ASSIGNMENT TOP-SHEET

X9651

Practitioner Enquiry for Professional Learning

Module leader Dr Alan Huang

Submission date 12 noon Thursday 9 June 2022
PE report word count 3936

It is recommended that you take the opportunity, in the space below, to request specific feedback from
the marker on a maximum of two aspects that you think would be beneficial. These points should be
very specific to the module, its themes and how these relate to this submission. Very general questions
are unlikely to be helpful to you or the marker.

Please also provide feedback on the following specific aspect(s) of this submission

My research study around self-efficacy is something that is incredibly important to me.

I found it hard to complete the study without asking students for their names on the questionnaires, as I
wanted to find a direct correlation before and after implementing new techniques. I wonder if there are any
ways to bypass this problem, to avoid potential bias?

Feedback should lead to continuous improvements across your work as a whole. You are encouraged to
consider feedback from previous module assignments when preparing this submission. Note below the
action(s) you have taken in light of this advice in relation to this particular assessment task.

This is how I have used feedback on previous work to improve this submission

I have enjoyed this course and completed all my work to a high standard. I spend a lot of time reading my
work over again and of course, writing it. I have taken all feedback into account.

Declaration
I declare that this submission is entirely my own work. All sources and quotation have been
acknowledged in the text and/or included in the references section. I have read and understood the
University policy on Academic Dishonesty and the familiarised myself with the Good Academic Practice
and the Avoidance of Plagiarism: Guidance for Students booklet.
=
 Self-Efficacy in Primary School Learners

Why do some students lack academic self-efficacy and what role does the classroom environment play in this?

Abstract

As teachers, we are all too familiar with students who are much more successful academically than
another, though their ability in class seems to be much the same. The belief that one can succeed academically
and meet learning objectives is referred to as academic self-efficacy. Self-efficacy has long been argued as one
of the most important factors influencing a student’s academic performance. Because of this, teachers must
provide a classroom learning environment that supports students who lack self-efficacy and challenges those
who have already developed a high sense of self-efficacy.

A safe, creative, and positive classroom environment is one most important things a teacher should
be able to provide for their students. However, we often encounter different problems in trying to do so, as all
students view the classroom environment in different ways. More importantly, almost always, students
perceive the classroom environment differently than how the teacher imagined. This study focuses on
exploring self-efficacy among primary school learners, in an ESL setting, and whether the classroom
environment impacts their development of self-efficacy. This study specifically looks at grade 4 students in a
bilingual setting, though the degrees of bilingualism differ slightly. It aims to investigate the relationship
between self-efficacy and the students view on their classroom environments. It also hopes to explore
different methods to improve upon both areas. The insights from this study can help teachers to create
optimal classroom learning environments for their students, which enhance self-efficacy and as a result,
academic success for all students.

1. Introduction

Self-efficacy beliefs are defined by Bandura (1997) as being the beliefs a person has about his or her
capabilities to complete a task and/or produce the desired outcome. Social cognitive theorists, Bandura and
Schunk identified three factors which influenced a student’s level of self-efficacy. The first factor relates to the
student’s prior academic performance. The second factor focuses on the role of the teacher and the message
they portray to the student. Lastly, and most importantly for this study, the success, and failures of their
peers. This study will look at relationships between students and their counterparts as well as observational
learning, which as suggested by Bandura, plays a significant role in enhancing a student’s self-efficacy.
Students with low self-efficacy tend to avoid interaction with their peers as much as possible, and so struggle
more with making friends. Therefore, these students may not enjoy the classroom environment as much as
others and would prefer less group work/interaction with peers. This interaction between classmates is key
to enhancing self-efficacy.

This relates closely to the classroom environment and the factors which help and hinder a student’s
self-efficacy. The importance of the classroom environment has been recognised through years of research
and has always been argued as an important factor for a child’s learning (Fraser and Fisher, 1982). The
classroom environment is often measured against other factors such as student enjoyment, self-regulation,
and self-efficacy (Al Zubaidi and Aldridge, 2016).

I hypothesise that the students who are determined to have low self-efficacy would perceive their
classroom environment less favourably than their counterparts with high self-efficacy. I also hypothesise that
it is the students with low self-efficacy who are found to be academically at risk. I believe that this study will
highlight the relationship between self-efficacy and the classroom environment.

1.1. PE Questions

This study addresses 2 main areas; firstly, to explore self-efficacy among students and the
relationship between this self-efficacy the classroom environment. Secondly, to identify and develop ways to
promote self-efficacy among students. With these aims in mind the PE questions that were examined
throughout this study are listed below:

1. What role does the classroom environment play in a student’s development of self-efficacy?
2. What are some ways to promote and improve students’ self-efficacy in the classroom?

2. Literature Review

The literature review in this study will take three parts. Firstly, literature focussing on Bandura’s
theory of self-efficacy will be discussed alongside other social-cognitive theorists. Secondly, it will review
relevant literature on classroom environments and the impact that they have on a student’s learning. Lastly, a
brief overview will bring both concepts together and review the current literature on methods to improve
self-efficacy in a classroom setting.

2.1. Bandura’s Theory of Self Efficacy

Self-efficacy is defined by Bandura (1986) as being “people’s judgements of their capabilities to

organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances”. It has long been
correlated with students’ academic success. Other social-cognitive theorists have also highlighted the effects
of students’ self-efficacy on their learning and achievement of academic success. Zimmerman et al (1992)
noted that students with high self-efficacy were confident to understand a lesson, solve problems and select
more challenging courses. The same is not said for students who are lacking in self-efficacy. They tend to take
the easy way out and do not believe they can reach the learning objectives set out by the teacher. This means
that as a teacher, we constantly must try and find ways to differentiate our lessons; firstly, to challenge those
students who want to be challenged, while also providing support for those students who do not.

Bandura proposed in 1997 that the learning environment was characterized by interactions between
the student, their behaviour, and the environment. He termed this ‘Reciprocal Interaction’. He theorised
posed that the environment can influence self-efficacy, which in turn can influence students’ behaviour. This
relationship between the classroom environment and self-efficacy was backed up by Vygotsky (1998). He
highlighted the importance of the learning environment and the people in it. He surmised that learning and
development could only take place when a student was interacting “with people in his environment and
cooperation with his peers” (p.90). He goes on to suggest that students and classmates could influence and
improve upon their self-efficacy by learning from each other. This related closely to Bandura’s peer learning
model, in which he posed that students could learn vicariously through observing peers. He noted that self-
efficacy, in turn, was socially constructed.

With these theories and models in mind, it is right to suggest that the classroom learning
environment which is provided for the student plays a key role in the development of their self-efficacy, The
next section will review relevant literature on classroom environments and what role they play in harnessing
self-efficacy and academic success.

2.2. Impacts the Classroom Environment has on Students’ Self-Efficacy and Academic Success.

This study aims to look at the social and psychological characteristics of the classroom (Fraser, 2012)
such as relationships between peers to determine the correlation between the classroom learning
environment and students’ self-efficacy. Given that students in a primary setting spend most of their day in a
classroom, the significance of this environment is apparent. The relationship between the classroom
environment and academic performance has been studied widely. All studies note the importance of a calm,
constructed and creative environment where students feel at ease, responsible and safe (Falsario et al, 2014).

3. Methods to Improve Self-Efficacy Among Primary School Learners in a Classroom Environment.

Academic self-efficacy beliefs of students correlate closely with students’ view of the classroom
environment. Both self-efficacy and the classroom environment are huge factors determining students’
academic outcomes. As previously mentioned, the type of environment provided for students and the
methods of teaching can both improve students’ self-efficacy in the classroom (Bandura, 1997). Fencl and
Scheel (2005) measured the effects different teaching methods had on the classroom climate, and students’
self-efficacy. Their students’ responses indicated that collaborative learning showed a positive correlation
with increased self-efficacy in their sample. In addition to this, they also found that the use of electronic
devices and/or applications in class also helped to create a positive classroom environment. They point out
the importance of teaching methods, by noting that the teaching methods which showed a positive effect on
student self-efficacy, all shared the common feature of engaging students – both comfortably and creatively.
Bandura helps to solidify this claim by concluding that creating a cooperative learning environment helps
both the students’ self-efficacy and their academic success. He noted; “Cooperative learning structures, in
which students work together and help one another also tend to promote more positive self-evaluations of
capability and higher academic attainments than do individualistic or competitive ones.” (1997)

Other strategies for improving students’ self-efficacy in the classroom include establishing specific,
yet attainable, goals for the students. These goals should be challenging and short term (Schunk and Pajares,
2002). Teachers should help students lay out their learning plan and as students progress through their
learning, the teacher can ask the students to note their progress and verbalise their next steps. Teachers
should also try to compare students’ performance, only to the student in question. They should not compare
one student against another, or even compare the student to the rest of the class. This creates a competitive
classroom environment, which the teacher should try to avoid (Bandura, 1997).

3. Methodology

Two questionnaires were sent to my own grade 4 students to collect data for this study. Students
were asked to provide their names when completing these surveys to examine correlations between both
questionnaires but will be treated anonymously in this study. The data was used in this study to examine the
correlation between the classroom environment and levels of self-efficacy among primary school learners.
The principal concern of this study was two explore the following two questions:

1. What role does the classroom environment play in a student’s development of self-efficacy?
2. What are some ways to promote and improve students’ self-efficacy in the classroom?

After reviewing the literature surrounding these questions, my hypothesise are as follows:

1. The classroom environment greatly impacts a student’s level of self-efficacy. The more positive and
collaborative the classroom environment is, the higher the level of self-efficacy among students will be. In
turn, I believe that students who have already developed this high level of self-efficacy have done so with the
help of a positive classroom environment, so will view it in a more positive manner, when compared to their
classmates with lower self-efficacy.
2. Following Bandura and other social cognitive theorists, I believe that promoting self-efficacy in class would
be enhanced by fostering a more collaborative learning environment, instead of a competitive one. Methods
that improve self-efficacy among students would create a more positive learning environment for all
students, and in turn, improve academic success.

3.1. Sample Participants

The participants used in my study were from the same grade and class. This was a class I taught
every day, sometimes twice a day, so the availability and rapport between myself and the students were
already very high. The classroom consists of 25 students (15 boys and 10 girls), all aged 9-10 years old. The
classes in my school are grouped according to levels, which are calculated from the student’s test scores. This
class is the highest in the grade and all have test scores between 85-100%. Most of my students perform very
well on tests, but not all students believe that they can perform well and seem disengaged/unmotivated in
class – the main basis of my study. Students who were deemed to be ‘at-risk’ during this study, were students
who have an average semester score of between 85-90% (4 students). They are termed to be ‘at-risk’ as
regulations in my school require students to have an average semester score of 91% (in all subjects) to stay in
this higher-level class. Test scores are not the only requirement considered, as students’
participation/homework hand-in rates are also measured. The students who have taken part in this study
had a) written consent from a parent or b) communicated verbally their consent to participate.

3.3. Instruments Used.

This research study included two questionnaires to measure data. The first survey was a modified
version of Wang’s (2004) Questionnaire of English Self-Efficacy (Appendix A). The original questionnaire was
written by Wang to investigate students of Chinese background, and thus some questions needed to be
restated for my Vietnamese primary students. The second survey was the Classroom Climate Questionnaire—
Primary (CCQ-P), which was developed by Aldridge and Galos in 2017. This questionnaire was suitable for my
study and thus was not modified (Appendix B).

The Questionnaire of English Self-Efficacy (QESE) was developed by Wang in 2004 to assess Chinese
students. The questionnaire consists of 32 questions in which students rank on a seven-point scale. The
questionnaire focuses on 4 different areas of non-native English speakers: listening, speaking, reading and
writing. Students responded to each item on a scale from 1 to 7, 1 being the least developed self-efficacy score
(not at all confident) and 7 being the highest (extremely confident). As noted, this questionnaire was modified
slightly to better suit the participants in my study. Appendix A shows the questionnaire that was given to my
students at the start of my study, and then again at the end. Appendix C shows the students results the first
time they responded to this questionnaire (pre-implementation). Their scores were calculated both times to
see differences in self-efficacy after a period of implementing new classroom techniques. The results can be
found in Appendix F.

The CCQ-P (Aldridge and Galos 2017) was used to collect data about students’ feelings towards their
classroom environment. This questionnaire has 45 questions addressing 9 different areas: Cohesiveness,
Teacher Support, Equity, Task Clarity, Responsibility for Learning, Involvement, Task Orientation, Personal
Relevance, and Collaboration. Appendix B shows this questionnaire in the format that it was sent to my
students. Students responded to these questions by circling the number (from 1-5) which best represented
their answer. The response scale was as follows;1. Almost Never, 2. Rarely, 3. Sometimes, 4. Often and 5.
Almost Always. Again, data was collected from the students via this questionnaire at the start of my study
(Appendix D) and then again at the end. The results of this comparison can be found in Appendix F.

4. Findings and Discussion

A strong sense of self-efficacy benefits students in several different ways. It is largely believed to
correlate positively with academic success. Furthermore, self-efficacy is an important skill which teachers
should try to harness in their students. This study demonstrates the relationship between self-efficacy and
the classroom environment. The objectives of this study (1.1. PE Questions) are discussed below.

4.1 The Role the Classroom Environment Plays on Students’ Self-Efficacy.

The data collected from the Questionnaire of English Self-Efficacy (Appendix A) was calculated to
give the total self-efficacy score of each student (labelled A, B, C….). This score was calculated by adding the
numerical answer provided for each question together, and therefore the highest self-efficacy score would be
175. The results as shown in Appendix C show that the average self-efficacy score among my students was
153.8. This score was lower than expected and can be attributed to the high range in scores (also shown in
Appendix C). The highest score of self-efficacies in this class pre-implementation QESE was 174, compared
with the lowest score of 118 -this gives a very high range of 56.

The data collected from the Classroom Climate Questionnaire – Primary (Appendix B) was also
calculated to give the overall scores for all students (Appendix D). The average score and range were given in
this appendix also. Students overall scores were calculated by the same method as above (added together to
give an overall score out of 225). We can see from these results that a lot of students view the classroom very
positively and scored highly. The average score from this questionnaire was 206.8 whilst the range was still
very high in this area (66).
 The results of these two studies were taken and directly examined beside each other to find a
correlation between self-efficacy and classroom environment perceptions. Below, figure 1 shows clearly that
the students who scored high in the QESE also scored high in the CCQ-P, whilst the students who scored low
in the QESE also scored low in the CCQ-P. This figure and these results directly confirm my hypothesis that
students who view the classroom environment more positively would be more developed in terms of their
self-efficacy.

Figure 1: Correlation between scores in QESE and CCQP.

* Scores were all divided by 10 to show results more accurately

25

20

15

10

0
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y

QESE CCQP

I also wanted to measure my hypothesis, and a lot of theorists’ work, that students that scored highly
on the self-efficacy questionnaire (Appendix A) would have more academic success than those who scored
low. In my last week of teaching, I calculated my students’ overall English scores (Appendix E). This was
calculated using their final test score (35%), continuous assessment score (35%), participation score (15%)
and homework hand-in score (15%). Appendix E also compares all scores beside one another to give an easy
reading of all scores. Figure 2 shows the correlation between academic success (in this case, overall English
score) and level of self-efficacy. We can see from Figure 2 that students who scored higher in the QESE also
yielded a higher overall English score.

Figure 2: Correlation between academic success (overall English score) and scores in the QESE.
 200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y

Overall English Score QESE

We can see from Figure 2 that students with a higher score of self-efficacy (according to the QESE)
also yielded a higher overall English score. The three top-scoring students in terms of self-efficacy were
students G, I and M who scored 172, 172 and 174 respectively. These three students also achieved 99-100%
in their overall English score. The three lowest scoring students in terms of self-efficacy were students K, T
and Y who scored 118, 119 and 121 respectively. These students confirm my hypothesis with their lower
overall English scores of between 88%-91%.

4.2 Methods to Improve Self-Efficacy Among Students in a Classroom Setting.

The data collected for this part of the study was collected in two parts. Both questionnaires were sent
out to students within the first week of preparing this study. The results of which can be found in Appendix C
and D respectively. After some literature review and research on methods how to improve self-efficacy in the
classroom, I began to implement more collaborative learning methods in the class, as suggested by social
theorists such as Bandura and Vygotsky. These methods were implemented for 5 weeks and then the
students were given both questionnaires again. The comparative results can be found in Appendix F. Figure 3
below demonstrates the difference between students’ scores pre-post implementation in both questionnaires.
Data was collected by subtracting students’ first scores from their second scores.
Figure 3: Differences in students’ results pre and post-implementation.
* Data was calculated by the following method: (QESE Score 2 – QESE Score 1 / CCQ-P Score 2 – CCQP Score 1)

25

20

15

10

0
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y

-5

QESE CCQ-P

Looking at Figure 3 we can see an increase in self-efficacy (QESE score) and classroom environment
perceptions (CCQ-P) for all students, except 1. Student N showed a difference of -1 in their self-efficacy score.
All other students scored higher in both areas. The average scores of both questionnaires also increased. This
is reflected in Appendix F. Before fostering a more collaborative classroom environment and including more
class discussions, group work and collaborative activities, the average QESE score was 153.8. Afterwards, the
average score increased by 2.5, making the new average QESE score 156.3. This positively confirms my
hypothesis that creating a more collaborative classroom environment, rather than a competitive one would
help to develop the self-efficacy of the students in that class. The same trend can be found when comparing
the average CCQ-P score pre and post-implementation. There was an increase of 5.1. This shows that students
in my class preferred the teaching and learning styles implemented within these 5 weeks.

Given the findings in this study, I believe that teachers should look in to how they can make their
classroom environment more positive for all students in their class. Based on the results of this study
teachers can enhance student self-efficacy in class by allowing more opportunities for the students to learn
and grow together. They should be allowed more time to discuss and bounce ideas off one another. The
classroom should be a collaborative place where all students feel like they are involved in their learning and
listened to by their peers and teacher. It is important that all the students in our class feel involved in their
learning. This strong association between involvement and self-efficacy supports the previous findings in my
literature review. It confirms that when students perceive the classroom more positively and feel more
included/belonging, they are more likely to experience higher self-efficacy. This all relates to Vygotsky’s main
theory that learning is social (1972) and therefore students should be able to work more collaboratively in
class. They should be making friends with their classmates and discussing questions with them to find the
answers. They should feel at home and safe in class.

This study also demonstrates that self-efficacy is positively correlated to academic success.
Therefore, a teacher or school who wishes to achieve better results academically should spend more time
improving the classroom environments that their students are a part of.

5. Conclusion.

It is clear from the results of both questionnaires, that students’ self-efficacy is directly related to the
way they perceive the classroom environment. The findings indicate a direct correlation between all three
factors: self-efficacy, perceived classroom environment and academic success.

According to relevant literature and the findings from this study, I can come to the following
conclusion. Self-efficacy is one of the more important factors contributing to academic success, and therefore
teachers need to help their students develop their self-efficacy. Teachers can improve students’ self-efficacy
by looking at their classroom environment and making sure it is positive and inclusive for all students. The
data provided by the students in this study suggest that classroom environments should be caring, supportive
and collaborative by nature. It is clear from the results presented in this study, and from prior research that
there is a clear correlation between academic achievement and self-efficacy. The correlation between self-
efficacy and the classroom environment gives teachers an easy area to focus on if they are wishing to achieve
better results from their students. Teachers should listen to the voice of their students who are achieving
lower scores when developing lessons and creating their classroom environments.

There are a few limitations within this study which should be acknowledged. First, given the small
sample size (n = 25) of participants in this study, it is unlikely to yield exceptionally conclusive results.
Secondly, the sample of students used in this study were all in the same class. This did mean that the ability
and behaviours of most students were the same, and changes in classroom perceptions and self-efficacy were
most prominent in the 4 students who were identified as being ‘at-risk’. Lastly, as mentioned previously,
students in this study were asked to provide their names when completing both questionnaires. This was to
ensure I could examine scores from the questionnaires alongside each other and find a relationship between
them. Students were told their names were needed, and they did not have to participate if they did not want.
All students will still be treated anonymously within this study. Despite these limitations, I believe that this
study still highlights important insights into the classroom environment and self-efficacy development.
 In my teaching practice, I will continue to provide all students in my class the opportunity to feel
involved in their learning. I will continue to try and develop my students’ self-efficacy and provide an
abundance of experiences for my students to build positive beliefs about their learning ability.
 Reference List

Al Zubaidi, E., & Aldridge, J. M. (2016). Learning English as a second language at the university level in
Jordan: Motivation, self-regulation and learning environment perceptions. Learning Environments Research,
19(1), 133–152. https://doi.org/10.007/s10984-014-9169-7

Aldridge, J. M., & Galos, S. K. (2017). Development and validation of an instrument to assess primary
school students’ perceptions of the learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 20(1), 1–20.
https://doi.ord/10.1007/s10984-017-9248-7

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological

Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Fencl, H., & Scheel, K. (2005) Research and Teaching: Engaging Students - An Examination of the
Effects of Teaching Strategies on Self-Efficacy and Course Climate in a Nonmajors Physics Course. Journal of
College Science Teaching, 35(1), 20-24.

Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1982). Predicting students’ outcomes from their perceptions of classroom
psychosocial environment. American Educational Research Journal, 19(4), 498–518.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1162539

Fraser, B. J. (2012). Classroom environment. Routledge.

Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2002). The development of academic self-efficacy. In A. Wigfield & J. S.
Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 15–31). Academic Press.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012750053-9/50003-6

Wang, C. (2004). Self-regulated learning strategies and self-efficacy beliefs of children learning
English as a second language [Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and
Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1091546670

Vygotsky, L. S. (1972). Thought and language. Boston: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). Infancy. In Rieber R.W (Ed.), The Collected Works of L.S. Vygotsky (pp. 207-
241). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5401-1

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(3), 663–
676. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312029003663
 Appendix A

A modified version of Wang’s (2004) Questionnaire of English Self-Efficacy

____________

Name: __________________________________

Please complete the following questionnaire to the best of your ability. There are no right or wrong answers.
Your answers to these questions will be used anonymously to help with my university assignment focussing
on self-efficacy.

Please use the following scale when answering your questions. Circle the number you feel best represents
your answer.

1 – I cannot do it at all 2 – I cannot do it 3 – Maybe I cannot do it

4 – Maybe I can do it 5. I basically can do it 6. I can do it 7. I can do it well

1. Can you understand stories told in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2. Can you finish your homework of English reading independently? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Can you understand American English TV shows? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. Can you introduce your school in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Can you compose messages in English (Facebook/Zalo)? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. Can you give directions to your home in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. Can you write stories in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Can you tell a story in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. When you read English books, can you guess the meaning of
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
unknown words?
10. Can you make sentences with new words learned in class? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. Can you send emails in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. Can you understand English news on the internet/tv? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. Can you ask questions to your teacher in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. Can you make sentences with English phrases? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. Can you introduce your teacher in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. Can you discuss in English with your classmates about topics you 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 are all interested in?
17. Can you read English short novels? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. Can you understand English movies without Vietnamese subtitles? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. Can you answer your teachers’ questions in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. Can you understand English songs? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. Can you find the meaning of new words using English-English
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
dictionaries?
22. Can you understand English articles about Vietnamese culture? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. Can you introduce yourself in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. Can you write an article about your teacher in English? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. Can you understand new lessons in your English textbook? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Thank you for your time and response to this questionnaire.

Appendix B
 Aldridge and Galos’ (2017) Classroom Climate Questionnaire – Primary (CCQ-P)

____________

Name: __________________________________

Please complete the following questionnaire to the best of your ability. There are no right or wrong answers.
Your answers to these questions will be used anonymously to help with my university assignment focussing
on self-efficacy.

Please use the following scale when answering your questions. Circle the number you feel best represents
your answer.

1. Almost never 2. Rarely 3. Sometimes 4. Often 5. Almost always

1. I get on well with students in this class. 1 2 3 4 5

2. Students in this class are my friends. 1 2 3 4 5
3. I get to know the students in this class. 1 2 3 4 5
4. I am friendly to the students in this class. 1 2 3 4 5
5. Students in this class like me. 1 2 3 4 5
6. My teacher helps me with my work. 1 2 3 4 5
7. My teacher cares about my feelings. 1 2 3 4 5
8. My teacher listens to me. 1 2 3 4 5
9. My teacher is interested in how I am doing. 1 2 3 4 5
10. My teacher helps me to understand my work. 1 2 3 4 5
11. I get as much say as other students. 1 2 3 4 5
12. I get the same encouragement from my teacher as other students do. 1 2 3 4 5
13. I get the same opportunity to ask questions as other students. 1 2 3 4 5
14. I get the same opportunity to take part in discussions as much as other
1 2 3 4 5
students.
15. I get the same opportunity to answer questions as other students. 1 2 3 4 5
16. I know what I need to do to complete my work. 1 2 3 4 5
17. The instructions for tasks are clear. 1 2 3 4 5
18. I know how to complete tasks successfully. 1 2 3 4 5
 19. I understand how to do a good job in my tasks. 1 2 3 4 5
20. I understand the instructions that are given. 1 2 3 4 5
21. I am expected to work independently. 1 2 3 4 5
22. I am given responsibility. 1 2 3 4 5
23. I am expected to think for myself. 1 2 3 4 5
24. I am given the opportunity to be independent. 1 2 3 4 5
25. I am encouraged to work independently. 1 2 3 4 5
26. I discuss ideas in class. 1 2 3 4 5
27. I give my opinions during class discussions. 1 2 3 4 5
28. The teacher asks me questions. 1 2 3 4 5
29. My ideas are used during classroom discussions. 1 2 3 4 5
30. I explain my ideas to other students. 1 2 3 4 5
31. Getting my work done is important to me. 1 2 3 4 5
32. I work hard even if I do not like what I am doing. 1 2 3 4 5
33. I pay attention during class. 1 2 3 4 5
34. I try to understand the work. 1 2 3 4 5
35. I know how much work I have to do. 1 2 3 4 5
36. I use what I learn in my everyday life. 1 2 3 4 5
37. I can make connections between what I learn in this class to my life outside of
1 2 3 4 5
school.
38. What I learn in this class is useful. 1 2 3 4 5
39. What I learn is important to my life outside of school. 1 2 3 4 5
40. I use what I learn in my life outside of school. 1 2 3 4 5
41. We work in groups (or pairs) in this class. 1 2 3 4 5
42. In this class, there is teamwork. 1 2 3 4 5
43. I work with other students. 1 2 3 4 5
44. I share with other students while doing classwork. 1 2 3 4 5
45. Working with other students helps me to learn. 1 2 3 4 5

Thank you for your time and response to this questionnaire.

Appendix C

Results from pre-implementation QESE

*Students marked with an asterisk are students who were deemed to have a low-self efficacy score (<130)

Student Score – Pre ( /175) Average Range

A 152 153.8 56
B 146
C 155
D 159
E 168
F* 124
G 172
H 170
I 172
J 154
K* 118
L 134
M 174
N 165
O 164
P 168
Q 170
R 158
S 153
T* 119
U 163
V 154
W 155
X 157
Y* 121

Appendix D

Results from pre-implementation CCQ-P

*Students marked with an asterisk are students who were deemed to perceive the classroom in a more negative
manner (<180)

Student Score – Pre ( /225) Average Range

A 213 206.8 66
B 210
C 213
D 215
E 205
F* 155
G 220
H 220
I 220
J 211
K* 162
L 195
M 217
N 213
O 220
P 220
Q 221
R 217
S 213
T 189
U 212
V 203
W 207
X 214
Y 187

Appendix E

Students’ overall English scores

 Calculated as follows; 35% test score, 35% continuous assessment, 15% participation and 15% homework
score.

*Students marked with an asterisk are students who were deemed academically ‘at-risk’ due to policies set out by
my school that students need to have an overall score of 91% to stay in this class. At risk = (85%-90%).

Student Overall English Score QESE Score CCQ-P Score

A 98% 152 213
B 98% 146 210
C 100% 155 213
D 100% 159 215
E 98% 168 205
F* 87% 124 155
G 100% 172 220
H 100% 170 220
I 99% 172 220
J 97% 154 211
K* 88% 118 162
L* 90% 134 195
M 99% 174 217
N 97% 165 213
O 99% 164 220
P 100% 168 220
Q 100% 170 221
R 98% 158 217
S 95% 153 213
T 91% 119 189
U 99% 163 212
V 100% 154 203
W 98% 155 207
X 100% 157 214
Y* 87% 121 187

Appendix F

Comparison of results from pre-implementation and post-implementation questionnaires.

 Average QESE - Pre Average QESE - Post Average CCQ-P - Pre Average CCQ-P - Post
153.8 156.3 206.8 211.9

QESE CCQ-P
Student Pre Post Difference Pre Post Difference
A 152 154 2 213 220 7
B 146 147 1 210 215 5
C 155 155 0 213 215 2
D 159 160 1 215 215 0
E 168 168 0 205 213 8
F 124 132 8 155 172 17
G 172 172 0 220 220 0
H 170 171 1 220 220 0
I 172 172 0 220 221 1
J 154 156 2 211 213 2
K 118 124 6 162 184 22
L 134 139 5 195 199 4
M 174 174 0 217 217 0
N 165 164 -1 213 220 7
O 164 167 3 220 220 0
P 168 168 0 220 221 1
Q 170 172 2 221 221 0
R 158 161 3 217 220 3
S 153 155 2 213 216 3
T 119 128 9 189 203 14
U 163 164 3 212 217 5
V 154 154 0 203 209 6
W 155 156 1 207 209 2
X 157 162 5 214 217 3
Y 121 132 11 187 200 13