a quarterly publication for the education community from the
Focus on ASSOCIATION FOR CHILDHOOD EDUCATION INTERNATIONAL
Middle School
Mathematics Motivation and Self-Efficiacy of Middle School Students
by Elizabeth M. Hughes, Duquesne University and
Paul J. Riccomini, The Pennsylvania State University
J ames and Sarah are students in Mrs. Gonzales’ 6th-grade
mathematics class. They have similar mathematics skills and
background knowledge; however, they have experienced different
levels of success in previous mathematics classes. Sarah believes
she is a strong mathematician and enjoys learning new concepts,
while James lacks confidence in the area and avoids engaging in
activities that require mathematics computations skills. Even
though both students have had the same mathematics teachers,
they have differing mathematics experiences.
Motivation is well documented as an integral component for
success. Positive student perceptions have been linked to higher
student achievement (House & Telese, 2008) and mathematic
problem solving (Hoffman & Schraw, 2009). Research suggests
that students’ motivation to learn a content area decreases as
they progress through school (e.g., Wigfield, Eccles, Mac Iver,
Reuman, & Midgley, 1991). This motivational decline has been
attributed to physical changes in self or school and classroom
environments (e.g., Wigfield et al.), increased peer awareness and
instruction that emphasize competition over curiosity (Guthrie
& Wigfield, 1997), or potential history of failure (Pajares, 2006).
Consequently, student motivation is an important consideration
for educators who work with middle school students.
SELF-EFFICACY AS A CONSTRUCT OF MOTIVATION
Particularly salient to motivation is self-efficacy (Fan & Williams,
2010; Greene, Miller, Crowson, Duke, & Akey, 2004). Self-
efficacy is a perceived awareness of one’s ability to produce the
desired results for a particular task (Bandura, 1997; Zimmerman,
2000). A student, like Sarah, who is confident that she will be
successful in mathematics demonstrates positive self-efficacy for
mathematics. Student motivation can be enhanced by evoking
the student’s sense of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy draws on a
sense of competence (Schunk, 1991a, 1991b) or competency
motivation, which leads to a nondefensive approach to new
learning. Self-efficacy is best induced when students experience
repeated successes in learning the subject matter, when teachers
point out or note their successes or achievements, and when
students can evaluate their own efficacy in the learning situation.
vol. 24, no. 1
Research in this area has demonstrated that an appropriate
teacher strategy to improve students’ self-efficacy is commenting
on specific achievements rather than praising students in general
(Schunk, 1991a). Teachers should recognize and share the
accomplishment(s) with the individual student.
The content-driven nature of self-efficacy suggests that
personal successes rely on the difficulty of the identified task
(Bandura, 1997). Perception may differ with familiarity and
comfort with the task, altering self-efficacy as task requirements
change. For example, it is reasonable that James would expect a
higher rate of success on a computations task that he considers
to be easy (e.g., two-digit addition) and expect a lower rate
of success on a task he perceives as difficult (e.g., addition of
fractions).
Bandura (1997) proposed that four sources contribute to
self-efficacy: 1) personal achievement and past experiences of
success or failure, 2) vicarious learning or learning by watching
others, 3) social persuasion or peer influence, and 4) emotional
or psychological states, such as anxiety. However, emphasis
on these sources differs (Hampton & Mason, 2003; Nielsen
& Moore, 2003). Continuing with the example, James may
have historically struggled with long division in 5th grade
(past experience). He watches his peers successfully solve long
division, and does not think that he can solve the problems
as well as the others can (vicarious learning). His classmate,
Sarah, on the other hand, receives praise from the teacher and
her classmates for her talents in mathematics (social persuasion)
and she looks forward to solving challenging mathematics
problems, even if they seem difficult to her (psychological
state). These students’ experiences and perceptions contribute
to their self-efficacy in mathematics and therefore are important
considerations for teachers. Self-efficacy and instruction as
influencing factors to student achievement are illustrated in
Figure 1.
CHALLENGES TO SELF-EFFICACY OF
MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS
Middle school students face a variety of unique challenges
Focus on Middle School • Fall 2011
to sustain positive self-efficacy. Studies show that student self-efficacy decreases as the
Focus on
Middle School difficulty of desired tasks increase (e.g., Chen & Zimmerman, 2007) and that self-efficacy
is influenced by such factors as gender, age, and culture. For example, by middle school,
EDITORS: boys reported higher self-efficacy in mathematics than girls (Pintrich & de Groot, 1990). As
Bradley Witzel
Winthrop University students progress in school, academic tasks naturally become more complex and anticipated
Scott Greenwood success consequently decreases, especially for students who have acquired a history of failure.
West Chester University Intrapersonal factors, such as cultural differences, also have been explored. Positive self-
Focus on Middle School (ISSN 2158-1673) efficacy has been linked to achievement (Pajares, 1996), even after controlling for mental
is published quarterly by the Association for ability (Pajares & Kranzler, 1995). Students with higher scores on achievement tests have
Childhood Education International, 17904 more positive beliefs about their own mathematics ability (House & Telese, 2008). Students
Georgia Ave., Ste. 215, Olney, MD 20832.
who believe they can successfully accomplish the task may be more likely to work harder
Articles published in ACEI’s Focus Quar- toward that goal and persist through obstacles or adverse encounters (Bandura, 1986; Pajares
terlies are peer-reviewed. Articles pub- & Kranzler). Researchers have sought to identify other variables that contribute to increased
lished in Focus on Middle School represent
the views of the authors and do not
mathematics motivation, including the use of technology (such as interactive whiteboards
necessarily reflect positions taken by the or specialized software), parental involvement, or authentic learning tasks (Fan & Williams,
Association for Childhood Education 2010; Isiksal & Askar, 2005; Maki et al., 2006; Torff & Tirotto, 2009).
International.
Results suggested that the impact of self-efficacy on performance may be stronger
Copyright © 2011 by the Association for than the impact of actual knowledge. That is, Sarah and James may achieve the same
Childhood Education International. No assessment scores, even though James was more proficient on the materials and Sarah
permission is needed to reproduce materi-
was more confident that she would succeed at the task. This is not to suggest that Sarah’s
als for education purposes.
high self-efficacy made up for lack of knowledge, but rather that James did not achieve
maximum performance due in part to a lack of self-confidence (e.g., anxiety). Bandura
ACEI EXECUTIVE BOARD: (1997) suggested that an optimistically inflated belief of self-efficacy may benefit a student;
Debora Wisneski,
President however, that is not always the case. Inflated perception of success may be a detriment if
James Hoot, the student lacks the basic skills necessary to complete the task. Referred to as “judgment
Past President disparity,” the disconnect between ability and perceived ability may not have beneficial
Belinda Hardin,
Secretary results for a student with “deficient academic preparation and achievement” (Bandura,
James Kirylo, p. 65), as self-efficacious belief for success will not allow the student to perform beyond
Treasurer personal capabilities (Pajares, 2006). Therefore, many educators recognize the importance
Kathleen Fite,
Member-at-Large of taking into account strategies to increase self-efficacy within the construct of other
Christine Chen, effective instruction techniques; self-efficacy alone is important, but not sufficient.
Member-at-Large


Charles Godwin,
Member-at-Large
Jane Lim,

Emerging Educator Representative
Jana Sanders,
Presidents’ Council Representative 


Diane P. Whitehead,  
 

Ex Officio Member

ACEI HEADQUARTERS STAFF:
Diane Whitehead,
Executive Director  


Anne Watson Bauer,

Editor/Director of Publications
Bruce Herzig,
Assistant Editor  

Lisa Wenger,
Director of Conferences
Yvette Murphy,
Director of Advocacy and Outreach $ 3HUVRQDODFKLHYHPHQW
 3DVWH[SHULHQFH
% 9LFDULRXVOHDUQLQJ
& 6RFLDOSHUVXDVLRQ
' (PRWLRQDORUSV\FKRORJLFDO
VWDWHV
ures for Every Child, Every Nat
Bright Fut io n Figure 1. Instruction and Motivation,
including self-efficacy, as influencing factors on student achievement.

2

THE ROLE OF SKILL IN SELF-EFFICACY
It is essential to self-efficacy that the individual also has the
skills necessary to perform the desired task. Self-efficacy cannot
improve behavior outcomes if fundamental skills necessary to
perform the task are absent (Bandura, 1997). For example,
Sarah may believe she will successfully perform an algebraic
equation; if she does not have the necessary skills, however, any
success would be due to coincidence and not belief of success.
Positive outcomes may improve the self-efficacy, and self-efficacy
subsequently may increase likelihood of success of the behavior.
One research-supported intervention used to develop
mathematics skills is concrete-representational-abstract (CRA)
sequence of instruction (National Mathematics Advisory
Panel, 2008). CRA-sequenced instruction systematically
progresses student learning through concrete, semi-concrete (i.e.,
representational), and abstract mastery of skills. During the
concrete phase of student learning, students physically manipulate
concrete materials in ways that demonstrate mathematical
concepts. After students demonstrate mastery at the concrete
level, they solve the same mathematics concepts using pictures
([DPSOH2XWOLQHRI&5$6HTXHQFH
'D\'LYLVLRQ:LWK)UDFWLRQDO$QVZHUV&RQFUHWH
Fall 2011 • Focus on Middle School
that represent the concrete manipulatives that were used
previously. Students illustrate steps of the problems that are
visually similar to the concrete steps already mastered. Essentially,
this representative phase connects the concrete procedures taught
in the first phase of the sequence to the abstract procedures taught
in the third phase. In the abstract phase, students use traditional
numbers and symbols to solve the mathematical equations.
See Figure 2 for an example of the CRA lesson sequence
implemented. Research supports the use of CRA-sequenced
instruction to teach struggling learners in middle school (Butler,
Miller, Crehan, Babbit, & Pierce, 2003; Witzel, 2005; Witzel,
Mercer, & Miller, 2003).
Historically, effective instruction contributes to improved
student outcomes. Less is known about the unique relationship
between effective interventions and self-efficacy of struggling
learners, mutual influence, and how they function together to
influence student achievement.
STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION TO
ENGAGE IN MATHEMATICS
The purpose of the current research was to explore the effects of
mathematics achievement on self-efficacy. Specifically, researchers
considered the question: What are the effects of a CRA sequence
of instruction, when compared to traditional fractions instruction,
on the self-efficacy of middle school students? Both a control
0HWKRG
Ǥ 'HVFULEHDQG0RGHOWKH6NLOO group and a treatment group received a self-efficacy survey prior
Ǥ *XLGHG3UDFWLFH:LWKWKH6WXGHQWV to implementing the intervention, after the treatment group
Ǥ ,QGHSHQGHQW3UDFWLFHE\6WXGHQWV received the six-week CRA intervention, and four weeks after
the completion of fractions instruction. Students were randomly
'D\'LYLVLRQ:LWK)UDFWLRQDO$QVZHUV6HPLFRQFUHWH
5HSUHVHQWDWLRQ0HWKRG assigned to CRA or control groups; however, additional analyses
Ǥ 'HVFULEHDQG0RGHOWKH6NLOO were conducted to determine normal distribution across groups.
Ǥ *XLGHG3UDFWLFH:LWKWKH6WXGHQWV An independent sample t-test was performed to determine if
Ǥ ,QGHSHQGHQW3UDFWLFHE\6WXGHQWV there were significant differences of self-efficacy between CRA
treatment and control groups prior to receiving instruction on
'D\'LYLVLRQ:LWK)UDFWLRQDO$QVZHUV$EVWUDFW0HWKRG
Ǥ 'HVFULEHDQG0RGHOWKH6NLOO fractions. Levene’s test of equality of variances was conducted
Ǥ *XLGHG3UDFWLFH:LWKWKH6WXGHQWV prior to instruction to determine lack of significance for pre-
Ǥ ,QGHSHQGHQW3UDFWLFHE\6WXGHQWV surveys (F(1,33) = .937, _= .340), indicating homogeneity of
variance within groups. Table 1 shares instructional differences
Figure 2 between the control group and CRA treatment group.

Table 1. Percent of Lessons for Which Instructional Strategy Was Present

Instructional Strategies Control instruction CRA-sequenced
instruction
Modeling (demonstration of skill) 19% 91%
Guided practice 46% 100%
Independent practice 59% 100%
Use of concrete manipulatives 6% 25%
Semi-concrete representations 17% 25%
Abstract numbers and symbols 100% 50%

3
Focus on Middle School • Fall 2011
Self-efficacy of Fractions
The first portion of the measure assessed self-efficacy of fractions
and the second portion of the measure addressed sources of self-
efficacy (Bandura, 1997) via an adaptation of a tool used by Usher
and Pajaras (2009). A 31-item assessment (_ = .95) required
students to provide the degree to which they agreed with a given
statement or computation problem using a 10-point Likert scale.
Scores indicated whether or not the students expected they would
be highly successful on operations involving fractions. Data were
collected on student performance prior to receiving instruction
on fractions, immediately upon completion of the fractions
instruction, and four weeks after completion of instruction
on fractions. A two-by-three repeated measures ANOVA was
conducted to assess the main effect and interaction effect for
the two instructional groups (see Table 2). Results yielded no
significant interaction effect between the control group and the
CRA treatment group on performance on the post assessment.
The self-efficacy post-survey was given to students at the
completion of instruction on fractions and four weeks after
the completion of instruction. Two separate series of repeated
measures ANOVAs were performed to analyze change in self-
efficacy over time. Significant changes in self-efficacy were
not determined between the pre- and post-surveys. However,
significant changes were detected between pre-survey and delayed-
post surveys F(1,32) = 19.20, p < .001,d2 = .375. Unremarkably,
no statistical differences were detected between the treatment and
control groups for self-efficacy of performance on the delayed-post
survey.
Source of Self-efficacy
The second portion of the self-efficacy survey consisted of four
constructs that measured sources of self-efficacy. A series of
t-tests determined there were no significant differences between
the control group and the CRA treatment group on pre-survey
measures for mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, or
social persuasions. There was, however, a significant difference
between the control and CRA treatment group on the construct
of psychological state t(33) = -2.34, p = .010. Students from the
CRA group posted higher scores on measures given prior to the
intervention, indicating a psychological state of greater anxiety
about fractions prior to the intervention.
A series of repeated measures ANOVAs were performed to
assess changes in the sources of student self-efficacy over time.
Table 2. Scores for Self-efficacy
Pretest
Condition n M (SD)
Control (15) 29.89 (13.70)
Treatment (20) 27.73 (11.65)
4
There were no significant differences from pre- to post-survey
for mastery experience, social persuasions, or psychological
state. There was a main effect for vicarious experiences F(1,33)
= 3.71, p = .030. There was also an interaction effect for
students’ psychological state pertaining to self-efficacy to perform
fractions F(1,33) = 5.39, p = .007. This suggests there were
differences detected in students’ scores in relation to the type of
instruction the students received. Significant changes over time
in psychological state were not detected between the two groups
on pre- and delayed-post surveys F(1,33) = 3.70, p = .063.
RESULTS
In an effort to explore the relationship between instruction
and self-efficacy, a series of ANOVAs were conducted prior to,
immediately after, and four weeks after instruction on fractions.
Student-reported scores from the CRA instruction and traditional
instruction groups were compared.
Perceived Success on Performance
The first part of the self-efficacy measure assessed students’ beliefs
regarding success on the computation of operations involving
fractions. Results indicate there were no differences between
the control group and treatment group over time on self-efficacy
measures. This finding suggests that the type of instruction (i.e.,
CRA or traditional) did not significantly impact student self-
efficacy over time. Research links self-efficacy and performance
(Hoffman & Schraw, 2009; House & Telese, 2008; Klassen,
2006). In efforts to change self-efficacy as a result of effective
instruction and behaviors of success during instruction, the
researcher analyzed student self-efficacy toward fractions before
and after receiving instruction (CRA or traditional) on computing
with fractions. The lack of significance in change from pre- to
post-surveys is not surprising, as attitudes are historically difficult
to change, especially over such a short period of time. It should
be noted, however, that there was a significant difference between
pre- and delayed-post survey scores.
The delayed-post survey scores were significantly higher
than pre-survey scores, indicating students reported greater
confidence and higher self-efficacy toward fractions. This
finding is peculiar, and deviates from logic that would reason
the change would occur after instruction, not four weeks after
the completion of instruction, or not at all. The increase in
self-efficacy for students, regardless of instructional type, on
Posttest Delayed-Post
M (SD) M (SD)
32.63 (8.94) 40.89 (9.77)
31.72 (10.83) 36.70 (12.70)

the delayed-post survey may reflect inflated perceptions that
developed from not having to solve fractions, but remembering
success in mathematics. Another possible explanation is that
because mathematics builds from prerequisite skills, students
are working on more difficult mathematics computations four
weeks after fractions instruction and therefore project feelings of
success on prerequisite and previously learned skills. Given that
the study took place at one middle school, it is not inconceivable
that recent school or community events may have contributed
to students’ self-reported self-efficacy scores. Additional research
pertaining to self-efficacy and instruction over time is needed to
shed light on these findings.
Sources of Self-efficacy
The second portion of the self-efficacy survey explored the
sources of students’ self-efficacy beliefs (Usher & Pajares, 2009).
Consistent with findings from the first portion of the survey,
there were few changes in students’ reported sources of self-
efficacy. However, the changes and differences reported are worth
examination.
There was a significant decrease for vicarious experience
and an interaction effect for psychological state wherein
anxiety of students in the CRA group decreased after receiving
instruction. Regardless of the type of the instruction in
computing with fractions students received, their perspectives of
personal experience and social pressures as an influence of their
anticipation of success or failure on fractions remained relatively
constant.
Vicarious Experience. Emphasis on success through vicarious
experiences (i.e., adults, peers, and self ) decreased four weeks after
the completion of fractions instruction for both instructional
groups. This may be, in part, because students from both groups
were no longer academically focusing on fractions instruction
and therefore had fewer opportunities to watch others (e.g.,
teacher, peers) perform operations involving fractions. Without
the immediacy and persistency of teacher instruction, student
perceptions of success by watching others correctly perform tasks
was less evident and perceived as less important as a contributing
factor to personal self-efficacy.
Psychological State. The most interesting finding, perhaps,
was the decrease in an anxious psychological state for students
in the CRA group immediately after the completion of the
CRA-sequenced instruction on the computation of fractions.
The decrease in student anxiety remained consistent four weeks
after the completion of instruction. Prior to the intervention,
students in the CRA treatment group communicated significantly
more anxiety (i.e., psychological state) as a negative contributing
source of self-efficacy. At the completion of the intervention, the
psychological state of students in the CRA group significantly
decreased (indicating increase in positive mental state) to scores
similar to those posed by students who received traditional
instruction. The decrease in scores for the CRA group suggests
that the source of anxiety was either undetected by the researcher,
Fall 2011 • Focus on Middle School
or that the CRA sequence of instruction provided students reason
to be less anxious toward fractions. The decrease in anxiety
may have resulted because students developed a conceptual
understanding of fractions, contributing to demystifying
mathematics involved with fractions. Anxiety toward fractions
decreased for students in the CRA group at the same time they
received evidence-based instruction on fractions. The significant
change in scores for students in the CRA treatment group, but
not the control group, suggests the differences were a result of the
intervention (i.e., CRA-sequenced instruction) and not chance.
It should be noted that as assessments indicated a decrease in
anxiety as a contributing factor to students’ self-efficacy, student
performance on computations involving fractions increased.
The decrease in student anxiety coincides with instruction
that addressed procedural and conceptual understanding of
fractions. The sequenced nature of CRA instruction scaffolds
learning from concrete to semi-concrete (i.e., representational)
to abstract, teaching students through different modalities.
Siegler and colleagues (2010) recommended using visual
representations during instruction to improve students’
understanding of procedures for computing with fractions. The
scaffolded instruction or interaction with manipulative and visual
representations may demystify fractions and help students better
understand fractions (as supported by student scores on the
computations assessment), consequently reducing their anxiety
when working with fractions.
Self-efficacy and instruction are both integral to student
success. However, more research is needed to explore the
relationship between self-efficacy and effective instruction with
regard to mathematics performance of middle school students.
Research findings support the mutually beneficial relationship
between self-efficacy and performance. Additionally, findings
suggest CRA instruction may help decrease student anxiety
toward fractions. It is important for educators to develop a
learning environment that fosters students’ self-efficacy and
academic performance through effective learning strategies.
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY:
W. H. Freeman and Company.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social
cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Butler, F. M., Miller, S. P., Crehan, K., Babbitt, B., & Pierce, T. (2003).
Fraction instruction for students with mathematics disabilities:
Comparing two teaching sequences. Learning Disabilities Research &
Practice, 18, 99-111.
Chen, P., & Zimmerman, B. (2007). A cross-national comparison study
on the accuracy of self-efficacy beliefs of middle-school mathematics
students. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 221-244.
Fan, W., & Williams, C. M. (2010). The effects of parental involvement
on students’ academic self-efficacy, engagement and intrinsic
motivation. Educational Psychology, 30, 53-74.
5
Focus on Middle School • Fall 2011
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K.
L. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement
and achievement: Contributions of the classroom perceptions and
motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462-482.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (Eds.). (1997). Reading engagement:
Motivating readers through integrated instruction. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Hampton, N. Z., & Mason, E. (2003). Learning disabilities, gender,
sources of efficacy, self-efficacy beliefs, and academic achievement in
high school students. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 101-112.
Hoffman, B., & Schraw, G. (2009). Conceptions of efficiency:
Applications in learning and problem solving. Educational Psychologist,
45, 1-14.
House, J. D., & Telese, J. A. (2008). Relationships between student and
instructional factors and algebra achievement of students in the United
States and Japan: An analysis of TIMSS 2003 data. Educational
Research and Evaluation, 14, 101-112.
Isiksal, M., & Askar, P. (2005). The effects of spreadsheet and dynamic
geometry software on the achievement and self-efficacy of 7th-grade
students. Educational Research, 47, 333-350.
Klassen, R. M. (2006). Too much confidence? The self-efficacy of
adolescents with learning disabilities. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.),
Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 181-200). Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Publishing.
Maki, D., Winston, W., Shafii-Mousavi, M., Kochanowski, P., Lang, C.,
Ernstberger, K., & Hodgson, T. (2006). On the use of client-driven
projects in the mathematics classroom. Primus: Problems, Resources &
Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 16, 300-313.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for
success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Nielsen, I. L., & Moore, K. A. (2003). Psychometric data on the
mathematics self-efficacy scale. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 63, 128-138.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy during childhood and adolescence. In
F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-
337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of
Educational Research, 66, 543-578.
Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general
mental ability in mathematics problem solving. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 20, 426-443.
Pintrich, P. R., & de Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-
regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
Schunk, D. H. (1991a). Learning theories: An education perspective.
New York, NY: Macmillan.
Schunk, D. H. (1991b). Self-efficacy and academic motivation.
Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231.
Siegler, R., Carpenter, T., Fennell, F., Geary, D., Lewis, J., Okamoto,
Y., Thompson, L., & Wray, J. (2010). Developing effective fractions
instruction for kindergarten through 8th grade: A practice guide (NCEE
#2010-4039). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from whatworks.ed.gov/
publications/practiceguides.
Torff, B., & Tirotta, R. (2010). Interactive whiteboards produce small
gains in elementary students’ self-reported motivation in mathematics.
Computers and Education, 54, 379-383.
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of academic and self-
regulatory efficacy beliefs of entering middle school students.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 125-141.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Mac Iver, D., Reuman, D. A., & Medgley, C.
(1991). Transitions during early adolescence: Changes in children’s
domain-specific self perceptions and general self-esteem across the
transition to junior high school. Developmental Psychology, 27, 552-
565.
Witzel, B. S. (2005). Using CRA to teach algebra to students with math
difficulties in inclusive settings. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary
Journal, 3, 53-64.
Witzel, B. S., Mercer, C. D., & Miller, M. D. (2003). Teaching algebra
to students with learning difficulties: An investigation of an explicit
instruction model. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18,
121-131.
Zimmerman, B. L. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.