The role and function of anxiety, self-efficacy, and resource management strategies on academic achievement in university students
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this study is to examine the role and function of anxiety, self-efficacy, and resource management strategies on academic achievement. This study extended current research by incorporating and investigating a number of critical issues such as student beliefs, motivation, resource management skills, anxiety and worry, intolerance of uncertainty, self-efficacy, and achievement. The integrated model of achievement was developed as the conceptual basis for this study to understand the relationships among these variables. 272 students participated from university Undergraduate and Bachelor of Education programs across Ontario. Participants completed an online questionnaire to assess self-efficacy, anxiety and resource management strategies. Achievement was measured by a self-reported grade in a mandatory course. T-tests and chi-square tests of independence were performed to examine systematic differences between participants from two different university programs and gender differences within each program. Hierarchical multiple regressions were performed to predict grade from assessment type, various anxiety scales as well as self-efficacy and resource management scales entered in blocks. A two-way Analysis of Variance was conducted to evaluate the effects of program and assessment type on grade obtained. Bachelor of Education and Undergraduate students were found to be significantly different populations specifically on grades attained, self-efficacy for self-regulated leaning and the type of assessment on which they reported. For Bachelor of Education students, self-efficacy was found to be the only significant predictor of achievement. For Undergraduate students, achievement was predicted by self-efficacy, generalized anxiety, and resource management strategies. No significant differences were found for males and females across any measures in either program. Results from the current study suggest that university students can benefit from early intervention. Early intervention from counsellors and professors may help students overcome debilitating anxiety, increase self-efficacy, strengthen resource management strategies and improve overall academic experience. The integrated model of achievement can provide university counsellors and professors with tools for identifying and assisting students who are at risk of failure or have low self-efficacy, high anxiety, and poor resource management skills. Mentors, peers and students can also benefit from becoming aware of the integrated model of achievement and the study's findings.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».