
P>0.05

Table 8 shows the summary of the relationship between Self-Efficacy of

Public School Students and their performance. The significant level of 0.05 upon

which the hypothesis is tested is lesser than the sig (2tailed) of 0.135. This implies

that the null hypothesis is accepted.

In other words, the alternative hypothesis which says there exist a significant

relationship between public school students Self-Efficacy and their performance is

accepted or not rejected.

62
Hypothesis Five: there is no significant relationship between Self-Efficacy of private
school students and their performance

In order to test this hypothesis, responses of the Private School Students to

items in the questionnaire and their Performance were correlated. Hence, the output

of the analysis reveals as below:

Table 9: (Pearson r) relationship between self-efficacy of Private School students

and their performance
Variables No Mean Std r-value df sig (2tailed) Decision

Self-Efficacy 300 67.93 10.2

0.167 289 0.004 Rejected
Performance 300 58.88 10.79
P<0.05

Table 9 shows the summary of the relationship between private school

students and their performance. It vividly shows that 0.05 level of significant upon

which the hypothesis is tested is greater than the sig (2tailed) of 0.004. Therefore, the

null hypothesis is rejected while the alternative hypothesis which says there exist

relationship between private school students Self-Efficacy and their Performance is

accepted or not rejected.

Summary of the Findings

63
 The data gathered for this research through research questionnaire and a

designed profoma by the researcher were analyzed with descriptive and inferential

statistics procedure. The following points summarized the findings of this study.

1. 570 respondents were identified to be highly self-efficacy while only 30 of the

respondents possessed low level of self-efficacy.

2. 60 students passed mathematics at distinction level, 406 students also passed

the subject at credit level while 132 had ordinary pass and two of them failed.
3. Self-Efficacy of secondary school students has significant relationship on their

Performance
4. Self-Efficacy of male secondary school students has significant relationship on

their Performance
5. Self-Efficacy of female secondary school students does not have significant

relationship on their performance.

6. Self-Efficacy of public secondary school students does not has significant

relationship on their Performance.

7. Self-Efficacy of private secondary school students has significant

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the discussion of the findings, conclusions of the study

on self-efficacy and its relationship with performance, implications of the study,

recommendations of the study, as well as suggestions for further studies

Discussion of the findings

64
 The primary aim of this study was to investigate into the relationship between

Self-Efficacy and Performance of the secondary school students. The discussions of

the findings were divided into two. Firstly, it addressed general performance of the

students and overall self-efficacy status of the students. And secondly, it revealed the

discussion of the findings of the five hypotheses generated for this study.

It was revealed that 600 students of secondary schools participated in the

study. 60 students passed with distinction, 406 students passed with credit level while

132 students with ordinary pass and only 2 students failed the test with 10%, 67.7%,

22.0%, and 0.3% respectively. This indicates that 77.7% of the respondents passed

the examination.

Furthermore, the study also revealed that out of 600 participants, 570 (95%)

ranked to be highly self-efficacious while only 30 (5%) said to be lowly self-

efficacious. This is in line with the proof that self-efficacy is a predictor of

performance (Adedeji, Adeyinka, & Olufemi 2009, Bandura 1989, & Minton, Brown,

& Lent 1991). Bandura (1997) asserted that students with a high self-efficacy or self-

belief show greater efforts and persistency and resiliency when challenged by

difficult tasks and circumstances and reverse is the case for the students of a low self

efficacy. Thus those students that failed in the Mathematics examination can be said

to be low in their efficacy.

65
 Similarly, the result gotten from the null hypothesis one in table 4 revealed

that there is a significant relationship between Self-efficacy of the secondary school

students and their Performance in Ilorin metropolis. The outcome of this finding was

in accord with other related findings in the world. For instance, Mgaogwe & Oliver

(2007) in their study, the relationship between language learning strategies,

proficiency, age, and self-efficacy beliefs carried out a study on 480 students from

primary school, secondary school and tertiary institution. The finding of the study

indicated that there is a significant and positive relationship between self-efficacy and

overall use of language learning strategies for the students. More so, Adedeji,

Adeyinka & Olufemi (2009) based on their findings, locus control, interest in

schooling, and self-efficacy jointly and relatively contribute significantly to the

prediction of performance of the Junior Secondary School Students.

The study also proved that relationship between self-efficacy of male

secondary school students and their performance was significant while self-efficacy

of female secondary school students and their performance was insignificant in table

5 and 6 respectively. This result is of no doubt when compared with the outcome of

the related past findings by other researchers. Researchers reported that boys and

men tend to be more efficacious than girls and women in the academic areas related

to Mathematics, science and technology (Meece,1991; Pajare & Miller, 1994;

66
Wigfield Eccles, & Pintrich 1996). Conversely, Pajare (2004) argued that in the area

related to language arts, male and female exhibit similar confidence despite the fact

that achievement of the girls typically is higher.

In their own study, Schunk and Lilly (1984) had students in Grade 6 and 8

judge self-efficacy for learning a novel of mathematical tasks, after which students

receive instruction, practice opportunity, and performance feedback. Although girls

initially judged self-efficacy for learning lower than did boys, but after instructional

program, girls and boys did not differ in achievement or self-efficacy for solving

problems. Thus the performance feedback conveyed to students that they were

learning and raised girls self-efficacy to that of boys.

In view of the above discussion of the finding, it is obvious that boys and men

tends to exhibit confidence than their girls and women counterpart when come to

science related courses like mathematics and technology.

Finally, the study also revealed that public secondary school students self-

efficacy and their performance was insignificant while private secondary school

students self-efficacy and their performance was significant in table in table 7 and 8

respectively. The reason for this can be attributed to the influence of the environment.

Schunk and Pajare (1996) identified five environmental influences on the

67
development of self-efficacy; familial influence, peer influence, role of schooling,

transitional influence and developmental changes in self-Appraisal skill.

Insignificant relationship between public secondary school students self-

efficacy and their performance might be as a result of unfavourable environment in

which most of the public secondary schools find themselves in developing countries

like Nigeria. This is in line with the view of Adeyemo (2005) that the school

environment is a predictor of academic self-efficacy of the secondary school

students. Thus, the environment that does not stimulate retards the efficacy of the

students.

Conversely, the significant relationship of private secondary school students

with their self-efficacy might be equally attributed to the favourable environment in

which most of the schools find themselves. According to Meece (1997), when

environment are rich in interesting activities, it arouses the students curiosity and

offer challenges that can be met, students are motivated to work on the activities and

thereby learn new information and skills.

Conclusions

Based on the findings in chapter four and discussion in this chapter, it is

undoubted that performances of the secondary school students depend upon their

self-efficacy. Having take a look at the overall self-efficacy status of the students

68
where 570 students possessed high level of self-efficacy and only 30 students with

low level of self-efficacy and correlate with the overall performance of the students

where 598 students passed including pass grade and only 2 failed, it was drawn that

there exist significant relationship between the two variables.

It is also concluded that male self-efficacy with their performance is

statistically significant related while female self-efficacy with their performance is

statistically insignificant related.

Finally, based on the findings of this study, there is no significant relationship

between public secondary school students self-efficacy and their performance while

there is significant relationship between private secondary school students self-

efficacy and their performance.

Implications of the Study

The findings of this study has confirmed that self-efficacy is an inevitable

phenomenon that is directly related to the performance of the students especially the

secondary school students.

Therefore, the findings of this study have implications for curriculum

designers, educational psychologists and teachers at all levels, school administrators,

parents, policy makers, religion leaders, community leaders and other relevant

stakeholders in education. While we consider the learners affects, there is need for

69
curriculum designer to design a learner-centered mathematics curriculum. This will

help the learner to develop positive belief of their ability and take part in decision-

making during and after course of study.

Educational psychologists and teachers at various level of education need to

device better ways of handling students and create conducive environment that

develop learners efficacy. This will help the learners to confront their enormous

challenges that may come their ways during and after the program. The findings also

have implications for school administrators to harness different strategies that will

motivate the learners to learn and that will awake both teachers and parents on their

vital role to play in develop the learners efficacy.

Finally, implications of this study is to awake the consciousness of policy

makers, religion leaders, community leaders and other related stakeholders to the

vital roles the self-efficacy plays in the development of educational understanding of

the man in general.

Limitations of the Study

This study was limited in some extent due to the inevitable constraints such as

resource and time. The researcher covered twelve (12) secondary schools (private

70
and public) in Ilorin metropolis out of 254 secondary schools. Only 50 students were

selected from each of the schools.

However, despite the these constraints, it is believe that the constraints do not

in any way harm the findings of the study and it is therefore be recommended to

other secondary schools in Kwara state and Nigeria at large till other contradiction

results will be established. Regardless of these limitations, this study was proved to

further the needs on how to improve the students performance as it was shown that

self-efficacy cannot be overemphasized in the performance of the students.

Recommendations

The study shown that there is positive interaction between self-efficacy and

students performance, it is therefore, recommended for the curriculum designers and

policy makers to integrate self-efficacy into the education curricular so as to improve

the students confidence in any given task.

Educational psychologists and the teachers at all levels of the education need

to be aware roles of the self-efficacy in the students performance and harness

strategies through which it can be improved. And the parents and guardian also need

to be sensitized on their roles to play in shaping the students self-efficacy through

school administrators as recommended.

71
Suggestions for Further Studies

The researcher recommends that similar study should be carried out in more

schools in the state, geo-political zone of the nation (Nigeria) and the Nigeria at

large. Replication of the study in other levels of education is also recommended by

the researcher.
Only one core subject (mathematics) was involved in the study and the subject

represents the students performance. The researcher therefore recommends

replication of the study in more than one core subjects to represent the students

academic performance.
Finally, the researcher recommends the replication of the research to involve

more variables.

REFERENCES
Abodunrin, I. O. (1999). Evaluating Teaching and Learning Effectiveness. Oyo:
Cardinal Information Technology

Adediwura . A. A. & Bada . T (2007). Perception of teachers knowledge, attitude

and teaching skills as predictor of academic performance in Nigerian
secondary schools. Educational Research and Review. Vol. 2 (7), pp. 165-
171

Adepoju, T. L. (2001). Locational factors as correlates of private cost and

academic performance of secondary school students in Oyo State, Nigeria.
Unpublished Ph.D.Thesis, University of Ibadan, Department of Educational
Management

Adeyemo, D.A. (2005). Parental Involvement Interest in Schooling and School

Environment as predictors of Academic Self-efficacy among fresh Secondary
School Student in Oyo State, Nigeria. Electronic Journal of Research in
Educational Psychology, 2005, 5-3 (1) pp. 163-180

72
Adeyemo, D.A. (2001). Self-efficacy and subject enrolment in secondary schools: An
empirical inquiry. Ibadan Journal of Educational Studies 1 (1): 86 95.

Akinsola, M.K. (2008). Relationship of some psychological variables in predicting

problem solving ability of in-service mathematics teachers. The Montana
Mathematics Enthusiast, ISSN 1551-3440, Vol. 5, no.1, pp. 79-100.

Alabi, O.A. (2000). School size, facility utilization and educational opportunities as
correlates of students performance in public secondary schools in Oyo State,
Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ibadan, Department of
Educational Management

American Association of University Women. (1991). Shortchanging girls,

shortchanging America: Executive summary. Washington, DC: Author.

American Association of University Women (2008). Women and girls in STEM.

Washington, DC: Author.

Aremu, A .O. (2004) Psychological and Sociological determinant of academic

achievement of Nigeria adolescents. Life Psychology. An international
Journal of Psychology in Africa, 2004,12, (2), 149-161

Al Anzi, F.O. (2005). Academic Achievement and its Relationship with Anxiety,
Self-Esteem, Optimism, and Pessimism in Kuwaiti Students. Social
Behaviour and Personality. Retrieved Available at
http://www.findarticles.com Accessed on 27/10/2005.

Arnold, J. & Brown, H.D. (1999). A map of the terrain. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in
Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Asikhia, D. A. (2010). Students and teachers perception of the causes of poor

academic performance in Ogun State Secondary Schools [Nigeria]:
Implications for counselling for national development. European Journal of
Social Sciences, 13, 229 -242.

Astin, H. S., & Sax, L. J. (1996). Developing scientific talent in undergraduate

women. In C. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, P. M.

73
 Rayman, & Associates (Eds.), The equity education: Fostering the
advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp.
96-121). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Babalola, J.B. (2000). Towards a responsive learning environment for the Nigerian
child: Journal of Research in Educational Planning and policy Student. Vol.:1-
6

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change.

Psychological Review, 2, 191 - 215.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundation of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive

Theory. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development an

Functioning. Educational Psychologist 28: 117 148.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. freeman

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of

human behavior. (pp. 71 - 81). New York: Academic Press. Retrieved from
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/BanEncy.html

Bandura, A. (2004). Swimming against the mainstream: The early years from chilly
tributary to transformative mainstream. Behavior and Research Therapy 42,
613 - 630. Retrieved from
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/Bandura2004BRT.pdf

Bandura, A. (2005). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T.

Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Publishing. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from
http://www.emory.edu/ EDUCATION/mfp/SEff-Guide2005Revised.html

Bandura, A. (2006). Adolescent development from an agentic perspective. In F.

Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, 5, 1-43.
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Retrieved from
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/001- BanduraAdoEd2006.pdf

74
Berndt, T. J., & Keefe, K. (1992). Friends influence on adolescents perceptions of
themselves at school. In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student
perceptions in the classroom (pp. 51-73). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Bernhardt, S. (1997). Self-efficacy and second language learning. The NCLRC

Language Resource, 1 (5).

Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. (2003). Academic self concept and self efficacy. How
different are they really? Educational Psychology Review 15: 140.

Brian .F.R (2009) Self-efficacy and social cognitive theories. http://jcmc.indiana.edu

Cairns, R. B., Cairns, B. D., & Neckerman, J. J. (1989). Early school dropout:
Configurations and determinants. Child Development, 60, 1437-1452.

Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first-
year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 93(1), 55-64.

Chen, Huei-Yu & Hasson, Deborah J. (2007). The Relationship between EFL
Learners Self-efficacy Beliefs and English Performance. Retrieved June,
2008 from http://www.coe.fsu.edu/core/abstracts/mse/Huei-
Yu_Chen_Abstract.doc.

Choi, N. , Fuqua, D. & Griffin, B. (2001). Exploratory Analysis of the Structure of

Scores from the Multidimensional Scales of Perceived Self-efficacy.
Educational and Psychological Measurement journal, 61; 475.

Cotterall, S. (1999). Key variables in language learning: what do learners believe

about them? System, 27 (4), 493-513.

Daramola, S.O. (2006) Research and Statistics Method in Education, Ilorin: Bamitex
Printing and Publishing.

David W.C. (2010) Mathematics Self-efficacy of Community College Students in

Developmental Mathematics Course. A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty
of the School of Education, Liberty University

75
Diane L. Witt-Rose (2003). Student self-efficacy in college science: An investigation
of gender, age, and academic achievement

Dweck, C. S., & Goetz, T. (1978). Attributions and learned helplessness. In J.

Harvey, W. Ickes, & R. Kidd (Eds.), New directions in attribution research
(pp. 157-179). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Eisenberg, N., Martin, C. L., & Fabes, R. A. (1996). Gender development and gender
effects. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 358- 396). New York: Macmillan.

Emunemu, B. O. (2000). Socio-economic and cultural correlates of the girls Guilds

access of education and withdrawal from secondary schools in Delta State,
Nigeria, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ibadan.

Garcia, T., Yu, S. L., & Coppola, B. P. (1993). Women and minorities in science:
Motivational and cognitive correlates of achievement. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED359235).

Hackett, G. (1985). The role of mathematics self-efficacy in the choice of math-

related majors of college women and men: A path analysis. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 32, 47-56.

Handy, C. and Aitkin, R. (1986). Understanding Schools as Organizations. London:

Penguin.

Hassan, T. (1995). Understanding Research in Education, Lagos: Merrifield

Publishing Company

Harter, S., Waters, P., & Whitesell, N. (1997). Lack of voice as a manifestation of
false self-behavior among adolescents: The school setting as a stage upon
which the drama of authenticity is enacted. Educational Psychologist, 32,
153-173.

Hymel, S., Comfort, C., Schonert-Reichl, K., & McDougall, P. (1996). Academic
failure and school dropout: The influence of peers. In J. Juvonen & K. R.
Wentzel (Eds.), Social motivation: Understanding childrens school

76
 adjustment (pp. 313-345). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press.

Iyi, U. (2011). Results of WAEC Examination 2010. Daily Sun Newspaper of 11 th

August. 2011

Johnson, B. (1998). Organizing for collaboration: A reconsideration of some basic

organizing principles. In D. G. Pounder (Ed.), Restructuring schools for
collaboration: Promises and pitfalls, (9-25). Albany: State University of New
York Press

Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self-efficacy as a resource factor in stress

appraisal processes. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of
action (pp. 195-213). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

Joo, Y. J., Bong, M., & Choi, H. J. (2000). Self-efficacy for Self-Regulated Learning,
Academic Self- Efficacy, and Internet Self-Efficacy in Web-based Instruction.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 5-17.

Kindermann, T. A., McCollam, T. L., & Gibson, E., Jr. (1996). Peer networks and
students classroom engagement during childhood and adolescence. In J.
Juvonen & K. R. Wentzel (Eds.), Social motivation: Understanding
childrens school adjustment (pp. 279-312). Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.

Kinsella, S. (1998). A cross-discipline study of traditional and nontraditional college

students. College Student Journal, 32(4), 532-538.

Kurumeh, M. S. & Imoko, B. I. (2008). Universal Basic Education. A way forward

for Development of Mathematics Education. The Abacus 33(1)

MacCoach, D. B. (2002). A validation study of the school attitude assessment survey.

Measurement and Evaluation in counseling and Development.

Magogwe, Joel Mokuedi & Oliver, Rhonda. (2007). The relationship between
language learning strategies, proficiency, age and self-efficacy beliefs: A
study of language learners in Botswana. System, Vol. 35, pp. 338-352.

77
Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. (1989). Change in teacher efficacy and
student self- and task-related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to
junior high school. Journal of Educational Psychology.

Meece, J. L. (1991). The classroom context and students motivational goals.

Meece, J. L. (1997). Child and adolescent development for educators. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Morgan, V. & Jinks, J. (1999). Children perceived academic self-efficacy: An

Inventory Scale. The Clearing House 72 (4): 224 230.

Moseri, P. O. Onwuka, P. O. & Iweka, S. (2010). Constructivism: A tool for

improving the teaching and learning of Mathematics for attainment of seven
point agenda. Proceeding of Annual National Conference of Mathematical
Association. Ilorin: Unilorin press.

Multon, K.D., Brown, S.D., & Lent, R.W. (1991) Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to
academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 38, 30-38.

Nwagwu,C.C. (, 2002). Students Academic Performance and the Crisis of

Confidence in the Nigerian Education System. Ilorin Journal of Education,
(21)10-19

Oke, C. S., Olosunde, G. R., & Jekayinfa, A. A. (2005).Research Methodology and

Statistics in Education: theory and practice. Ibadan; Emola-Jay
Communication Inc.

Oxford, R. & Shearin, J.(1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding the

theoretical framework. The Modern Language Journal, 78 (1), 12-25.

Pajares, F. (2005). Gender differences in mathematics self-efficacy beliefs. In

A. M. Gallagher & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in
mathematics: An integrative psychological approach (pp. 294315).
New York: Cambridge University Press.

78
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs and mathematical problem-solving of gifted
students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 325-344.

Pajares, F. (2002). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic contexts: An outline. Retrieved,

From http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/efftalk.html.

Pajares, F. (2000). Self-efficacy beliefs and current directions in self-efficacy

research. Retrieved June, 2008 from
http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/effpage.html.

Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Charlotte, NC: Information

AgePublishing, Incorporated.

Pajares, F., & Graham, L. (1999). Self-efficacy, motivation constructs, and

mathematicsperformance of entering middle school students. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 24, 124-139.

Pajares, F., Hartley, J., & Valiante, G. (2001). Response format in writing self-
efficacy assessment: Greater discrimination increases prediction.
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 214-221.

Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in
mathematical problem-solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20,
426-443.

Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1997). An exploratory factor analysis of the mathematics
self-efficacy scale revised (MSES-R). Measurement and Evaluation in
Counseling and Development, 29(4), 215-228. Retrieved from the ERIC
database.

Pajares, F., & Miller, M. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in
mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 86, 193-203. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from
www.earlylearning.ubc.ca/documents/2007/SC2workshop/Path_analysis_2.p
df

79
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. (1995). Mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics
performances: The need for specificity of assessment. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 42, 190-198.

Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and learning components of

classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1),
33-40
Rasaq, B. & Ajayi, O. S. (2001). Research Method of Statistical Analysis.
Unpublished book Federal Polytechnic Offa.

Redmond, B. F. (2009). Lesson 7: Self-efficacy theory: Do I think that I can succeed

in my work?. Work Attitudes and Motivation. The Pennsylvania State
University World Campus.

Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized Expectancies for Internal Versus External Control of
Reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, General and Applied 80(1): 1
26.

Schibeci, R. A., & Riley, J. P., II. (1986). Influence of students background and
perceptions on science attitudes and achievement. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 23(3), 177-187.

Schunk, D. H. (1981). Modeling and attributional effects on childrens achievement:

A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 93-105.

Schunk, D. H. (1983). Reward contingencies and the development of childrens skills

and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 511-518.

Schunk, D. H. (1984). Enhancing self-efficacy and achievement through rewards and

goals: Motivational and informational effects. Journal of Educational
Research, 78, 29-34.

Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and childrens behavioral change. Review of

Educational Research, 57, 149-174.

Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux

(Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and
application (pp. 281-303). New York: Plenum Press.

80
Schunk, D. H., & Gunn, T. P. (1986). Self-efficacy and skill development: Influence
of task strategies and attributions. Journal of Educational Research, 79,
238-244.

Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R. (1985). Peer models: Influence on childrens self-
efficacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 313-322.

Schunk, D. H., Hanson, A. R., & Cox, P. D. (1987). Peer-model attributes and
childrens achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79,
54-61.

Schunk, D. H., & Lilly, M. W. (1984). Sex differences in self-efficacy and

attributions: Influence of performance feedback. Journal of Early
Adolescence, 4, 203-213.

Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W. (1993). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on
self-efficacy and writing achievement. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 18, 337-354.

Shavelson, R. J., & Bolus, R. (1982). Self-concept: The interplay of theory and
methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 3-17.

Shell, D., Bruning, R; & Colvin, C. (1995). Self-Efficacy, Attribution, and Outcome
Expectancy Mechanisms in Reading and Writing Achievement: Grade-Level
and Achievement-Level Differences. Journal of Educational Psychology
87(3): 386-398.

Shell, D. F., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and Outcome
Expectancy Mechanisms in Reading and Writing Achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 81, 91-100.

Skaalvik, E. M., and Rankin, R. J. (1994). Gender differences in mathematics and

verbal achievement, self-perception and motivation. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 64, 419-28.

81
Smist, J. M. & Owen, S. V. (1994, April). Explaining science self-efficacy. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, New Orleans, LA.

Smist, J. M., Archambault, F. X., & Owen, S. V. (1997, April). Gender and ethnic
differences in attitude toward science and science self-efficacy among high
school students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Smith, R. E. (1989). Effects of coping skills training on generalized self-efficacy and

locus of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 228233.

Speight, N.P. (2009). The relationship between self-efficacy, resilience and academic
achievement among African-American urban adolescent students. Doctoral
dissertation, Harward University.

Tella, A. Jr & Tella, A. (2003). Self-efficacy and locus of Control as Predictors of

Academic Achievement among Secondary Schools Students in Osun State
Unity Schools. Oyo Journal of Educational Psychology. 1(1), 32-41. 66.

Tippins, D. J. (1991). The relationship of science self-efficacy and gender to ninth

grade students intentions to enroll in elective science courses. (Report No.
SE052385). Georgia. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED350144).

Umoiyang, I.E. (1998). Student Socio-Psychological Factors as Determinant of

Achievement in Senior Secondary School Mathematics. Unpublished Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.

Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2006a). Inviting confidence in school: Invitations as a

critical source of the academic self-efficacy beliefs of entering middle school
students. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice.

Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2006b). Sources of academic and self-regulatory efficacy
beliefs of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational
Psychology.

82
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning: A
validation study. Educational and Psychological Measurement.

Usher, E.L. & Pajares, F. (2009). Source of self-efficacy in mathematics: A validation

study. University of Kentucky USA. Contemporary Educational Psychology.
Journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cedpsych

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J., MacIver, D., Reuman, D., & Midgley, C. (1991). Transitions
at early adolescence: Changes in childrens domain-specific self-perceptions
and general self-esteem across the transition to junior high school.
Developmental Psychology, 27, 552-565.

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). Development between the ages of
11 and 25. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 148- 185). New York: Macmillan.

www.punchng.com/news/71-candidates-fail-2013-novdec-wassce/

Yoloye, E.A.(1978). Evaluation for Innovation. Ibadan: I.U.P, 1978.

Yusufu, I.O. (1999). An analysis of the relationship between motivational strategies

and teachers productivity in Egbeda local government. Unpublished Masters
Project, Universityof Ibadan, Department of Educational Management.

Zimmerman, B. (2000). Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn. Contemporary

Educational Psychology 25(1): 82-91.

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

Zimmerman, B., & A. Kitsantas. (1999). Acquiring Writing Revision Skill: Shifting
From Process to Outcome Self-Regulatory Goals. Journal of Educational
Psychology 91(2): 241-250

83
 APPENDIX I

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCES EDUCATION

FACULTY OF EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN, ILORIN, NIGERIA

MATHEMATICS SELF-EFFICACY SCALE (MSES)

Dear Respondent,

This questionnaire was aimed to elicit information on students mathematics

self-efficacy. The information supply will be used purposely for research only.

You are request to please respond honestly to all the items in the questionnaire

regard with your efficacy. There is no right or wrong responses

Finally, you are assured of the utmost confidentiality of information you

provided regard with this research. Thank you.

84
Yours Faithfully

MOHAMMED, Olojoku Tajudeen

(Researcher)

SECTION A: PERSONAL INFORMATION

Kindly respond to the following items by ticking ( ) the column that is
applicable to you:
1. Gender: Male ( ) Female ( )
2. Type of School: Public ( ) Private ( )

SECTION B: SELF-EFFICACY
Kindly respond to all the items in this section by ticking ( ) the column that
best represent your view

Never
Seldom
Sometime
Often
S/ Items Never Seldom Sometime Of
N
1 I make excellent grades on math tests
2 I have always been successful with math
3 Even when I study very hard, I do poorly in
math
4 I got good grades in math on my last report
card
5 I do well on math assignments
6 I do well on even the most difficult math

85
 assignments
7 Seeing adults do well in math pushes me to do
8 When I see how my math teacher solves a
problem, I can picture myself solving the
problem in the same way
9 Seeing kids do better than me in math pushes
me to do
10 When I see how another student solves a math
problem, I can see myself solving the problem
in the same way
11 I imagine myself working through challenging
math problems successfully
12 I compete with myself in math
13 My math teachers have told that I am good at
learning math
14 People have told me that I have a talent for
math
15 Adults in my family have told me what a good
math student I
16 I have been praised for my ability in math
17 Other students have told me that Im good at
learning math
18 My classmates like to work with me in math
because they think Im good at it
19 Just being in math class makes feel stressed
and nervous
20 Doing math work takes all of my energy
21 I start to feel stressed-out as soon as I begin
my math work
22 My mind goes blank and I am unable to think
clearly when doing math work
23 I get depressed when I think about learning
math
24 My whole body becomes tense when I have to do
math

86
 Appendix ii

Proforma for Recording Students Scores

S/N School Gender Mathematics
score

87
 Appendix III

LIST OF SELECTED PUBLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS

S/N NAME OF THE SCHOOL SELECTED NUMBER OF THE

STUDENT SELECTED

1 Government Day Secondary School, 50

Odokun, Ilorin

2 Ansarul Islam Secondary School, Ilorin 50

3 Community Secondary School, Banni 50

Ilorin

4 Government High School, Adeta Ilorin 50

88
 5 St. Anthony Secondary School Ilorin 50

6 Government Day Secondary School, 50

Okekere Ilorin

Appendix IV

LIST OF SELECTED PRIVATE SECONDARY SCHOOLS

S/N NAME OF THE SCHOOL SELECTED NUMBER OF THE

STUDENT SELECTED

1 Muhammed Kamaldeen College, Adewole 50

Ilorin

2 Oluwatoyin Progressive Secondary School, 50

Olohunsogo Ilorin

3 Socrates College, Adeta-Aromaradu 50

Ilorin

89
 4 Nana Aishat Memorial College, Ilorin 50

5 Federal Staff College Adewole Ilorin 50

6 Dalex Royal College, Kulende Sango 50

Ilorin

Appendix V

THE LIST OF REGISTERED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS IN ILORIN METROPOLIS

Ilorin East
Name of the Schools School Code
Government Secondary School (Science School) Ilorin KW/006001
St. Anthony Secondary School, Ilorin KW/006002
Cherubim and Seraphim College Ilorin KW/006003
Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/006004
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/006005
Army day Secondary School Ilorin KW/006006
Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/006007
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/006008
Kwara State School For Special Needs Ilorin KW/006009
Tetegun Comprehensive High School Ilorin KW/0060010
Secondary Commercial School Ilorin KW/0060011
Bukola Ansarul ISLAM High School Ilorin KW/0060012
Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060013
Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060014
Kwara State Polytechnic Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060015
Government Day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060016

90
 Government Day Secondary School Amule Ilorin KW/0060017
Government Day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060018
Ansarul Islam Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060019
Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060020
Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060021
Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060022
Shamusudeen College Of Arabic and Islamic Studies Ilorin KW/0060023
Best Way College Ilorin KW/0060024
Future Leaders Model College Ilorin KW/0060025
Al-Azim Muslim High School Ilorin KW/0060026
IFEOLUWA International College Ilorin KW/0060027
Sheba International College Ilorin KW/0060028
BURHANUDEEN Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060029
Sentu Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060030
Olokuta Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060031
junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060032
Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060033
UBE Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060034
ST. Barnabas Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060035
ST. John Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060036
ZANGO/Okesuna Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060037
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060038
HIS.GRACE College School Ilorin KW/0060039
Omo Hiyah Zeinus Soliheenah Cais Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060040
Dr.Bukola Saraki, Amule Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060041
Muslim Model Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060042
Ayo College School Ilorin KW/0060043
Ajoshe Model Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060044
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060045
Zarat Model College School Ilorin KW/0060046
Imam Hamzat Model College School Ilorin KW/0060047
Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060048
Okelele Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060049
Nana Aishat Academy School Ilorin KW/0060050
Ansarul Islam Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060051

91
 Junior Secondary School Alalubosa Ilorin KW/0060052
OKIKI Model Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060053
Rahmatul-Adabiyyah College School Ilorin KW/0060054
Dlight Girls College School Ilorin KW/0060055
Best Academic College School Ilorin KW/0060056
Ever Increasing High School Ilorin KW/0060057
UBE/JSS Secondary School Ilorin KW/0060058
Olore Islamic College Oke-ose School Ilorin KW/0060059
Ilorin south
Name of the School School Code
Bishop Smith Memorial College School Ilorin KW/007001
Ansarul ISLAM SECONDARY SChool Ilorin KW/007002
United Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/007003
Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/007004
Government Technical College School Ilorin KW/007005
Government Girls Day Secondary School Ilorin KW/007006
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/007007
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/007008
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/007009
Muhydeen Arabic Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070010
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070012
Taoheed Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070013
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070014
Government day Seondary School Ilorin KW/0070015
Anglican Grammar School Ilorin KW/0070016
Anglican Church Comprehensive College Ilorin KW/0070017
Christ Apostolic Church Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070018
Umca High School Ilorin KW/0070019
Emmanuel Basptist College School Ilorin KW/0070020
Precious Gift International School Ilorin KW/0070021
Dalex Royal College School Ilorin KW/0070022
Ifedamola International High School Ilorin KW/0070023
Effective International College School Ilorin KW/0070024
Omowumi Model College School Ilorin KW/0070025
International Art & Science Academy School Ilorin KW/0070026

92
 Cornerstone International Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070027
Ilorin South Local Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070028
Nana Aisha Memorial College School Ilorin KW/0070029
Emmaculate Model College School Ilorin KW/0070030
Messiah High School Ilorin KW/0070031
Reputable International College School Ilorin KW/0070032
Alexander College of Arts and Science School Ilorin KW/0070033
Adebola College School Ilorin KW/0070034
Simeon Mary College School Ilorin KW/0070035
Sheik Abdulsalam Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070036
Adewumi Abake Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070037
Oluwaseun College School Ilorin KW/0070038
As-shuarau Model Academy School Ilorin KW/0070039
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070040
Okc International College School Ilorin KW/0070041
Sango Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070042
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070043
Ilota Apaola Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070044
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070045
Junior Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070046
Flora College School Ilorin KW/0070047
Top-klass College School Ilorin KW/0070048
St.willliams Rcm Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070049
Lower Niger River Basin College School Ilorin KW/0070050
Uniliorin Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070051
Fate- Basin Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070052
Ebenezer High School Ilorin KW/0070053
Glory Land College School Ilorin KW/0070054
Islau-Deen Black/White International Model College Ilorin KW/0070055
Our Ladys Catholic Secondary School Ilorin ` KW/0070056
Abdul Aziz Atta Memorial College School Ilorin KW/0070057
Kinsey Academic College School Ilorin KW/0070058
Mobolajoke Model College School Ilorin KW/0070059
Masha Allah International College School Ilorin KW/0070060
Muhyyideen College of ARABIC and Islamic Study Ilorin KW/0070061

93
 Minaret Comprehensive High School Ilorin KW/0070062
Al-lateen Model College School Ilorin KW/0070063
Imam Hamzat Model College School Ilorin KW/0070064
Excellent International College School Ilorin KW/0070065
Benedict Comprehensive College School Ilorin KW/0070066
Aodac International High School Ilorin KW/0070067
Nasmat Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070068
Christ Redeemers Secondary School Ilorin KW/0070069
Gods Grace Comprehensive College School Ilorin KW/0070070
Alistiqomah College School Ilorin KW/0070071
Al-muwahib Group of School Ilorin KW/0070072
Hollab School Ilorin KW/0070073
Toluwani Education College School Ilorin KW/0070074
Redemption International School Ilorin KW/0070075
Tawfeequllahi islamic Academy KW/0070076
Shekinah Glory Academy School Ilorin KW/0070077
Gods Time Model College School Ilorin KW/0070078
Victorious Comprehensive College School Ilorin KW/0070079
Darul-atiq was Surah Moral College School Ilorin KW/0070080
Skylight Model College School Ilorin KW/0070081
Golden Era Model School Ilorin KW/0070082
Olunlade Jss School Ilorin KW/0070083
Wisdom Path College School Ilorin KW/0070084
Royalrinbow International School Ilorin KW/0070085
Omolola High School Ilorin KW/0070086
Corner Stone Independent High School Ilorin KW/0070087
Champions Ever College School Ilorin KW/0070088
Amazing Academy School Ilorin KW/0070089
Ilorin west
Name of the school school code
Sheikh Abdulkadir Secondary School Ilorin KW/008001
Queen Elizabeth School Ilorin KW/008002
Mount Carmel College School Ilorin KW/008003
Government High School Ilorin KW/008004
Ilorin Grammer School Ilorin KW/008005

94
 Baboko Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/008006
Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/008007
Community Secondary School Ilorin KW/008008
College of Arabic and Islamic Studies School Ilorin KW/008009
Government Day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080010
Government Girls Day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080011
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080012
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080013
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080014
Government day Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080015
Ilorin Comprehensive High School Ilorin KW/0080016
Imam sahban College of Arabic an Islamic Studies Ilorin KW/0080017
Kwara State College of Education Model School Ilorin KW/0080018
The Apostolic Grammar School Ilorin KW/0080019
Stephens Fountain of Knowledge College Ilorin KW/0080020
Socrates College School Ilorin` KW/0080021
Jibsorek International College School Ilorin KW/0080022
Islamic College School Ilorin KW/0080023
Glorious vision International College Ilorin KW/0080024
An-nur Islamic College School Ilorin KW/0080025
Ilorin west Local Government Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080026
Oluwatoyin Progressive Secondary School Ilorin KW/0080027
Five ways International College School Ilorin KW/0080028
Joel Best Legacy Model College School Ilorin KW/0080029
Al-ghali College of Arabic and Islamic Studies School Ilorin KW/0080030
Alade College School Ilorin KW/0080031
Uswat Model College Ilorin KW/0080032
The world Assembly College Ilorin KW/0080033
Future Stars College School Ilorin kw/0080034
In-depth International College School Ilorin kw/0080035
Lumex International College Ilorin kw/0080036
Gold academy School Ilorin kw/0080037
Federal Staff Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080038
Junior Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080039
Real Option College School Ilorin kw/0080040

95
 Ahababud-deen Islamic College School Ilorin kw/0080041
Balogun Model College School Ilorin kw/0080042
Royal International College School Ilorin kw/0080043
Lakadir New Success International College School Ilorin kw/0080044
Focal Point College School Ilorin kw/0080045
Our Lady of Mount Carmel College School Ilorin kw/0080046
Jooro Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080047
St.charles College School Ilorin kw/0080048
Junior Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080049
Muhammed kamal-deen College School Ilorin kw/0080050
Rukayat Science Academy School Ilorin kw/0080051
Fortunate International College of Arts and Science Ilorin kw/0080052
Junior Secondary School Baboko Ilorin kw/0080053
Al-adabiyyah kamaliyah Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080054
Dola Star Model College School Ilorin kw/0080055
Montessori Model College School Ilorin kw/0080056
Newbirth Model College School Ilorin kw/0080057
Busari alao College School Ilorin kw/0080058
Madi Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080059
Al-alim Basic School Ilorin kw/0080060
Ajoke Model College School Ilorin kw/0080061
Aminat Memorial College School Ilorin kw/0080062
Gaa odota Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080063
Al-furqan College School Ilorin kw/0080064
Tal-fizul quran International School Ilorin kw/0080065
Iman Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080066
Mandate Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080067
Olayemi comprehensive college school Ilorin kw/0080068
First Baptist College School Ilorin kw/0080069
Imam-dar-al Hijra Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080070
Ecwa Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080071
Ayoson Comprehensive High School Ilorin kw/0080072
Goodwill Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080073
Ansaru-deen Secondary School Ilorin` kw/0080074
Faith Academy Ilorin kw/0080075

96
 Ajenipa International School Ilorin kw/0080076
Sultanat Islamic Model College Ilorin kw/0080077
Kingstep International School Ilorin kw/0060078
Boltem International School Ilorin kw/0080079
Baptist jss School Ilorin kw/0080080
God-s time Model College Ilorin kw/0080081
Zion Basptist Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080082
Warrah Community Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080083
Gods Favour Progressive College Ilorin kw/0080084
Prospect International School Ilorin kw/0080085
Pearls International College Ilorin kw/0080086
Sheikh-Alimi Secondary School Ilorin kw/0080087
Jss Pakata School Ilorin kw/0080088
Orire College Isale Banni Ilorin kw/0080089
Lyson Comprehensive College Ilorin kw/0080090
Islamic Standard College Ilorin kw/0080091
Great Scholars College Ilorin kw/0080092
Cosmopolitan College of Arts Sciences & Tech kw/0080093
Precious High Star College Ilorin kw/0080094

97