For Binding Sop 2.0 Space

Westmead International School
College of Teacher Education
SOURCES OF SELF-EFFICACY IN MATHEMATICS AMONG

JUNIOR AND SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN
BATANGAS CITY INTEGRATED HIGH SCHOOL
A Thesis
Presented to the Faculty of the
Batangas City
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Secondary Education
Major in Mathematics
JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

JENNY A. ATIENZA
MARIA JULIET G. CLEOFE
December 2022
i
APPROVAL SHEET
This study entitled

by:
JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

JENNY A. ATIENZA
after having been presented is hereby approved by

the following members of the panel
PROF. ROSANA B. DE CHAVEZ MARITES D. MANLONGAT, Ph.D

Member Member
ARLENE D. CASTOR, Ph.D

Lead Panelist
Accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree

Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics.
December 2022
Date ARLENE D. CASTOR, Ph.D
Dean, College of Teacher Education
ii
ADVISER’S RECOMMENDATION SHEET
This study entitled

by:
JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

JENNY A. ATIENZA
and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree

Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics has been examined
and is recommended for acceptance and approval for oral examination.
REGIE D. ABILA, Ed.D

Research Adviser
December 2022
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The researchers would like to extend their deepest gratitude to the

following who made significant contribution for the success of the study:
To Dr. Regie D. Abila, their Research Adviser and Program Head of

College of Teacher Education, for his unwavering support, constant guidance,
and expert advice to finish this research work and for facilitating them with
suitable statistical treatment of data for their study.
To Dr. Arlene D. Castor, Dean of College of Teacher Education and Lead

Panelist, for her leadership, continuing support, dedication, and patience to finish
this study.
To Dr. Marites D. Manlongat, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and

Prof. Rosana B. de Chavez, Dean of College of Information Technology and
Computer Studies and School Registrar, for their assistance and suggestions
and who serve as the thesis panel members.
To Prof. Blandine O. Baybay, Mr. Mark Angelo Dilay and Mr. Melvin R.
Magbata, their validators, for their comments and suggestions concerning the
face and content of the questionnaire.
To all the students and teachers of Batangas City Integrated High School
who participated in this study, for their time and cooperation in completing the
survey questionnaires.
To the beloved families and loved ones of each researcher who showed
their unending moral and financial support to fulfill this paper.
And above all, to the Almighty God, who has never forsaken them, for
giving them the wisdom and strength all throughout the course of this study.
Jaysa, Jenny, Juliet
iv
ABSTRACT
Self-efficacy has been identified as an important determinant for
successfully completing tasks. It influences an individual on what goals to
pursue, how to achieve these goals, and how to evaluate own performance.
Using descriptive method of research, this study examines the sources of self-
efficacy in mathematics among junior and senior high school students at
Batangas City Integrated High School.
The study involved four hundred (400) junior and senior high school
students and eighteen (18) mathematics teachers of Batangas City Integrated
High School as respondents. This study used Sources of Middle School
Mathematics Self-efficacy Scale by Usher & Pajares (2009), Mathematics Self-
efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire by Diana K. May (2009), and a self-
constructed questionnaire for teacher-respondents.
The study revealed that vicarious experience was the most significant
contributory source to students’ self-efficacy. The findings also showed that
there was no significant difference in the level of self-efficacy in mathematics
among the student-respondents when grouped according to grade level and
gender. Results also attested that males have higher levels of self-efficacy as
compared to females but there was no significant difference in the four sources
of self-efficacy among male and female respondents. Furthermore, there was a
significant difference in the four sources of self-efficacy among the respondents
when grouped according to their level of self-efficacy.
v
SUMMARY OF THE STUDY
Title: SOURCES OF SELF-EFFICACY IN MATHEMATICS

AMONG JUNIOR AND SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
STUDENTS IN BATANGAS CITY INTEGRATED HIGH
SCHOOL
Number of Pages:133
Name of Authors: JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

JENNY A. ATIENZA
Course: Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics
School: Westmead International School
Address: Alangilan, Batangas City
Summary:
The study focused on the sources of self-efficacy in mathematics among
junior and senior high school students in Batangas City Integrated High School.
This research determined the profile of the student-respondents in terms of
grade level, age, and gender as well as the profile of the teacher-respondents in
terms of years of teaching experience and educational attainment. It also
identified the source of self-efficacy that contributes the most to students’ self-
efficacy in mathematics among the key sources namely: mastery experience,
vicarious experience, social persuasions, and physiological and emotional
states. Additionally, it sought to determine the student-respondents’ self-efficacy
vi
level in mathematics based on their beliefs. Furthermore, it ascertained the
strategies that were used by the teacher-respondents to enhance the self-
efficacy of the students in mathematics.
The findings of the study revealed that among the key sources of self-
efficacy, vicarious experience is the most contributory to the self-efficacy of the
student-respondents in Batangas City Integrated High School while
physiological and emotional states have the least influence. The results also
showed that males have higher self-efficacy level as compared to females. In
line with this, there was no significant difference in self-efficacy levels among
students according to grade level and gender. Likewise, there was no significant
difference between male and female respondents in the four sources of self-
efficacy. Meanwhile, there was a significant difference in social persuasion
across the three age groups, but there was no significant difference in mastery
experience, vicarious experience, physiological and emotional states.
Furthermore, when it comes to self-efficacy level, there was a significant
difference in the four sources of self-efficacy among the respondents.
Thus, two were found to be the most commonly used strategies by
mathematics teachers for increasing students' self-efficacy. These are
presenting activities that students can finish with significant effort and
encouraging social collaboration, rather than establishing a competitive
environment.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE.…………………………………………….………….........................i
APPROVAL SHEET….………….………………………..………………..............ii
ADVISER’S RECOMMENDATION SHEET……...…….………………………...iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.…….……………………………..………………………iv
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………........................v
SUMMARY OF THE STUDY……..…………..……………………………………vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………......viii
LIST OF TABLES………………………...………………………………………….x
LIST OF FIGURES……....……………………………………..….......................xii
LIST OF APPENDICES……………………………………………………………xiii
CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction...………………………………….…………...............................1
Statement of the Problem.…………………………………………………….2
Hypothesis of the Study.………………………………….............................4
Significance of the Study………………………………………………….......4
Scope, Limitations and Delimitations of the Study………………………....6
Definition of Terms……………………………………………………………..7
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Conceptual Literature…...……………………….…………........................10
Research Literature…….…………………………………………………….21
Synthesis of the Study….………………….………………………………...26
Conceptual Framework...….………………………………………………...27
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE

Research Design……………………………………………........................30
Subject of the Study...………………………………………………………..31
Data Gathering Instrument….……………………………………………….31
Data Gathering Procedure…………………………………………………..36
Statistical Treatment of Data……………………………………………......37
viii
CHAPTER IV: PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF

DATA…………………………………………………………….....39
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….83
Recommendations……………………………………………………………85
REFERENCES……………………………………………....................................87
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………….96
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page
1.1.1 Profile of the Student-Respondents according

to Grade Level………………………………………………...39

to Gender…………………………………………...…………40

to Age……………………………………………...…………..41
1.2.1 Profile of the Teacher-Respondents according

to Years of Teaching Experience.......................................42
1.2.2 Profile of the Teacher-Respondents according

to Educational Attainment………………………...…………42
2.1 Summary of the Sources that Contribute to Students’

Self-efficacy in Mathematics……………..………………….43
3.1 Level of Students’ Self-efficacy in Mathematics………......47
4.1 Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance

Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics…………………..51
5.1.1 Summary of the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy in

Mathematics when grouped according to Gender………..56
5.1.2 Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’

Self-efficacy in Mathematics when grouped
according to Gender………………………………………….58

Mathematics when grouped according to Age…..………..60
x

according to Age……….....................................................61

Mathematics when grouped according to
Level of Self-efficacy………………………………..………..64

according to Level of Self-efficacy………………………….65
6.1.1 Summary of the Means of Students’ Self-efficacy in

Mathematics with respect to Grade Level………………….69
6.1.2 Summary of the Means of Students’ Self-efficacy in

Mathematics with respect to Gender……………………….71
6.2 Significant Difference in the Self-efficacy Level

in Mathematics with respect to Students’ Profile………….72
7.1.1 Summary of the Means of the Teaching Strategies

Used to Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in
Mathematics with respect to Years of Teaching
Experience…………………………………………………….76
7.1.2 Summary of the Means of the Teaching Strategies

Mathematics with respect to Educational
Attainment…………………………………………………….78
7.2 Significant Difference in the Teaching Strategies

Mathematics with respect to Teachers’ Profile……………80
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title Page
1 Conceptual Framework……………………….....................27
xii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Title Page
A Letter Request to the School Division Office

Superintendent for the Permission to Distribute
the Survey Questionnaires…………………………………..97
B Letter Request to the Principal of Batangas City

Integrated High School for the Permission to Distribute
the Survey Questionnaires…………………………………..98
C Letter Request to the Author of Survey

Questionnaires………………………………………………..99
D Approval Letter from the Author of Survey

Questionnaires………………………………………………100
E Sample Letter Request for the Validation of Survey

Questionnaires…………………...………………………….101
F Data of Population of the Target Respondents in

Batangas City Integrated High School……………………102
G Sample Survey Questionnaires and Survey Tally

Results……...………………………………………………..106
H Tally Results per Source of Self-efficacy…………………110
I Resume………………………………………......................112
xiii
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
This study focuses on the sources of self-efficacy in mathematics among
junior and senior high school students at Batangas City Integrated High School.
This chapter presents the problem and its background.
Introduction
Mathematics holds a distinguished place in the K-12 Basic Education
Curriculum because the academic success of students in Mathematics is
imperative in the 21st century. However, the Philippines performed the worst out
of 58 countries in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (TIMSS, 2019). This outcome prompts speculations about where
the problem is and how to address it.
Self-efficacy is a self-belief that plays a promising role in students'
learning and academic gains. In Mathematics, self-efficacy is deemed important
because it greatly influences the student's learning process. It is vital for
motivation because it drives students to complete various tasks and challenges.
A high level of mathematical self-efficacy can lead to excellent performance, but
a low one will have the opposite effect.
Sources of Self-efficacy in Mathematics among Junior and Senior High School

Students in Batangas City Integrated High School
1
Good emotional responses to academic challenges might increase
students’ self-confidence and their ability to succeed. However, high anxiety can
lower self-efficacy. It is believed that individuals form their self-efficacy beliefs by
interpreting information from different sources which may influence their self-
efficacy level. It is crucial to determine the self-efficacy sources of the students
to strengthen their self-efficacy in Mathematics. Therefore, it is appropriate and
significant to question the students, particularly those chosen respondents, to
find out how to increase their self-efficacy.
From this perspective, the researchers sought to determine the sources
of self-efficacy that contribute the most to the self-efficacy in Mathematics among
Junior and Senior High School students in Batangas City Integrated High
School. The researchers also aimed to identify the level of self-efficacy in
Mathematics of the chosen student-respondents of the said school. Moreover,
the researchers are interested to find out the different strategies mathematics
teachers employ to improve the self-efficacy of the students.
Statement of the Problem
This research sought to determine the source of self-efficacy that
contributes to the self-efficacy in mathematics among junior and senior high
school students in Batangas City Integrated High School.
This research specifically aimed to identify relevant responses to the

………
2
following questions;
1. What is the demographic profile of the students and teacher –respondents
in terms of:
1.1. Student’s Profile
1.1.1. Grade Level;
1.1.2. Gender; and
1.1.3. Age?
1.2. Teachers’ Profile
1.2.1. Teaching Experience; and
1.2.2. Educational Attainment?
2. Which of the following sources contribute the most to students’ self-
efficacy in mathematics:
2.1. Mastery Experience;
2.2. Vicarious Experience;
2.3. Social Persuasion; and
2.4. Emotional and Physiological States?
3. What is the level of students' self-efficacy in mathematics?
4. What teaching strategies are used to enhance self-efficacy of students?
5. Is there any significant difference in the sources of self-efficacy in
mathematics in terms of students’ gender, age and level of self- efficacy?

3
6. Is there any significant difference in self-efficacy levels in mathematics
with regard to students’ grade level and gender?
7. Is there any significant difference in the teaching strategies used to self-
efficacy of students in mathematics in terms of teachers’ profiles, years of
teaching experience and educational attainment?
Hypotheses of the Study
Based on the specific problem of the study, the following hypotheses were
tested and validated:
1. There is no significant difference in the sources of students’ self-efficacy
with respect to gender, age and level of self-efficacy.
2. There is no significant difference in self-efficacy levels of the students with
respect to grade level and gender.
3. There is no significant difference in the teaching strategies used to
enhance self-efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to years of
teaching experience and educational attainment.
Significance of the Study
This study focused on the sources of self-efficacy that contribute to self-
efficacy in mathematics among junior and senior high school students in
Batangas City Integrated High School. The results of this study are clearly
……….
4
established to be beneficial to the following:
Findings from this study are seen beneficial to curriculum developers
considering that the perspective of the students will be evaluated in terms of the
sources of self-efficacy. This may help them contribute to the creation of
interventions aimed at increasing students' level of self-efficacy.
In addition, the study will also be beneficial to school administrators
because this will help them understand which sources of self-efficacy get the
least effect on the level of self-efficacy among students in mathematics. This
may provide them the opportunity to work on a variety of intervention strategies
to assist students in coping with self-efficacy.
Teachers are also seen as one of the beneficiaries as they have an
impact on students’ self-efficacy development. It will give them the awareness
of what source is most contributory to the self-efficacy of their students. This will
provide them with information on which teaching strategies will help their
students enhance their level of self-efficacy.
The findings of this research will be most beneficial to the students as
they will have a better understanding of the different self-efficacy sources that
will develop their level of self-efficacy. Their educational experiences will be used
as a measure by their teachers to evaluate which teaching strategies will
contribute to enhance their self-efficacy.

5
Finally, this study will be extremely useful to future researchers who will
be dealing with similar issues. It may function as the principal guide, providing
the background knowledge required as they do their research study.
Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations of the Study
This study gave depth on the sources of self-efficacy that makes a
significant contribution to self-efficacy in mathematics of junior and senior high
school students of Batangas City Integrated High School. In this study, four
hundred (400) junior and senior high school students and eighteen (18)
mathematics teachers served as the research participants. The profile variables
of the student-respondents namely grade level, age, and gender were
determined. The essential sources of self-efficacy of the students with respect
to vicarious experience, mastery experience, physiological state and social
persuasion were also ascertained. The level of students' self-efficacy in
mathematics was also determined.
This study also deliberated the strategies that were used by the teachers
in building self-efficacy of students in learning mathematics. In line with this, the
profile variables of the teacher-respondents with respect to educational
attainment and years of teaching experience were also ascertained.
For this study, the researchers administered a standard questionnaire
which is limited to four hundred (400) junior and senior high school students,
Sources
….. of Self-efficacy in Mathematics among Junior and Senior High School
6
and a self-made questionnaire limited to eighteen (18) mathematics teachers of
Batangas City Integrated High School. More so, this study was delimited to the
time the survey is conducted. Lastly, the collection and evaluation of data were
limited to the results of the survey directed to the respondents.
Definition of Terms
For a deeper comprehension of this study, the key definitions are hereby
addressed theoretically and operationally.
Emotional and Physiological states. This term describes the connection
between exhaustion or tiredness and a reduction in the ability to perform
(Celestine, 2019). In this study, it pertains to the fourth factor of self-efficacy
sources the researchers use as a basis for assessment of respondents’ sources
of self-efficacy in mathematics.
Mastery Experience. This term refers to the experiences one has after
successfully overcoming a new task (Garrido, 2020). In this study, it pertains to
the primary factor of self-efficacy sources the researchers use as a basis for
assessment of respondents’ sources of self-efficacy in mathematics.
Mathematics. The study of utilizing numbers and symbols to measure,
relate, and characterize quantities and sets (Mifflin, 2011). In this study, it is the
subject where sources and level of self-efficacy of the students are measured.
Peer Modelling. It refers to a teaching technique where students can gain

7
knowledge by observing a peer do well in a task (Margolis & Mccabe, 2006). In
this study, it refers to the strategy that math teachers employ to raise students'
sense of self-efficacy.
Problem-Based Learning. This term refers to a teaching strategy where
groups of students work together to find a solution to a problem that occurs in
the real world (Kurt, 2020). In this study, it pertains to a teaching strategy
teachers use to improve self-efficacy of the students.
Self-efficacy. This term refers to one's belief in his own capacity to show
and practice proper behavior toward completing a task successfully (Hayat et
al., 2020). In this study, it is the student’s belief in their capacity to complete a
task specifically in mathematics
Social Persuasion. This term describes the process of convincing
someone that they have the necessary abilities and traits to succeed by
providing them with encouraging verbal feedback while they work through a
challenging task (Garrido, 2020). In this study, it pertains to the third factor of
self-efficacy sources the researchers use as a basis for the assessment of
respondents’ sources of self-efficacy in mathematics.
Sources of Self-efficacy. This term refers to the primary factors of
influence that shapes a person's self-efficacy beliefs (Garrido, 2020). In this
study, it relates to the important factors that have an impact on the student-
respondents’ levels of self-efficacy that the researchers wish to measure.

8
Strategy. This refers to a plan of action to accomplish short-, medium,
and long-term intended goals (Strategy Archieves, 2022). In this study, it refers
to the action or approach mathematics teachers use to build and develop their
students' sense of self-efficacy.
Vicarious Experience. This term refers to the second source of self-
efficacy which is gained from our observation of those around us, particularly
those who we view as role models (Akhtar, 2008). In this study, it pertains to the
second factor of self-efficacy sources the researchers use as a basis for
assessment of respondents’ sources of self-efficacy in mathematics.

9
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter presents the review of the conceptual and research literature
after a thorough and in-depth research analysis conducted by the researchers.
This also presents the synthesis and the conceptual framework that supports the
present study.
Conceptual Literature
The concepts and theories related to self- efficacy and its sources are
hereby presented. The literature is carefully cited and gathered from various
reliable references. The researchers are certain that this literature discusses
ideas that are essential and relevant to the present study.
Origin and Concepts of Self-efficacy. Albert Bandura created Social
Cognitive Theory in 1986 which claims that learning happens in a social context,
with a continuous and mutual interactions between the individual, environment,
and behavior. It was previously known as The Social Learning Theory which
included the development of five constructs namely reciprocal determinism,
behavioral capability, observational learning, reinforcements, and expectations.
Thus, when the theory evolved into Social Cognitive Theory, the construct of
self-efficacy was added (LaMorte, 2019).

10
Furthermore, Albert Bandura was the man behind the term "self-efficacy".
According to Bandura, it is a belief in one’s own ability to perform through
applying appropriate behavior needed to deal with probable situations. This
implies that, it is the belief of an individual on his own capacity to succeed on the
challenges one encountered. How a person perceived impact of sources builds
his self-efficacy (Garrido, 2020).
One can succeed in a specific circumstance if he believes on his own
abilities. People's thoughts, actions, and emotions are driven by these ideas.
Moreover, self-efficacy could be a factor of whether or not goals are met. Self-
efficacy is manifested through how people behave, act and think about a
particular task or situation. Belief on inherent abilities to perform events of
actions required to manage potential problems is what self-efficacy is: a person's
confidence that they can succeed in a specific circumstance. More so,
everything from psychological states to behavior to motivation can be affected
by self-efficacy. People could be convinced to think they possess the abilities
and skills necessary for success, according to Bandura's self-efficacy
assessment. Receiving verbal affirmation from others aids individuals in
overcoming self-doubt and directing their attention to the work at hand (Cherry,
2020).
According to Maddux and Kleiman (2023), self-efficacy is not always
straightforwardly tested, and when not taken into account, results may be
……….
11
incorrect. Self-efficacy is an abstract concept that cannot be touched, seen, or
evaluated using a simple scale. It must be quantified using the Likert scale,
which may be used in surveys and questionnaires.
On the other hand, Meera and Jumana (2015) stressed that the efficacy
belief system is a varied set of self-beliefs associated to different fields of human
endeavor, rather than a single attribute. Given the vast evidence on the impact
of self-efficacy on academic achievement, it is appealing to investigate the
sources of the belief in order to better understand how self-efficacy develops.
Self-efficacy, according to Bandura, comes from four key influences. These are
mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasions, physiological
and emotional excitement.
Key Sources of Self-efficacy. When an individual takes on a new
challenge and excel at it, mastery experience is obtained. Practice enhances
performance and this contributes to an individual’s mastery experiences. This
method is effective because the capability of learning new skill is realized
(Ackerman, 2018).
In addition, Bryant (2017) also claimed that the main source of self-
efficacy, known as mastery experience, grows when pupils encounter successes
and setbacks over time. Success brought forth by overcoming challenges leads
to higher degrees of efficacy and positive mastery experiences overall.

12
Vicarious experience is the second source of self-efficacy. Observing a
role model is how these experiences are built. Positive self-beliefs are absorbed
through seeing positive role models who have a healthy level of self-efficacy.
People who have direct interaction with an individual like family members,
teachers and mentors can all provide vicarious experiences (Ackerman, 2018).
In connection with this, one’s self-efficacy can rise if an individual sees
someone else deal with a comparable circumstance and succeed. Nevertheless,
much like with mastery experiences, observing someone else lose or fail could
make someone feel less capable (Yilmaz, 2022).
The third source is social persuasion which involves receiving positive
verbal feedback while executing a tough task in order to persuade someone that
they possess the essential skills and qualities to succeed. Though verbal
persuasion can influence a person at any age, it is more likely for self-efficacy to
emerge if it is brought about at an earlier stage (Garrido, 2020).
Lastly, the fourth source is emotional and psychological states. This can
influence how a person feels about their personal abilities when faced by
unanticipated circumstances. Self-efficacy can be developed by knowing how
to deal with anxiousness and enhance their disposition in difficult situations
(Garrido, 2020).
Moreover, Ashcraft and Krause (2007) as cited by Castro et al, (2020) said
that the term physiological and emotional states pertain to the physical and
……..
13
psychological conditions that an individual experiences before the initiation of an
activity, including, but not limited to, anxiety, stress, weariness, and good moods.
There has been a persistent body of research on the physical symptoms and
detrimental emotional conditions associated with math anxiety, and this research
shows how these problems affect both academic progress and quality of life.
One of the best tools for determining the sources of self-efficacy beliefs,
according to Kontas and Ozcan (2017), is the Sources of Mathematics Self-
efficacy Scale by Usher and Pajares (2009). The 24-item questionnaire is a valid
and reliable tool to evaluate the mastery experience, vicarious experience, social
persuasion, and physiological state as sources of mathematics self-efficacy in
middle school students.
In relation, Diana K. May (2009) of the University of Georgia created a
standardized questionnaire on mathematics self-efficacy and anxiety known as
the Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire (MSEAQ), according
to Cuevas and Berou (2016). Items pertaining to students' perceptions of their
anxiety and self-efficacy in mathematics were initially included in the
questionnaire. The self-efficacy and anxiety of students can be evaluated and
understood by researchers and instructors using this reliable, valid, and effective
questionnaire.
Importance of Self-efficacy in Learning Mathematics. According to
Cherry (2020), self-efficacy can have a big influence on how individuals act,
…….
14
including how motivated they are to achieve their goals. It is vital in determining
which goal they will pursue. People are much less willing to pursue an activity
when they believe there is little chance of success. Their level of self-efficacy
might influence how they seek and achieve their goals.
As for Miller (2019), self-efficacy shapes decisions and perceptions of
what is possible. Low self-efficacy, or a lack of confidence in one's own abilities,
can impair a person's ability to make decisions and exert effort. He added that
self-efficacy affects personal health, intellectual growth, professional and work
fulfillment, and relationships with family.
Likewise, Spoelma (2018) claimed that psychological well-being is
influenced by an individual’s beliefs about his own efficacy. It has an impact on
how the brain responds to stress and challenges. Believing in the ability to
overcome a problem sets in motion the coping strategies needed to succeed.
According to Youngs (2022), high levels of self-efficacy boost creativity
and curiosity which encourages learners to learn outside of the classroom. He
also mentioned that students' self-efficacy improves when they experience
success, watch others achieve success, and receive positive comments and
encouragement. The importance of self-efficacy can be summed up as follows:
if a person does not genuinely think he has what it intends to reach his goals, he
will not succeed (Meilleur, 2021).

15
Efficacy beliefs have a big impact on a student's academic success
(Lambros, 2017). According to Bandura (1977), as cited by Olave (2019), self-
efficacy is a social component of academic competency because of one's
confidence in their ability to succeed in a range of settings beyond academic
knowledge. To put it in another way, the learner must be able to apply their
knowledge, as the academic experience entails regular evaluation of the learned
competencies. As a result, the social context in which learning occurs is critical
for self-efficacy to evolve. It is essential for students because it motivates them
to strive at their hardest even when the task is challenging (Putri & Prabawanto,
2019). In agreement, according to Schunk (1991), as also cited by Olave (2019),
academic self-efficacy relates to students' belief in their ability to perform and
complete a given task successfully.
According to McCall (1999), as cited in Study Corgi (2022), a learner who
is confident in their ability to succeed in mathematics will ultimately be motivated
to practice and put in the effort necessary, but one who is uncertain or afraid of
their chances is likely to perform poorly. In addition, after recognizing the
significance of self-efficacy for the learner, Math teachers might modify their
pedagogical strategies to meet the motivational demands of the students. Past
performance is one of the main factors that influence self-efficacy, and teachers
can use this to motivate students to establish a good attitude toward
mathematics (Nicolaidou & Philippou, 2003 as cited by Ajisuksmo et al., 2017).

16
Furthermore, Ramacciotti (2020) stated that self-efficacy affects both
what people do and obtained from its outcomes. Research has abundantly
shown that teachers' beliefs influence their practices and that teachers' practices
and behavior have a significant impact on students' performance. It influences
both approach behaviors, such as the decision to pursue a particular career or
field of study, and persistence behaviors, such as the amount of effort and
perseverance put forth to achieve a goal. In addition, if learners choose to
remove any restrictions that their erroneous attributions may have placed on
their self-perceived abilities, the expectations for the outcomes will also change.
This alteration will influence how they learn and improve the patterns of their
behavior.
In addition, Street et al. (2022) cited that Math self-efficacy is correlated
with academic success, perseverance, and involvement. There will be many
changes in students as self-efficacy is established. As cited by Bernacki et al.
(2015), these changes include shifts in self-efficacy across learning activities
when a new topic is introduced to students and if self-efficacy variance varies in
levels of perceived difficulty.
Rozgunjuk et al. (2020) stated that students’ mathematics anxiety is
strongly influenced by their mathematics self-efficacy. As a result, when
students' mathematics self-efficacy improves, their mathematics anxiety will as
well. It is also possible that decreasing students' mathematics anxiety may help
17
to increase their mathematics self-efficacy.
Implications of Teaching Strategies to Improve Self-efficacy in
Mathematics. People who are resilient and open to new experiences are those
who have confidence in their abilities. They can successfully redefine who they
are and fully make use of their specific skills and knowledge. Emphasizing
students' self-efficacy more during the educational process is essential. For
students' self-esteem to rise and a love of learning to flourish, make the
classroom environment dynamic. Realistic teaching objectives, making full use
of the demonstration role, attribution training, creating the right environment, and
teaching students to value and love others are just a few instructional strategies
for helping students become more self-sufficient (Li et al., 2020).
As per Fencl and Scheel (2005), as cited by Celestine (2019),
conversations and lectures are less efficient at increasing students' self-efficacy
than conceptual problem-solving tasks. In relation, instructors need to feel
competent and secure in their capacity to teach and reach all students because
their feeling of effectiveness is vital. To anticipate and interpret the perceptions
and judgments that affect teachers' decisions and behaviors in the classroom,
self-efficacy has emerged as a key framework in education (Withy, 2019).
McColis and McCabe (2006), as cited in The Journal of Geoscience
Education (2022), reiterated that teachers can use a variety of strategies to boost
their students' self-efficacy, including assigning them more challenging work

……
18
than what is required, serving as a role model, planning their work assignment
learning about their students' interests, giving them the opportunity to try new
tasks, praising their efforts, and encouraging them to spend more time learning
rather than procrastinating.
Additionally, Withy (2019) mentioned various tactics that teachers can use
to raise students' self-efficacy levels above their typical levels. These include
making sure that the students can complete their work and succeed on the task,
using scaffolding and giving more time for accomplishments, reminding them
that class must have a cooperative and collaborative environment rather than
pushing one away to another, and providing students with opportunities for
success.
The outcomes of the studies in the literature demonstrated gender
differences in self-efficacy beliefs. However, studies on gender differences in the
sources of self-efficacy are limited. The few investigations had conflicting
outcomes. Based on established studies, males have higher self-efficacy than
females, and vice versa (Sarici & Kondakci, 2017).
In the study of Probst (2019), he claimed that no substantial differences
in mathematical ability existed. Numerous studies have reported gender to be a
significant determinant of students’ mathematics self-efficacy. A higher level of
mathematics self-efficacy was exhibited by male students as compared to their
female peers.
19
In addition, Usher and Pajares (2006), as cited by Zander et al. (2020),
stated that mastery experiences were a significant predictor of academic self-
efficacy beliefs for both genders, whereas social persuasion was only a
significant predictor of self-efficacy for female. Moreover, self-efficacy
differences in terms of sex are now the most widely provided rationale for the
gender gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (Kanny et
al., 2014 as cited by Zander et al., 2020). Good academic standing and work-
related success is predicted by self-efficacy attitudes.
Furthermore, Fallan et al. (2016) stated that self-referential cognition is an
important component of psychosocial theories that serve as a bridge between
knowledge and action. Self-efficacy has a substantial impact on academic
achievement, and hence gender-personality orientation may indicate an
essential association between academic success and self-efficacy.
In the same manner, Mozahem et al. (2020) argued that gender
inequalities in intellectual ability have received much interest throughout the
years. Thus, reduced inequalities in terms of self-efficacy in math scores may
lead to a variety of favorable outcomes, including increased mathematics
proficiency and female involvement in the subject and its related fields of study
and professions.

20
Research Literature
The study of Gao (2019) entitled “Sources of Mathematics Self-efficacy in
Chinese Students: A Mixed-Method Study with Q-Sorting Procedure” which is
anchored on Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory looks closely at the sources of
Chinese junior high school students' mathematical self-efficacy. This study
adopts a mixed-method approach which incorporates semi-structured interview
with the BQ-sorting procedure and Mathematics Self-efficacy Scale. The result
of the study shows that students' experiences with the four sources are varied.
It demonstrates that students with different levels of self-efficacy not only had
differing degrees of exposure to the sources of self-efficacy but also had varying
opinions about how each source affected their mathematical self-efficacy.
Furthermore, it reveals that females remember feeling greater social pressure
and anxiety during mathematics lessons than males do.
On the other hand, the study of Ozcan and Kultur (2021) entitled “The
Relationship Between Sources of Mathematics Self-efficacy and Mathematics
Test and Course Achievement in High School Seniors” which purpose is to
examine the effect of sources of math self-efficacy on high school seniors'
performance on math exams and in their courses, mentions that self-efficacy
sources have the power to both directly and indirectly affect performance in
educational contexts. The direct link between the sources of self-efficacy and
accomplishment is the study's main flaw. This research study is embedded on

21
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory. Using a correlational study, the study
reveals that mastery experience strongly influenced mathematics course
success, according to the findings of the regression analysis on mathematics
course achievement. It concludes that students’ performance on the course and
math exams, were influenced by self-efficacy sources.
In similar vein, a descriptive-normative survey and documentary analysis
study entitled “Students’ Mathematics Self-efficacy and Anxiety as Correlates to
Academic Performance”, seeks to ascertain how mathematics anxiety and self-
efficacy affect academic performance. Cuevas and Berou (2016), the authors
of the study, find that regardless of gender, mathematics self-efficacy is at the
same level.
In the study entitled “Sources of Self-efficacy and Outcome Expectation
in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Domains: A Meta-
Analysis” by Sheu (2018), the structure of theoretical self-efficacy sources as
well as how these sources relate to efficacy beliefs in STEM areas are explored.
This uses meta-analysis method. It is anchored on Bandura’s Social Cognitive
Theory. According to this study, four sources of self-efficacy affect outcome
expectancies. Each source variable is significantly linked with self-efficacy when
all samples are taken into consideration.
In connection, the study of Yildizi (2019) entitled “Mathematics Self-
efficacy beliefs and sources of Self-efficacy: A Descriptive Study with two

……….
22
Elementary School Students” looks on the relationship of mathematics self-
efficacy beliefs and sources of self-efficacy through a case study design. It
reveals that students with high math success had good experiences with the key
factors of self-efficacy. However, students with low math achievement tend to
display an amount of negative experiences indicating that students with excellent
mathematical achievement had much higher self-efficacy. It demonstrates that
having strong beliefs in one's own ability to master mathematics makes one work
harder to complete a task, whereas low levels of self-beliefs discourage a person
from exerting effort to finish a task.
The study conducted by Ablian and Parangat (2022), entitled Mathematics
Anxiety and Mathematics self-efficacy among Senior High School Students in
Public Secondary Schools is supported by Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory.
This study utilizes descriptive method and reveals that the perceived level of
mathematics self-efficacy by the students is highly positive. It also demonstrates
that perceptions of the mastery experience, vicarious learning, and physiological
state aspects of mathematics self-efficacy differ significantly with age, although
the perceptions of social persuasion are consistent. When views of vicarious
learning and affective state are compared by gender, they differ significantly,
although mastery experience and social persuasion are perceived similarly.
Furthermore, Zander (2020) conducts a descriptive study entitled “When
Grades Are High but self-efficacy Is Low: Unpacking the Confidence Gap
……….
23
Between Girls and Boys in Mathematics” to look at factors that predicted math
self-efficacy. It is discovered through that both genders fared equally well
academically and are regarded by their peers as capable colleagues in the areas
of mathematics when it comes to social persuasion and vicarious experience,
respectively. The study also reveals that social persuasion contributed more to
girls' self-efficacy than to boys. Using multilevel multiple-group regression
analyses, it shows that the affective mastery component described girls' self-
efficacy, while the cognitive self-improvement component explained boys.
According to the research, there are significant variations in how mastery is
evaluated with respect to gender which explains a large portion of differences.
A quantitative study of Kasturi et al. (2021) entitled “How is Self-efficacy
in Mathematics Based on Gender Perspective?” is also supported by Bandura's
Social Cognitive Theory. The point of the study is to ascertain whether male and
female students in mathematics have different levels of self-efficacy. This also
shows that students have great confidence in solving mathematical problems.
The findings of this study reveal that there is no significant difference in
mathematical self-efficacy between male and female students.
In the study entitled “Secondary School Students and Self-efficacy in
Mathematics: Gender and Age Differences” conducted by Mozahem et. al
(2021), gender and age differences in self-efficacy in mathematics among
secondary school students are discussed. The study used the questionnaire
…..
24
developed by Ellen Usher and Frank Pajares. The findings of the study reveal
that older female have lower levels of perceived self-efficacy in mathematics
because the four variables are more inclined to provide them with unfavorable
information. It also shows that physiological state and vicarious experience have
the least correlation while social persuasions and mastery experience have the
largest.
In relation, the study entitled "Examining Sources of Mathematics Self-
efficacy Beliefs of Senior Secondary School Students," by Awofala (2022),
examines whether mathematics self-efficacy sources differed by gender among
senior high school students in Nigeria using the sources of mathematics self-
efficacy scale that was adapted from Usher and Pajares (2009). The study
employs a quantitative research strategy within the framework of a descriptive
ex-post facto survey design. According to the findings of this study, male
students have significantly higher levels of sources of self-efficacy in
mathematics than female students do. Senior secondary school students also
show gender differences in these sources of self-efficacy in mathematics.
Masitoh (2018) confirmed in his classroom research study entitled
"Improving Students' Mathematics Self-efficacy Through Problem Based
Learning" that stated approach could boost students' mathematics self-efficacy.
This study was divided into two cycles. The initial cycle indicated that students'
have average self-efficacy. However, after implementing PBL, students' self-

…..
25
efficacy increased after the second cycle.
Synthesis of the Study
The purpose of this research was to determine the source of self-efficacy
that contributes to the self-efficacy in mathematics among junior and senior high
school students in Batangas City Integrated High School. The different studies
related to this work were discussed to enrich and supply more information about
the problem. All studies presented bear relevance to the present study.
The review of related literature gave substantial information and data on
the different topics that constituted the subjects of the study. It paved the way
for the researchers to determine where to start and where to go as they deeply
examined the subject matter.
This study and all the existing studies have something in common in
terms of theoretical framework and the type of questionnaire used. The
questionnaire used to determine the source of self-efficacy is adapted from a
standardized questionnaire by Usher and Pajares (2009) while the questionnaire
used to measure students' level Mathematics self-efficacy is adapted from a
standardized questionnaire - the “Mathematics Self-efficacy and Anxiety
Questionnaire” (MSEAQ) by Diana K. May (2009).
The conceptual literature is designed to accumulate some information on
various topics about self-efficacy and its four sources. It contained related
………
26
discussions that supported the researchers to define and explain the concepts
and theories related to self- efficacy and its key sources.
The research literature on the other hand is designed to accumulate
information about various studies related to this paper and are discussed in order
to provide enrichment and understanding of the problem at hand. It contained
related discussions of different studies by different researchers about self-
efficacy sources specifically its significance to age, gender, and mathematics
self-efficacy levels.
Conceptual Framework
This study focused on sources of self-efficacy that contributes to self-
efficacy in mathematics among junior and senior high school students in
Batangas City Integrated High School. The proceeding figure shows the
independent, dependent, and intervening variables which served as the main
framework of the study.

27
Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Four Sources of Self -
efficacy
• Mastery Experience
• Vicarious Experience
• Social Persuasion Level of Self-efficacy among
• Emotional and Junior and Senior High School
Physiological States Students in Batangas City
Integrated High School
Teaching Strategies of
Mathematics Teachers in
Batangas City Integrated
High School
Intervening Variables
➢ Profile Variables of
Student-Respondents
• Grade Level
• Gender
• Age
➢ Profile Variables of
Teacher-Respondents
• Years of Teaching
Experience
• Educational Attainment
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
Figure 1 shows the flow of this study. The conceptual paradigm was
designed using the Independent Variable and Dependent Variable (IVDV)
format. The independent variable box contains four sources of self-efficacy
which may have been influenced by the strategies used by the mathematics
…….
28
teachers while the dependent variable box contains the level of self-efficacy in
mathematics among junior and senior high school students in Batangas City
Integrated High School to address the significance of self-efficacy sources to
students’ self-efficacy level. The third box contains the intervening variables
which include the profile variables of the student and teacher-respondents.
In view of the foregoing framework, this study attempted to find out if the
level of self-efficacy among junior and senior high school students in Batangas
City Integrated High School is dependent on their sources of self-efficacy in
mathematics. The intervening variables which are comprised with the profile
variables of the student and teacher-respondents were also determined to have
an impact on the level of self-efficacy of the students.

29
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE
This chapter comprises the research design, the subject of the study, the
data gathering instruments, the data gathering procedures, and the statistical
treatment of data and tools used to interpret and evaluate the given data.
Research Design
The researchers employed descriptive method to assess the profile of the
student-respondents such as grade level, age, and gender which helped them
in determining the sources of self-efficacy in mathematics of the students as well
as their level of self-efficacy in the said subject area. The researchers also
utilized this method to assess the profile of the teacher-respondents namely
educational attainment and years of teaching experience to determine the most
efficient teaching strategy used to improve the students' self-efficacy.
This method of research is regarded as the most appropriate for this study
in order to provide the data acquired from the conducted survey which is
concerned with the sources of self-efficacy in mathematics among junior and
senior high school students in Batangas City Integrated High School with respect
to mastery experience, vicarious experience, social persuasion, and
physiological and emotional states as well as with the teaching strategies
implemented to improve the self-efficacy of the students as described by the

……
30
responses of the subjects under this study. The data gathered were tabulated,
analyzed, and interpreted.
The Subject of the Study
The main subjects of the study were four hundred (400) junior and senior
high school students and eighteen (18) mathematics teachers in Batangas City
Integrated High School during the school year 2022-2023. The total population
of junior and senior high school students of Batangas City Integrated High
School from Grade 9 to Grade 12 is 4,971. The researchers computed the
sample size needed for the study using Raosoft. For the teacher-respondents,
the total number of mathematics teachers from Grade 9 to Grade 12 was
considered.
Data Gathering Instrument
The primary tools utilized by the researchers to acquire the data needed
for the study were standardized questionnaires and a self-made survey
questionnaire. The researchers framed the indications and assertions included
in the study by using web publications and other associated materials to develop
the questionnaire. The researchers created the survey questionnaire which
assessed the teaching strategies used by the teachers to enhance the self-
efficacy of the students. The section of the questionnaire was then presented to
31
the research advisor numerous times for assessment and rectification of items.
The self-constructed survey questionnaire underwent comprehensive
and detailed validation by academic researchers and mathematics field experts.
The final revisions were based on their comments and suggestions concerning
the face and content of the instrument. The survey questionnaire final revised
copy for the teacher-respondents was composed of two parts. The first part
stated the respondents’ basic information, which is essential for the retrieval of
their demographic profile while the second part contained information on
responses of the teachers with respect to teaching strategies to improve the self-
efficacy of the students in mathematics.
On the other hand, junior and senior high school students were the target
audience for the other survey questionnaires which are made in standardized
form. The three parts of this questionnaire were as follow: 1) the demographic
profile of the students; 2) the information on students’ responses in terms of the
sources of self-efficacy in mathematics adapted from the Sources of Middle
School Mathematics Self-efficacy Scale by Usher & Pajares (2009), and 3) the
information on responses of the students with respect to the level of their self-
efficacy in mathematics which is adapted from Mathematics Self-efficacy and
Anxiety Questionnaire by Diana K. May (2009).
The researchers distributed the questionnaire to the intended
respondents after it has been authorized. They were given the reassurance that
32
all the information collected would be treated with absolute confidentiality and
would be utilized only for this research.
A six-point scale based on the frequency Likert's Scale was used to assess
the number of student-respondents’ responses to the questionnaire items to
identify the sources of self-efficacy as mentioned in the acquired questionnaires
of Usher and Pajares (2009).
Likert Scale Range Scale Verbal Interpretation

6 5.50-6.00 Definitely True
5 4.50-5.49 Mostly True
4 3.50-4.49 A little bit True
3 2.50-3.49 A little bit False
2 1.50-2.49 Mostly False
1 1.00-1.49 Definitely False
This Likert scale applies for the sources of self-efficacy of the students in
mathematics in Batangas City Integrated High School specifically on mastery
experience, vicarious experience, and social persuasion. Each item's score was
assigned a weight value, with 1 being the lowest and 6 being the highest. The
range scale of 5.50 - 6.00 is interpreted as "definitely true" and is marked as 6.
The range scale of 4.50-5.49 is interpreted as "mostly true" and is marked as 5.
The range scale of 3.50-4.49 is interpreted "a little bit true" and is marked as 4.
The range scale of 2.50 - 3.49 is interpreted as “a little bit false” and is marked
..Students in Batangas City Integrated High School
33
as 3. The range scale of 1.50-2.49 is interpreted as “mostly false” and is marked
as 2. The range scale of 1.00-149 is interpreted as “definitely false” and is
marked as 1.

6 5.50-6.00 Definitely False
5 4.50-5.49 Mostly False
4 3.50-4.49 A little bit False
3 2.50-3.49 A little bit True
2 1.50-2.49 Mostly True
1 1.00-1.49 Definitely True
This Likert scale applies for the sources of self-efficacy of the students in
mathematics in Batangas City Integrated High School specifically on
physiological and emotional states. In terms of the stated source, the reverse-
score item was applied. The range scale of 5.50 - 6.00 is interpreted as
"definitely false" and is marked as 6. The range scale of 4.50 - 5.49 is interpreted
as "mostly false" and is marked as 5. The range scale of 3.50 - 4.49 is interpreted
as "a little bit false" and is marked as 4. The range scale of 2.50 - 3.49 is
interpreted as "a little bit true" and is marked as 3. The range scale of 1.50 –
2.49 is interpreted as "mostly true" and is marked as 2. The range scale of 1.00
- 1.49 is interpreted as "definitely true" and is marked as 1.
For the self-efficacy level, a four-point scale based on the frequency

……..
34
Likert’s Scale adapted from Mark Berou’s study was used to assess the number
of the student-respondents’ responses to the standardized questionnaire items
from MSEAQ by Diana K. May (2009).
4 Always
3.25-4.00
3 Often
2.50-3.24
2 Sometimes
1.75-2.49
1 Never
1.00-1.74
The range scale of 3.25 - 4.00 is interpreted as "always" and is marked as
4. The range scale of 2.50 - 3.24 is interpreted as "often" and is marked as 3.
The range scale of 1.75-2.49 is interpreted as “sometimes” and is marked as 2.
The range scale of 1.00 - 1.49 is interpreted as “never” and is indicated as 1.
To determine the extent of the respondents' responses to the
questionnaire items, a four-point scale patterned from the Frequency Likert's
Scale was applied to the teacher-respondents questionnaire. Each item's score
was assigned a weight value, with 1 being the lowest and 4 being the highest.

4 3.25-4.00 Always
3 2.50-3.24 Often
2 1.75-2.49 Sometimes
1 1.00-1.74 Never

35
The range scale of 3.25 - 4.00 is interpreted as "always" and is marked
as 4. The range scale of 2.50 - 3.24 is interpreted as "often" and is marked as 3.
The range scale of 1.75-2.49 is interpreted as “sometimes” and is marked as 2.
The range scale of 1.00 - 1.49 is interpreted as “never” and is marked as 1.
Data Gathering Procedure
For the purpose of acquiring primary data for the study with regards to
teaching strategies used to improve self-efficacy, the researchers constructed
their own questionnaires using information from the internet, theses, books,
journals, and online documents. To ascertain the sources of self-efficacy and the
level of self-efficacy, standardized questionnaires from Usher and Pajares,
2009, and Dianna K. May, 2009 were utilized.
The researchers sent a letter of request to the DepEd Batangas City
Division Office for the data of total population of junior and senior high school
students and mathematics teachers in Batangas City Integrated High School.
The researchers conducted a pre-survey of the self-constructed questionnaires
to mathematics teachers to check the reliability of the questionnaire items
through Cronbach-alpha.
The researchers personally visited the select school and handed the
formal letter to the principal for the administration of the survey questionnaires.
The survey was undertaken to the respondents with the assistance of the
……….
36
principal, who disseminated the hard copies of the questionnaires to the
teachers down to the respondents.
After the survey was completed, the respondents' answers were
tabulated, analyzed, and interpreted. The findings were then used to form factual
conclusions.
Statistical Treatment of Data
Essential data were collected, tabulated, and analyzed in accordance with
the statistical tools of the study. The following statistical tools were used to attain
the results:
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). This statistical test analyzes the variation
in group means with a sample list while taking only one independent variable
into account. It was used to determine: 1) the significant difference in self-
efficacy levels of the students with respect to the profile variables: grade and
gender; 2) the significant difference in the sources of students’ self-efficacy with
respect to gender and age and; 3) significant difference in the teaching strategies
used to improve self-efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to
teachers’ profile, years of teaching experience and educational attainment.
Cronbach-Alpha. This statistical tool measures the internal consistency
and the scale reliability of the questionnaire. It was utilized to assess reliability
of the self-made questionnaire on teaching strategies to improve self-efficacy.

37
Frequency. This statistical tool is used to arrange statistical data that
exhibits the frequency of the occurrence of the values of a variable. It was used
to elucidate the number of responses in each item.
Likert Scale. It is the statistical tool that determined students’ and
teachers’ responses. This tool was utilized in rating the results gathered from the
survey.
Percentage. This tool is used to determine the frequency count. This was
utilized in treating the profile of the respondents.
Ranking. This statistical tool is used to determine the arrangement and
relationship of variables. In this study, it was used to rank every statement of the
questionnaire.
Raosoft Sample Size Calculator. This statistical tool is used to determine
the sample size of a population. In this study, it was used to get the sample size
of student-respondents.
Weighted Mean. This was used to get the arithmetic average of the overall
response of the respondents.

38
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter contains the presentation of analysis and interpretation of data
collected from the questionnaires conducted to Grade 9 through Grade 12
students and mathematics teachers of Batangas City Integrated High School.
1. Profile of the Respondents
The proceeding set of tables shows the profile of the student-respondents in
terms of grade level, age, gender, and profile of the teacher-respondents in
terms of years of teaching experience and educational attainment.
1.1. Students’ Profile
The following tables present the frequency and percentage of the students
in terms of grade level, gender, and age.
1.1.1. Grade Level
This table presents the distribution of frequency and percentage of the
student-respondents in terms of grade level.
Table 1.1.1
Profile of Student-Respondents according to Grade Level
Grade Level Frequency Percentage (%) Rank

Grade 9 100 25 2.5
Grade 10 100 25 2.5
Grade 11 100 25 2.5
Grade 12 100 25 2.5
Total 400 100%
39
The grade level of the respondents is divided into four brackets: Grade 9
through 12, with 100 students per grade level and comprises 25%, respectively.
This shows that the number of respondents for each grade level is divided
equally.
1.1.2. Gender
This table presents the distribution of frequency and percentage of the
student-respondents in terms of gender.
Table 1.1.2
Profile of Student-Respondents according to Gender
Percentage
Gender Frequency Rank
(%)
Male 200 50 1.5
Female 200 50 1.5
Total 400 100%
This table reveals that the gender of the 400 respondents is equally
divided into 200 both for male that comprises 50% and female that comprises
another 50% with a total of 100%.
1.1.3. Age
The following table presents the distribution of frequency and percentage
of the student-respondents in terms of age.

40
Table 1.1.3
Profile of Student-Respondents according to Age
Percentage
Age Frequency Rank
(%)
13-15 years old 187 47 2
16-18 years old 195 49 1
19 years old and 18 5 3

above
Total 400 100%
The table reveals that the age is divided into three brackets: 13-15 years
old, 16-18 years old and 19 years old and above. Respondents with respective
ages of 16-18 have a frequency of 195 and is equivalent to 49%. Respondents
with respective ages of 13-15 have a frequency of 187 and is equivalent to 47%.
Respondents with the respective ages of 19 and above have a frequency of 18
and is equivalent to 5%. When summed up together, this gives 100%.
1.2. Teachers’ Profile
The following tables present the frequency and percentage of the teacher-
respondents in terms of years of teaching experience and educational
attainment.
1.2.1. Years of Teaching Experience
The proceeding table shows the frequency and percentage of the teacher-
respondents in terms of years of teaching experience.

41
Table 1.2.1
Profile of Teacher-Respondents according to Years of Teaching
Experience
Percentage
Teaching Experience Frequency Rank
(%)
10 years and below 8 44 2
11 years and above 10 56 1
Total 18 100%
The table shows that the teaching experience of the eighteen (18)
mathematics teachers fall under two brackets: teachers with 10 years and below
teaching experience and teachers with 11 years and above teaching experience.
Teachers with 10 years and below teaching experience has a frequency of 8 that
is equivalent to 44% and teachers with 11 years and above teaching experience
has a frequency of 10 that is equivalent to 56%. This gives a total of 100%.
1.2.2. Educational Attainment
This table shows the frequency and percentage of the teacher-
respondents in terms of Educational Attainment.
Table 1.2.2
Profile of Teacher-Respondents according to Educational
Attainment
Educational Percentage
Frequency Rank
Attainment (%)
With Bachelor’s Degree 12 67 1
With Postgraduate 6 33 2
Degree
Total 18 100%
42
The educational attainment falls under two (2) categories named: with
bachelor’s degree and with postgraduate degree. With Bachelor’s Degree has a
frequency of 12 that is equivalent to 67%. With Postgraduate Degree has a
frequency of 6 that is equivalent to 33%. When sum up together, this gives 100%.
2. Summary of the Sources that Contribute to Students’ Self-efficacy in
Mathematics.
The proceeding table shows the summary of the sources that contribute to
students’ self-efficacy in mathematics among Grade 9 through 12 in Batangas
City Integrated High School.
Table 2.1
Summary of the Sources that Contribute to Students’ Self-efficacy in
Mathematics
Sources of Self-efficacy Mean Rank

Mastery Experience 3.80 2
Vicarious Experience 4.23 1
Social Persuasion 3.50 3
Physiological and Emotional 3.19 4

States
The table reveals that vicarious experience has obtained the highest mean
of 4.23. Mastery experience ranked 2nd and obtained a weighted mean of
3.80. Social persuasion ranked 3rd and obtained a weighted mean of
3.50. Physiological and emotional states ranked the lowest and obtained a
weighted mean of 3.19 (see Appendix F for the tally results per self-efficacy
……..
43
source). The result demonstrates that vicarious experience is the most
contributory source to students’ self-efficacy in mathematics. This reveals that
when students see others do well in mathematics, they become motivated to do
better in the said subject and this increases their level of self-efficacy. This also
shows that there is one specific source that has a greater impact than the others.
In this study, the student-respondents’ self-efficacy is built through peers. They
believe that witnessing other individuals complete a task successfully greatly
influences their self-efficacy.
The big difference in the weighted mean of vicarious experience to other
sources of self-efficacy indicates that when students are surrounded by people
who are eager to excel in math, they become inspired and encouraged to
perform better as well. This has something to do with the so-called Peer
Modeling as stated in the study of Awofala (2022). He mentioned in his study
that observation of others, particularly those identified as role models, gives rise
to vicarious experiences. Confidence is acquired on the capability to learn the
skills required for success in that field in observing role models succeed through
their persistent effort. Since there are no precise measures of proficiency
according to Usher and Pajares (2009), students assess their own performance
as well as that of their classmates, peers, and adults. Appraising their
performances, students’ self-efficacy might change because of their present and
prior results.
44
Moreover, the study by Chan and Lam (2008) as cited by Gao (2019)
supports the results wherein they stated that students get the knowledge that is
pertinent to their self-efficacy through vicarious experience, which is defined as
learning from models about the abilities and skills needed to finish a specific
task. Modeling typically increases students’ competencies, and as a result, its
educational role improves their self-efficacy. In contrast, modeling also has a
comparative aspect, which allows students to evaluate their performance by
comparing it to their model. They can learn about their relative skills through
this, which may lead to a more accurate self-evaluation of skills.
Another study, authored by Ozcan and Kultur (2021), claimed that
vicarious experience helps students form beliefs about activities by observing
others. Comparing themselves to particular people such as classmates and
peer evaluates their academic abilities. Hence, the behavior of their models who
are very different from them does not affect their self-efficacy beliefs. In this
sense, models who share comparable traits such as age, gender, and social
standing heavily impacted students’ self-efficacy. Observing others’ successful
performance can boost their self-efficacy beliefs. On the other hand, seeing a
failure can impair efficiency (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2020).
Additionally, Yildiz (2019) stated that observations allow a person to
assess his or her own ability. However, information from the external
environment can also be used to evaluate behavior. In the building of self-

………
45
efficacy, knowledge gained from the knowledge of others is not as efficient as
knowledge obtained from an individual’s own mastery experience. However, if
a person has no prior experience in the field, the experience of others has a
significant impact on the development of self-efficacy. When the person used
as a model shares characteristics with an individual, other people’s experiences
are more effective. The success of the model fosters a sense of “I can do” when
the person and the model share demographic traits, such as age, educational
level, and gender.
While it can be observed on the findings above, physiological and
emotional states ranked the lowest and obtained a weighted mean of 3.19. The
result demonstrates that the mentioned source contributes the least on students’
self-efficacy. This implies that students are feeling stress and experiencing
anxieties on their math subjects and these impacts their self-efficacy sense.
According to Bandura as cited by Garido (2020), an individual may find it
more difficult to maintain a healthy level of well-being if they are dealing with
anxiety or feeling stress. Building self-efficacy is impossible while going through
some difficulties. Thus, people can increase their sense of self-efficacy by
learning how to control their anxiety and improve their mood when confronted
with difficult situations.
3. Level of Students’ Self-efficacy in Mathematics
This part presents the level of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics.

46
Table 3.1
Level of Students’ Self-efficacy in Mathematics
Verbal
Level of Self-efficacy Mean Rank
Interpretation
1. I feel confident enough to ask
Average Self-
questions in my mathematics 2.39 11
efficacy
class.
2. I believe I can do well on a
2.56 High Self-efficacy 6
mathematics test.
3. I believe I can complete all of
the assignments in a 2.70 High Self-efficacy 2
mathematics course.
4. I believe I am the kind of
Average Self-
person 2.28 13
efficacy
who is good at mathematics.
5. I believe I will be able to use
mathematics in my future 2.88 High Self-efficacy 1
career when needed.
6. I believe I can understand the
content in a mathematics 2.65 High Self-efficacy 4
course.
7. I believe I can get an “A” when
I am in a mathematics 2.56 High Self-efficacy 5
course.
8. I believe I can learn well in a
mathematics course.
9. I feel confident when taking a Average Self-
2.38 12
mathematics test. efficacy
10. I believe I am the type of
Average Self-
person 2.42 9
efficacy
who can do mathematics.
11. I feel that I will be able to do
well in future mathematics 2.54 High Self-efficacy 7
courses.
12. I believe I can do the well in a Average Self-
2.45 8
mathematics course. efficacy
13. I believe I can think like a Average Self-
2.09 14
mathematician. efficacy
14. I feel confident when using
Average Self-
mathematics outside of 2.42 10
efficacy
school.
Composite Mean 2.50 High Self-efficacy
As assessed, Table 3.1 has obtained a composite mean of 2.50 which
reveals that junior and senior high school students in Batangas City Integrated
…
47
High School have a high level of self-efficacy in mathematics. This is reflected
in indicator number 5 which has obtained the highest mean of 2.88 indicating
that students have high self-efficacy because they believe that mathematics can
be used in their future careers when needed. This means that there are many
careers that involve the application of mathematics, say, for example,
Engineering, Accountancy, Architecture, and a lot more.
The indicator that has obtained the highest weighted mean reveals that
mathematics is not only useful at the present time in solving problems but will be
advantageous to students as a springboard when they start at their chosen
profession. This is supported by the study of Austin (2010), Winston and Fouad
(2008) as cited by Ogutu et al. (2017) where they mentioned that self-efficacy
influences an individual's profession choice because it is a fundamental concept
that describes one's basic ability to succeed. When a person knows he can
perform or finish a particular task, it influences his decision. Self-efficacy in
mathematics and science influences career decisions. Additionally, they stated
that self-efficacy was found to significantly predict math and science career-
related behaviors and goal intentions.
Meanwhile, indicator 3, which ranked second, obtained a mean of 2.70
showing high self-efficacy level of the students because they believe they can
accomplish all mathematics assignments. This means that respondents believe
that they are confident enough to effectively accomplish all the assignments
…….
48
because they might have understood the lessons very well and can apply the
knowledge that they have learned in the class. In short, mastery of the subject
takes place which results in compliance with Math homework.
This result is attested by the study of Olave (2019), where he stated that
the level of self-efficacy of students increases as their experience with mastery
increases. In the same way, completing an assignment can help the students in
retaining their math lesson, increase their mastery experience, and lead to a high
level of self-efficacy.
On the other hand, indicator number 13 obtained the lowest mean of 2.09
indicating that respondents can averagely think like a mathematician. Students
lack confidence in their ability to answer mathematical problems like a
mathematician. Their belief in their ability in mathematics is insufficient for them
to think like one. It can be inferred that behind the reasons for knowledge
insufficiency lie the anxiety and attitude of the students toward the subject.
This can be supported by the study of Han et al. (2015) wherein he stated
that students with a high feeling of self-efficacy demonstrate great motivation
and approach obstacles as challenges to be overcome, whereas students with
a poor sense of self-efficacy exhibit weak commitment and regard difficulties as
threats, as well as anxiety. Self-concept is closely related to self-efficacy
because it conveys a general sense of self-perception. Mathematics self-efficacy
and self-concept influence one's attitude and conduct toward mathematics, as

…
49
well as motivation and confidence to perform well.
Therefore, students must think positively to overcome the anxiety that
they have been dealing with to think properly and to think like a Mathematician.
This is evident in the study by Katsuri et al. (2020). He mentioned that in order
to solve mathematical difficulties, both men and women tend to think positively
and persevere in their efforts solving mathematical problems, feeling neither
challenging nor helpless in the process.
Another study from Clickenbeard (2012), as cited by Taylor (2014), stated
that student’s independent and intrinsic motivation increases as their self-
efficacy levels increases, resulting in better performance in the classroom.
Therefore, students must believe they possess the abilities to finish a certain
task if they are to maintain a high degree of self-efficacy.
4. Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in
Mathematics
The following table shows the teaching strategies used to enhance self-
efficacy of students in mathematics.

50
Table 4.1
Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in
Mathematics
Verbal
Teaching Strategies Mean Rank
Interpretation
1. I use interesting activities in the classroom
3.39 Sometimes 3.5
that may reveal and empower students.
2. I use intervention tools (i.e., goal setting on
3.22 Sometimes 7
their learning mathematics).
3. I demonstrate how a task is accomplished
3.11 Sometimes 8
using peer models.
4. I ask my students to keep a reflection
2.83 Sometimes 14
journal.
5. I focus on providing tasks that learners can
3.67 Always 1
complete with significant effort.
6. I encourage social cooperation instead of
3.61 Always 2
fostering a competitive environment.
7. I assess students’ understanding of
mathematical ideas and confidence using
3.00 Sometimes 9.5
Self-assessment tools (i.e., posters, mind
maps, drop boxes)
8. I assist my students in articulating their
specific educational strategic plan and 3.33 Sometimes 5
advise them to do so.
9. I give my students moderately difficult
mathematics tasks that are slightly above 2.83 Sometimes 14
their critical ability levels.
10. I impart to them particular learning
methods or a clear strategy for completing 3.28 Sometimes 6
their assignments.
11. I provide frequent, detailed and positive
3.39 Sometimes 3.5
feedback.
12. I use problem-based learning (PBL), in
which actual challenges are presented to
2.94 Sometimes 11.5
students as a setting for learning about
problem solving methods.
13. I hold make up classes when a large
number of my students perform poorly on 2.83 Sometimes 14
the mathematics exam.
14. I tailor the teaching material or topics to the
interest of the students, such as sports, 2.94 Sometimes 11.5
popular, culture, movies or technology.
15. I assist and guide my students, holding
weekly meetings with them to review their 3.00 Sometimes 9.5
progress in relation to their objectives.
Area Mean 3.16 Sometimes

51
Table 4.1 garnered an area mean of 3.16 which means that teacher-
respondents sometimes used the teaching strategies listed above to improve
self-efficacy of the students in mathematics. It reveals that indicator number 5
obtained the highest mean of 3.67 indicating that mathematics teachers always
focus on providing tasks that learners can complete with significant effort. This
means that mathematics teachers consistently prioritize in giving challenging
assignments that students can successfully finish to enhance the self-efficacy of
students in mathematics. Teachers observe that students’ efforts improve their
performance, so it is important to assign them task that requires a decent level
of work.
This is substantiated in the study of Vosniadou et al. (2021), where he
reiterated that teachers must learn new skills and knowledge to give students
the ability for independent, continuous learning, also known as self-regulated
learning. It includes giving students to work individually or collaboratively on a
worthwhile task, as well as the information and skills they may use to manage
their learning and regulate their motivation and emotions while successfully
accomplishing these activities.
In addition, indicator number 6, which ranked second, obtained a mean of
3.61 stating that mathematics teachers always encourage social cooperation
instead of fostering a competitive environment. Meaning to say, instead of
creating a competitive atmosphere, mathematics teachers always advocate

…….
52
social collaboration which allows students to communicate and interact with
others. Similarly, cooperative learning activities have a dual effect of enhancing
both self-efficacy and academic achievement. Allowing students to collaborate
and encouraging them to build on one another’s responses and help one another
improve their social persuasion can improve their self-efficacy.
This claim is supported by the study of Li et al. (2020) where he cited that
during the teaching process, it is critical to lay a greater emphasis on students'
self-efficacy. In order to do so, teachers must create a lively classroom
environment to increase students' self-esteem and encourage a love of learning.
Some instructional approaches for increasing students' self-efficacy include
realistic teaching goals, full use of the demonstration role, attribution training,
establishing the proper atmosphere and teaching students to appreciate and
love others.
Furthermore, In’am and Sutrisno (2020) found out that using a
cooperative learning approach can help students feel more capable and
motivated to learn mathematics as a whole. Based on their research, it is
possible to apply the cooperative learning approach to other mathematics
learning materials because it significantly increased self-efficacy and learning
motivation. Better teaching and learning interactions can be sparked by
teachers, and this model can also raise the caliber of learning, particularly in
terms of learning outcomes.

53
On the other hand, three indicators obtained the lowest weighted mean of
2.83. It appeared that they were the least employed strategies by mathematics
teachers for improving students’ self-efficacy. One of which is indicator number
4 which indicates that teachers sometimes ask the students to keep a reflection
journal. Students' lack of understanding of the requirements of reflective writing
assignment is one of the many drawbacks of writing reflective journals.
Moreover, excessive contemplation is generally disliked and some individuals
may not give it much thought. Issues in confirming the content and timing of
when reflective notes were actually written are difficult to adequately grade. It is
then necessary to create and express specific criteria (The University of
Edinburgh, 2021).
Another is indicator number 9 which states that teachers sometimes give
students moderately difficult mathematics tasks that are slightly above their
critical ability level. This is probably because difficult tasks may hinder students
from making an effort to do or start them at the outset. This is supported by the
study of Street et al. (2022) which echoed that although students' self-efficacy
may be affected more by completing difficult tasks than by completing simpler
ones, completing difficult tasks is more likely to be viewed as indicative of future
performance ability. However, high perceived difficulty tasks also carry a greater
risk of failure, which may discourage students from attempting them in the first
place.
54
The last one which obtained the lowest weighted mean is indicator number
13, which demonstrates that teachers hold make-up classes when a large
number of students perform poorly on the mathematics exam. This is most likely
because the teachers find it difficult to find an extra time for make-up classes
since the curriculum guide for the entire school year which is set to finish at a
particular time is considered.
According to Briones, as cited by Galias (2019) in her article, Saturdays
are typically reserved for this activity in schools. Because of the curriculum guide
that they are following, public schools may only hold make-up lessons when
there is an event such as a celebration, holiday, or natural or man-made
calamity. If the mandated nonnegotiable teacher-pupil contact time remains
intact, public schools are not required to hold makeup classes or add extra hours
on school days.
5. Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy in
Mathematics when grouped according to Gender, Age, and Self-
efficacy Level
The proceeding set of tables shows the summary tables of the means and
significant difference in the sources of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics
when grouped according to gender, age, and self-efficacy level.
5.1. Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy
in Mathematics when grouped according to Gender

55
This part presents the summary of the means and significant difference
in the sources of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics when grouped according
to gender.
5.1.1. Summary of the Sources of Student’s Self-Efficacy in
Mathematics when grouped according to Gender
This table shows the summary of the sources of student’s self-efficacy in
mathematics when grouped according to gender.
Table 5.1.1
Summary Table showing the Sources of Student’s Self-Efficacy in
Sources of Male Female

Self-efficacy Weighted Rank Weighted Rank
Mean Mean
Mastery
Experience 3.77 2 3.84 2
Vicarious
Experience 4.12 1 4.33 1
Social
Persuasion 3.51 3 3.44 3
Physiological 3.24 4 3.10 4

and
Emotional
States
Mastery experience has obtained a weighted mean of 3.77 for male and
3.84 for female which ranked 2nd. While vicarious experience obtained a
weighted mean of 4.12 for male and 4.33 for female which ranked 1 st. Social
persuasion which ranked 3rd has obtained a weight mean of 3.51 for male and
…
56
3.44 for female. Lastly, physiological and emotional states ranked last with a
weighted mean of 3.24 for male and 3.10 for female. The results demonstrate
that vicarious experience is the most influential source of self-efficacy in both
genders. As you can see, there is only a little variation in their weighted mean,
indicating that both genders have the same level of exposure to the self-efficacy
sources in mathematics. Thus, it implies that students, regardless of gender,
regarded vicarious experience as their primary source of self-efficacy positively.
On the other hand, male and female students from Batangas City
Integrated High School considered physiological and emotional states as the
least important contributors to their self-efficacy in mathematics. Stress and
anxiety did not differ according to gender in all aspects. Though physiological
and emotional states were ranked lowest, this does not imply that they do not
contribute to students' self-efficacy.
5.1.2. Significant Difference in the Sources of Student’s Self-
efficacy in Mathematics
This table shows the significant difference in the sources of student’s self-
efficacy in mathematics when grouped according to gender.

57
Table 5.1.2
Significant Difference in the Sources of Student’s Self-efficacy in
Sources of
F- P- Verbal
Self- Decision
Value Value Interpretation
efficacy
Mastery
Not
Experience 0.18 0.68 Accept
Significant
Vicarious
Not
Significant
Social
Not
Persuasion 0.71 0.41 Accept
Significant
Physiological
and Not
0.77 0.40 Accept
Emotional Significant
States
Mastery experience has obtained an F-value of 0.18 and P-value of 0.68.
Vicarious experience has obtained an F-value of 2.64 and P-value of 0.14. Social
persuasion has obtained an F-value of 0.75 and P-value of 0.41, and lastly
physiological and emotional states has obtained an F-value of 0.77 and P-value
of 0.40. The results obtained show that there is no significant difference in the
four sources of self-efficacy namely, mastery experience, vicarious experience,
social persuasion, and physiological and emotional states among junior and
senior high school students in Batangas City Integrated High School when
grouped according to gender.
The result implies that gender is not a factor to consider in determining
……
58
significant differences in the sources of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics.
This indicates that exposure to four self-efficacy sources is the same for males
and females. They have similar beliefs about how each source affect their
mathematical self-efficacy.
This claim is supported by the study of Awofala (2022). He mentioned that
gender differences in self-efficacy sources have been the topic of significant
research over the last decade, with varied results. Some researchers revealed
that there are gender disparities in the sources of self-efficacy among middle
school, high school, and college students. Others, however, have seen no
significant difference between genders in the sources of self-efficacy.
On the other hand, the study of Gao (2019) claims that when learning
mathematics, girls remembered experiencing more social influence and stress
than boys. However, by-person factor analysis showed there was no significant
difference between males’ and females’ perceptions of each source. His study
adds to existing research on gender variations in the formation of mathematical
self-efficacy.
5.2. Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy in
Mathematics when grouped according to Age
This part presents the summary table of the means and significant
difference in the sources of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics when grouped
according to age.
59
5.2.1. Summary of the Sources of Student’s Self-Efficacy in
This table shows the summary of the sources of students’ self-efficacy in
mathematics when grouped according to age.
Table 5.2.1
Sources of 13-15 years old 16-18 years old 19 and above

Self-efficacy
Weighted Rank Weighted Rank Weighted Rank
Mean Mean Mean
Mastery
Experience 3.83 2 3.82 2 3.90 2
Vicarious
4.31 1 4.23 1 4.00 1
Experience
Social
Persuasion 3.39 3 3.42 3 3.79 3
4 3.14 4 3.07 4
Physiological 3.24
and Emotional
States
The table illustrates that mastery experience which ranked 2nd has
obtained a weighted mean of 3.83 for the age bracket of 13-15 years old, 3.82
for 16-18 years old, and 3.90 for 19 and above. Vicarious experience which
ranked 1st has obtained a weighted mean of 4.31 for age bracket 13-15 years
old, 4.23 for 16-18 years old, and 4 for 19 and above. While Social persuasion
which ranked 3rd has obtained a weighted mean of 3.39 for age bracket 13-15
years old, 3.42 for 16-18 years old, and 3.79 for 19 and above. Lastly,
physiological and emotional States which ranked the lowest has obtained a
……..
60
weighted mean of 3.24 for age bracket 13-15 years old, 3.14 for 16-18 years old,
and 3.07 for 19 and above.
This shows that vicarious experience contributes the most to students’ self-
efficacy regardless of age. In contrast, physiological and emotional states are
the least contributory. Witnessing examples of competence by people who are
similar to them can help a person develop self-efficacy. Choosing a role model
does not depend on their age; as long as an individual see them successful at
their task, they are more likely to imitate them.
5.2.2. Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self efficacy
in Mathematics when grouped according to Age
This table shows the significant difference in the sources of students’ self-
efficacy in mathematics when grouped according to age.
Table 5.2.2
Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy in
Sources of P- Verbal
F-Value Decision
Self-efficacy Value Interpretation
Mastery
Not
Significant
Vicarious
Not
Significant
Social
Persuasion 9.33 0.00 Reject Significant
Physiological
Not
and Emotional 0.50 0.62 Accept
Significant
States

61
Vicarious experience has obtained an F-value of 2.52 and P-value of 0.11. Social
persuasion has obtained an F-value of 9.33 and P-value of 0.00, and lastly
physiological and emotional states has obtained an F-value of 0.50 and P-value
of 0.62. The results obtained show that there is no significant difference in the
sources of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics on mastery experience,
vicarious experience, and physiological and emotional states when grouped
according to age. On the other hand, there is a significant difference when it
comes to social persuasion.
The results demonstrate that students experience the same degree of
exposure or the same view in the sources in terms of mastery experience, verbal
persuasion and physiological states, regardless of age. In contrast, with respect
to social persuasion, students in three age brackets have a different level of
influence and diverse perspectives on the sources of their mathematical self-
efficacy.
This is confirmed in Bandura's self-efficacy assessment, as cited by Cherry
(2020), where he mentioned that people can be persuaded to believe they have
the abilities and skills required for success. When someone receives verbal
affirmation from others, it helps people overcome self-doubt and focus their
attention on the task at hand.
Additionally, the study by Garrido (2022) stated that receiving encouraging

62
verbal feedback while completing a challenging task helps someone believe that
they have the necessary skills and qualities to achieve through social
persuasion. He posited that the earlier verbal persuasion is employed, the more
likely self-efficacy will develop. He also added that verbal persuasion can be
utilized at any age.
In comparison, older girls are less likely to hear positive information than
younger girls. This is consistent with the idea that females acquire information
that pushes them away from particular fields as they get older. The positive and
significant path coefficient of age for social persuasion in boys shows that older
males tend to hear positive words regarding their ability in mathematics than
younger boys (Mozahem et al., 2021).
5.3 Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy in
Mathematics when grouped according to Level of Self-efficacy
This part presents the summary table of the means and the significant
difference in the sources of students’ self-efficacy in mathematics when grouped
according to the level of self-efficacy.
5.3.1 Summary of the Sources of Student’s Self-Efficacy in
Mathematics when grouped according to Level of Self-
Efficacy
This table shows summary of the sources of student’s self-efficacy in
mathematics when grouped according to level of self-efficacy.

63
Table 5.3.1
Mathematics when grouped according to Level of Self-Efficacy
Very High High Average Low

Sources of
Self-efficacy Weighted Rank Weighted Rank Weighted Rank Weighted Rank
Mean Mean Mean Mean
Mastery
Experience 2.81 2 3.04 3 3.38 3 3.55 3
Vicarious
Experience 2.14 4 2.65 4 2.96 4 3.32 4
Social
Persuasion 2.61 3 3.29 2 3.78 2 4.42 2
Physiologica
l and 3.23 1 3.70 1 3.93 1 4.46 1
Emotional
States
The table reveals that mastery experience has obtained a weighted mean
of 3.04 for high level, 3.38 for average level, 3.55 for low level which ranked 3rd
while 2.81 for very high level which ranked 2nd. Meanwhile, vicarious experience
has obtained weighted mean of 2.14 for very high, 2.65 for high, 2.96 for
average, and 3.32 for low which all ranked the lowest. Social persuasion in high
level, average level, and low-level ranked 2nd with a weighted mean of 3.29, 3.78,
and 4.42, respectively while 2.61 for very high which ranked 3 rd. Lastly,
physiological and emotional states ranked 1st in all level of self-efficacy with a
weighted mean of 3.23, 3.70, 3.93, and 4.46, respectively.
This finding indicates that, regardless of the level of students' self-efficacy,
physiological and emotional states are the most important contributory factor.
However, vicarious experience is the least contributory source regardless of self-
efficacy level.
64
5.3.2. Significant difference in the sources of students’ Self-
efficacy in Mathematics when grouped according to
Level of Self-efficacy
This table shows the significant difference in the sources of students’ self-
efficacy in mathematics when grouped according to level of self-efficacy.
Table 5.3.2
Significant difference in the sources of students’ Self-efficacy in
Mathematics when grouped according to Level of Self-efficacy
Sources of
F- P- Verbal
Self- Decision
Value Value Interpretation
efficacy
Mastery
3.84 0.03 Reject Significant
Experience
Vicarious 27.95 0.00 Reject Significant

Experience
Social 327.61 0.00 Reject Significant

Persuasion
Physiological
and 12.31 0.00 Reject Significant
Emotional
States
This reveals a significant difference in the stated source of students’ self-efficacy
in mathematics in terms of self-efficacy levels. When they work very hard in their
studies, students who have a very high level of self-efficacy excel in
mathematics. The same is true for students who have a high level of
…………….
65
mathematical self-efficacy. Students who have a low level of self-efficacy as
well as those who have an average level have both inconsistently excelled in
mathematics.
Vicarious experience has obtained an F-value of 27.95 and P-value of
0.00. This reveals a significant difference in the aforementioned source of
students’ self-efficacy in mathematics when grouped according to self-efficacy
levels. When students observe other students performing better than they are,
students with very high levels of self-efficacy are motivated to perform even
better. While in mathematics, students with high, average, and low levels of self-
efficacy compete among themselves.
Social persuasion has obtained an F-value of 327.61 and P-value of 0.00.
This reveals a significant difference in the previously mentioned source of
students’ self-efficacy in mathematics in terms of self-efficacy levels. Students
with a very high level of self-efficacy have always received praise for their
mathematical ability, and their classmates enjoy working with them since they
agree that they are talented on the subject. Meanwhile, students with a high
level of self-efficacy have been informed, they have a talent for math and adults
in their family told them that they are competent at Math. Additionally, students
with low levels of self-efficacy also get the same praise for their ability in Math.
Lastly, physiological and emotional states has obtained an F-value of
12.31 and P-value of 0.00. This reveals that there is a significant difference in
….
66
the mentioned source when grouped in terms of self-efficacy levels. High self-
efficacy students deny that they experience depression when they consider
learning mathematics. Additionally, individuals with a high level of self-efficacy
disagree that they experience depression when they consider learning
mathematics and that doing mathematics causes their entire body to stiffen up.
Meanwhile, students with average and low levels of self-efficacy deny that doing
mathematics also makes their entire body tense.
The results obtained show that there is significant difference in the four
sources of self-efficacy among junior and high school students of Batangas City
Integrated High School when grouped according to self-efficacy levels. This
implies that students with different self-efficacy levels have varying beliefs about
how their mathematical self-efficacy is formed by each source.
This is supported by Gao's (2020) claim in his study that students'
experiences with the four sources vary. He stated that students with high or low
self-efficacy had differing levels of exposure to self-efficacy sources, as well as
varying opinions about how each source affected their mathematical self-
efficacy.
Usher (2009), referenced by Gao (2020), discovered that students with
varying levels of mathematical self-efficacy had quite distinct experiences and
interpretations of the sources of their self-efficacy. In addition to being exposed
to more mastery experiences, more positive persuasion, and fewer anxiety

……..
67
arousals, high self-efficacy students also tended to evaluate the sources of self-
efficacy in a more positive light than their low self-efficacy counterparts.
In relation, Yildizi (2019) claimed that students with exceptional
mathematics achievement had substantially higher self-efficacy because they
had positive experiences with the sources of their self-efficacy, whereas
students with low math achievement tended to have more negative experiences.
On the other hand, it demonstrates that those with high mathematical self-
efficacy views put forth more effort to accomplish tasks, whereas those with low
self-efficacy beliefs are less likely to do so.
6. Significant Difference in Self-efficacy Levels in Mathematics with
respect to Students’ Profile
This proceeding set of tables presents the summary tables of the means
and the test of significant difference in self-efficacy levels in mathematics with
respect to students’ profile.
6.1. Summary of the Means of Self-efficacy Levels in Mathematics
with respect to Students’ Profile
This part presents the summary table of the means of self-efficacy levels
in mathematics with respect to students’ profile.
6.1.1 Summary of the means of Students’ Self-Efficacy Levels
in Mathematics with respect to Grade Level
This table shows the summary of the means of students’ self-efficacy

…….
68
levels in mathematics with respect to grade level.
Table 6.1.1
Summary Table showing the Level of Student’s Self-Efficacy in
Mathematics with respect to Grade Level
Self-efficacy Level Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12
Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted
Mean Mean Mean Mean
1. I feel confident enough to 2.39 2.46 2.33 2.36
ask questions in my
mathematics class.
2. I believe I can do well on 2.49 2.5 2.62 2.61
a mathematics test.
3. I believe I can complete 2.77 2.59 2.81 2.63
all of the assignments in
a mathematics course.
4. I believe I am the kind of 2.24 2.2 2.28 2.41
person who is good at
mathematics.
5. I believe I will be able to 2.85 2.9 2.86 2.92
use mathematics in my
future career when
needed.
6. I believe I can 2.71 2.72 2.53 2.63
understand the content in
7. I believe I can 2.56 2.66 2.49 2.54
understand the content in
8. I believe I can learn well 2.65 2.7 2.68 2.69
in a mathematics course.
9. I feel confident when 2.32 2.34 2.55 2.31
taking a mathematics
test.
10. I believe I am the type of 2.3 2.48 2.46 2.45
person who can do
mathematics.
11. I feel that I will be able to 2.63 2.54 2.52 2.47
do well in future
mathematics courses.
12. I believe I can do the 2.46 2..47 2.5 2.37
mathematics in a
mathematics course.
13. I believe I can think like a 2.03 2.25 2.13 1.96
mathematician.
14. I feel confident when 2.04 2.58 2.41 2.35
using mathematics
outside of school.

69
The table delineates that the students from Grade 9 through Grade 12
have the same self-efficacy levels. It was attested through indicator number 5
which obtained the highest weighted mean of 2.85 for Grade 9, 2.9 for Grade
10, 2.86 for Grade 11 and 2.92 for Grade 12, disclosing that the students from
the mentioned grade levels they will be able to use mathematics in their future
career when needed.
6.1.2. Summary of the Means of Students’ Self-Efficacy levels in
Mathematics with respect to Gender
This table shows the summary of the means of students’ self-efficacy
levels in mathematics with respect to gender.

70
Table 6.1.2
Summary Table showing the Level of Student’s Self-Efficacy in
Mathematics with respect to Gender
Self-efficacy Level Male Female
1. I feel confident enough to ask 2.39 2.46

questions in my mathematics
class.
2. I believe I can do well on a 2.49 2.5
mathematics test.
3. I believe I can complete all of 2.77 2.59
the assignments in a
mathematics course.
4. I believe I am the kind of person 2.24 2.2
who is good at mathematics.
5. I believe I will be able to use 2.85 2.9
mathematics in my future career
when needed.
6. I believe I can understand the 2.71 2.72
content in a mathematics
course.
7. I believe I can understand the 2.56 2.66
content in a mathematics
course.
8. I believe I can learn well in a 2.65 2.7
mathematics course.
9. I feel confident when taking a 2.32 2.34
mathematics test.
10. I believe I am the type of person 2.3 2.48
who can do mathematics.
11. I feel that I will be able to do 2.63 2.54
well in future mathematics
courses.
12. I believe I can do the 2.46 2..47
mathematics in a mathematics
course.
13. I believe I can think like a 2.03 2.25
mathematician.
14. I feel confident when using 2.04 2.58
mathematics outside of school.
Based on the table shown above, both genders have the same level of
……
71
self-efficacy. It was proven through indicator number 5 which obtained the
highest weighted mean of 2.79 for male and 2.97 for female stating that students
believe they will be able to use mathematics in their future career when needed.
6.2. Significant Difference in Self-efficacy Levels in Mathematics
This table shows the significant difference in self-efficacy levels in
mathematics with respect to students’ profile.
Table 6.2
Significant Difference in Self-efficacy Levels in Mathematics with respect
to Students’ Profile
F- P- Decision Verbal
Profile
value value Ho Interpretation
Grade
Level 0.29 0.84 Accept Not Significant
Gender 1.28 0.27 Accept Not Significant
As can be seen from the table, students’ profile in terms of grade level has
obtained an F-value of 0.29 and P-value of 0.84. Computed values imply that
there is no significant difference in the level of self-efficacy in mathematics
among junior and senior high school students in Batangas City Integrated High
School in terms of grade level. It merely reveals that students, regardless of
grade level, are persistent and motivated in the face of adversity, that they are
confident in their ability to learn the classroom discussion and excel in their
evaluation, and that they are more naturally motivated to learn new knowledge.

72
It is supported by Taylor (2014) in her study entitled “The Correlation
Between Self-efficacy and the Academic Success of Students”, which states that
there is no significant difference in the self-efficacy composite between the
students taking math courses beyond grade level and those taking math courses
at grade level. She also states that reminding students of their accomplishments
throughout the year may be a motivating and empowering way to boost students'
self-efficacy level.
On the other hand, students’ profile in terms of gender has obtained an F-
value of 1.28 and P-value of 0.27. The computed values imply that there is no
significant difference in the level of self-efficacy in mathematics among junior
and senior high school students in Batangas City Integrated High School with
respect to gender. This means that gender differences do not have an impact
in evaluating students’ self-efficacy level in mathematics. In this study, gender
is not a factor to consider in determining differences in self-efficacy levels
between males and females. Student-respondents, regardless of gender, have
similar views on their self-efficacy levels in mathematics.
It is supported by the study of Kasturi et al. (2021) where they stated that
gender does not affect individual beliefs about a problem in terms of
mathematical self-efficacy. They observed that the majority of male and female
students are confident in their ability to solve math problems. Additionally, they
claimed that there is no evident variation in students' levels of mathematical self-

73
efficacy between genders. They also mentioned that previous research on the
impact of students' mathematical self-efficacy found that gender had little effect
on individual perceptions about a task.
Likewise, the study of Schnell et al. (2015) and Dullas (2012), as cited by
Dullas (2018), discovered that among adolescent high school students, there is
no gender difference on the level of self-efficacy. The study's findings are
congruent with the findings of other studies investigating gender differences in
academic self-efficacy. As a result, there is no significant difference in students’
self-efficacy levels in mathematics in Batangas City Integrated High School with
respect to profile variables namely gender, and grade level. The results support
the idea that it is crucial to analyze the educational situation and there are
several sources of information to consult. Thus, their gender differences do not
significantly affect the level of self-efficacy of the students.
7. Significant Difference in the Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-
efficacy of Students in Mathematics with respect to Teachers’ Profile
The proceeding set of tables shows the summary tables of the means and
the test of significant difference in the teaching strategies used to enhance self-
efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to teachers’ profile.

74
7.1. Summary of the Means of the Teaching Strategies Used to
Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics with respect to
Teachers’ Profile
This part presents the summary of the means and significant difference
in the teaching strategies used to enhance self-efficacy of students in
mathematics with respect to teachers’ profile
7.1.1. Summary of the Means of the Teaching Strategies Used
to Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics
with respect to Years of Teaching Experience
This table shows the summary of the means of the teaching strategies
used to enhance self-efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to
years of teaching experience.

75
Table 7.1.1
Summary Table showing the Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-
efficacy of Students in Mathematics with respect to Years of Teaching
Experience
Teaching Strategies 10 Years and Below 11 Years and Above
Weighted Rank Weighted Rank
Mean Mean
1. I use interesting activities in the 3.50 3.5 3.30 5
classroom that may reveal and
empower students.
2. Use intervention tools (i.e., goal 3.25 6 3.20 7.5
setting on their learning
mathematics).
3. I demonstrate how a task is 3.00 9.5 3.20 7.5
accomplished using peer
models.
4. I ask my students to keep a 2.88 13 2.80 14.5
reflection journal.
5. I focus on providing tasks that 3.63 1.5 3.70 1
learners can complete with
significant effort.
6. I encourage social cooperation 3.63 1.5 3.60 2
instead of fostering a competitive
environment.
7. I assess students’ 2.88 13 3.10 9
understanding of mathematical
ideas and confidence using self-
assessment tools (i.e., posters,
mind maps, drop boxes)
8. I assist my students in 3.25 6 3.40 3
articulating their specific
educational strategic plan and
9. I give my students moderately 2.88 13 2.80 14.5
difficult mathematics tasks that
are slightly above their critical
ability levels.
10. I impart to them particular 3.25 6 3.30 5
learning methods or a clear
strategy for completing their
assignments.
11. I provide frequent, detailed and 3.50 3.5 3.30 5
positive feedback.
12. I use problem-based learning 3.00 9.5 2.90 12
(PBL), in which actual challenges
are presented to students as a
setting for learning about problem
solving methods.
13. I hold make up classes when a 2.75 15 2.90 12
large number of my students
perform poorly on the
mathematics exam.
14. I tailor the teaching material or 3.00 9.5 2.90 12
topics to the interest of the
students, such as sports,
popular, culture, movies or
technology.
15. I assist and guide my students, 3.00 9.5 3.00 10
holding weekly meetings with
them to review their
progress in relation to their
objectives

76
This table demonstrates that teachers with 10 years below of teaching
experience and teachers with 11 years above of teaching experience commonly
use the same strategy for increasing students’ self-efficacy. It was revealed
through indicator number 5 which obtained the highest weighted mean of 3.63
and 3.70 respectively implying that mathematics teachers, regardless of years
of teaching experience focus on providing tasks that the learners can complete
with significant effort.
7.1.2. Summary of the Means of the Teaching Strategies Used to
Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics with
respect to Educational Attainment
This table shows the summary of the means of the teaching strategies
used to enhance self-efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to
educational attainment.

77
Table 7.1.2
Summary Table showing the Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-
efficacy of Students in Mathematics with respect to Educational
Attainment
Teaching Strategies Bachelor’s Degree Postgraduate Degree
Weighted Rank Weighted Rank
Mean Mean
1. I use interesting activities in the 3.33 5.5 3/50 2.5
classroom that may reveal and
empower students.
2. Use intervention tools (i.e., goal 3.25 7.5 3.17 6
setting on their learning
mathematics).
3. I demonstrate how a task is 3.25 7.5 2.83 13
accomplished using peer
models.
4. I ask my students to keep a 2.75 15 3.00 8.5
reflection journal.
5. I focus on providing tasks that 3.67 1.5 3.67 1
learners can complete with
significant effort.
6. I encourage social cooperation 3.67 1.5 3.50 2.5
instead of fostering a competitive
environment.
7. I assess students’ 3.08 9.5 2.83 13
understanding of mathematical
ideas and confidence using self-
assessment tools (i.e., posters,
mind maps, drop boxes)
8. I assist my students in 3.33 5.5 3.33 4.5
articulating their specific
educational strategic plan and
9. I give my students moderately 2.83 13.5 2.83 13
difficult mathematics tasks that
are slightly above their critical
ability levels.
10. I impart to them particular 3.42 3.5 3.00 8
learning methods or a clear
strategy for completing their
assignments.
11. I provide frequent, detailed and 3.42 3.5 3.33 4.5
positive feedback.
12. I use problem-based learning 2.92 11.5 3.00 8
(PBL), in which actual challenges
are presented to students as a
setting for learning about problem
solving methods.
13. I hold make up classes when a 2.83 13.5 2.83 13
large number of my students
perform poorly on the
mathematics exam.
14. I tailor the teaching material or 2.92 11.5 3.00 8
topics to the interest of the
students, such as sports,
popular, culture, movies or
technology.
15. I assist and guide my students, 3.08 9.5 2.83 13
holding weekly meetings with
them to review their
progress in relation to their
objectives

78
The result illustrated that teachers with bachelor’s degree and teachers
with post graduate degree frequently employ the same strategy for increasing
students’ self-efficacy in mathematics. It was evidenced through indicator
number 5, which displayed the highest weighted mean of 3.67 for both
categories implying that mathematics teachers, regardless of educational
attainment, prioritized on providing tasks that the learners can complete with
significant effort.

79
7.2. Significant Difference in the Teaching Strategies Used to
Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics with
respect to Teachers’ Profile
This table shows the significant difference in the teaching strategies used
to enhance self-efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to teachers’
profile.
Table 7.2
Significant Difference in the Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-
efficacy of Students in Mathematics with respect to Teachers’ Profile
F- P- Decision Verbal
Profile
value value Ho Interpretation
Years of
Teaching 0.00 0.99 Accept Not Significant
Experience
Educational 0.46 0.50 Accept Not Significant

Attainment
Table 7.1 shows the significant difference in the teaching strategies used
to enhance self-efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to teachers’
profile. The profile of the teacher-respondents in terms of years of teaching
experience has obtained an F-value of 0.00 and P-value of 0.99. This reveals
that there is no significant difference between the years of teaching experience
and the teaching strategies used to enhance the self-efficacy of the students in
mathematics.

80
The profile of the teacher-respondents in terms of educational attainment
has obtained an F-value of 0.46 and P-value of 0.50. This reveals that there is
no significant difference between the educational attainment and the teaching
strategies used to enhance the self-efficacy of the students in mathematics.
Teachers, as life-long learners, are well-equipped with different knowledge
and skills enhanced through training. Regardless of educational achievement
and years of practice, they are exposed to different strategies that could help
their students enhance their self-efficacy.
According to Withy (2019), instructors must feel competent and confident
in their ability to teach and reach all students; their sense of effectiveness is
critical. Self-efficacy has emerged as a key framework in education for
anticipating and interpreting the perceptions and judgments that influence
teachers' decisions and behaviors in the classroom.
In addition, Sillah (2022) stated that others will acquire more universal self-
efficacy abilities that can be applied to a variety of contexts, while some people
will only develop particular efficacy abilities relating to a given task. According to
the theory of self-efficacy and learning, this relationship is the result of a triadic
process involving an individual, their environment, and their behavior. His study
found out that the fact that there were no statistically significant differences
between teachers' overall sense of self-efficacy and subscales efficacies like
student engagement, instructional strategies, and classroom management

……..
81
based on school factors and demographic variables may be attributable to the
supportive environment among staff members and the dual role of principals that
are typical of schools in rural settings.
Problems including a bad teaching atmosphere, insufficient self-practice,
and students with weak mathematics backgrounds poorly run math
departments. In order to choose teaching strategies that will improve students'
math performance, the teachers should analyze the backgrounds of their
students. Additionally, learners should practice and exert themselves to master
mathematics (Michael, 2015).

82
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the conclusions drawn on the findings and
recommendations offered by the researchers based on the findings of the study.
Conclusion
Based on the findings of this study, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. One hundred ninety-five (195) student-respondents which is equivalent to
49% fall between ages 16 through 18, which are in Grades 10 and 11.
Meanwhile, the ten (10) teacher-respondents which is equivalent to 56%
have at least a bachelor’s degree and have been teaching for at least 11
years.
2. Vicarious experience is the most contributory source to students’ self-
efficacy in mathematics. Students agree that seeing others carry out a task
adeptly has a significant impact on their self-efficacy.
3. The student-respondents of this study have a high level of self-efficacy in
Mathematics. Students believe that mathematics will be useful as a
springboard when they begin their chosen profession, and they are
confident in their ability to complete a given task.

83
4. Based on this study, the top two most commonly used teaching strategies
for increasing students’ self-efficacy in mathematics are focusing on
providing tasks that learners can complete with significant effort and
encouraging social cooperation instead of fostering a competitive
environment.
5. Results attest that there is no significant difference in the source of self-
efficacy in terms of mastery experience, vicarious experience, and
physiological and emotional states among the male and female
respondents. Meanwhile, there is significant difference in social
persuasion on the three age brackets. Furthermore, there is a significant
difference in the four sources of self-efficacy among the respondents when
it comes to their self-efficacy level.
6. Results reveal that there is no significant difference in the level of self-
efficacy in mathematics among the student-respondents when grouped
according to grade level and gender. It demonstrates that grade level and
gender distinctions have no bearing on how students perceive their self-
efficacy levels in mathematics.
7. The results show that the teachers who have been teaching less than ten
(10) years and teachers who have been teaching more than eleven (11)
years have no significant difference in teaching strategies to improve the
self-efficacy of the students. The results also show that there is no

…………
84
significant difference in teaching strategies to enhance the self-efficacy of
the students in mathematics with respect to the teacher-respondents’
educational attainment.
Recommendations
From the findings of this study and conclusions drawn, the following
recommendations are hereby endorsed:
1. Teachers are recommended to assess students’ sources of self-efficacy
in mathematics that will be beneficial to students’ progress. This will
resort the teachers to employ appropriate teaching strategies in order to
pique the students' interest. Furthermore, this will boost students' self-
esteem, facilitate continuous learning, and keep them from failing the
subject.
2. Teachers may attend seminars on increasing students’ efficacy to learn
new strategies that will help their students excel in Math. Various
seminars that involve the assessment of students’ self-efficacy will also
help them discover different teaching methods that will ensure skill
distinction in mathematics.
3. Teachers may find ways to become more digitally savvy given that
students are now learning in a digital environment. Students will find
learning more engaging if math-related computer software applications

85
are used in place of the conventional approach.
4. Vicarious experiences, as well as physical and emotional states, play a
crucial role on students’ mathematics learning and performance. Hence,
teachers should foster these sources in a variety of learning settings. This
will not only help improve the students’ mathematical skills and abilities but
will also guarantee motivation among them.
5. Future researchers may broaden the scope of the study to obtain more
reliable results. This can be accomplished by conducting research in
various private and public junior and senior high schools.

86
REFERENCES

87
Aarti. (2022, May 27). What Teachers Could Do When Students Fail ? –
Classplus Growth Blog. https://classplusapp.com/growth/what-teacher-
could-do-when-a-student-failed/
Ablian, J. D., & Paranga, K. B. (2022, April 20). Mathematics anxiety and
mathematics self efficacy among senior high school students in public
secondary schools. SSRN. Retrieved December 1, 2022, from
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4062027
Ackerman, C. E. (2018, May 29). What is Self-efficacy theory? (incl. 8

examples & scales): What is Self-efficacy theory? (incl. 8 examples &
scales). PositivePsychology.com. Retrieved May 16, 2022, from
https://positivepsychology.com/Self-efficacy/
Akhtar, M. (2008). What is self-efficacy? Bandura’s 4 sources of efficacy

beliefs. Positive Psychology. Retrieved from
http://positivepsychology.org.uk/self-efficacy-definition-bandura-meaning/
Ajisuksmo, Clara & Saputri, Grace. (2017). The Influence of Attitudes towards
Mathematics, and Metacognitive Awareness on Mathematics
Achievements. Creative Education. 8. 486-497. 10.4236/ce.2017.83037.
Awofala, A. O. A. (2022, September). Examining Sources of Mathematics

Self-efficacy Beliefs of Senior Secondary School Students. ASEAN
Journal of Science and Engineering Education, 3. Retrieved September
12,2022,https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/AJSEE/article/view/50347/200
96
Bernacki, M.L., Nokes-Malach, T.J. & Aleven, V. Examining self-efficacy
during learning: variability and relations to behavior, performance, and
learning. Metacognition Learning 10, 99-117 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9127-x
Bryant, S. K. (2017). Self-efficacy Sources and Academic Motivation: A

Qualitative Study of 10th Graders.Retrieved November 8, 2022, from
https://dc.etsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4693&context=etd

88
Blotnicky, K.A., Franz-Odendaal, T., French, F. et al.(2018). A study of the
correlation between STEM career knowledge, mathematics Self-efficacy,
career interests, and career activities on the likelihood of pursuing a STEM
career among middle school students. IJ STEM Ed 5, 22.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0118-3
Castro,S. B.et,al.(2020).Measurement Model and Adaptation of a Self-

Efficacy Scale for Mathematics in University
Students.SAGEOpen.Retrieved November 8,2022, from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2158244019899089
Celestine, N. (2019, April 9). 4 Ways To Improve And Increase Self-Efficacy.

PositivePsychology.com. https://positivepsychology.com/3-ways-build-
self-efficacy/
CETL- Assessment Resource Centre. (2014). Ar.cetl.hku.hk.

https://ar.cetl.hku.hk/index.php
Cherry, K. (2020, November 15). What is Self-efficacy? Explore Psychology.

Retrieved May 21, 2022, from http://www.explorepsychology.com/Self-
efficacy-definition-examples/
Cuevas, M. M., & Berou, M. (2016, September). Students’ mathematics

Self-efficacy and anxiety as correlates to ... ResearchGate. Retrieved
August 9, 2022, from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331508819_Students'_Mathem
atics_Selfefficacy_and_Anxiety_as_Correlates_to_Academic_Performan
ce
Dullas, A. (2018). The Development of Academic Self-Efficacy Scale for

Filipino Junior High School Students. Frontiers in Education. 3.
10.3389/feduc.2018.00019.
Fallan, L., & Opstad, L. (2016, May 30). Student Self-efficacy and Gender-
Personality Interactions. Retrieved November 8, 2022, from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1106351.pdf
Galias, M. L. (2019, March 7). What Teachers Should Know About Make-Up
Classes. TeacherPH. https://www.teacherph.com/makeup-classes/

89
Garrido, L. (2020).Self-Efficacy Theory. Www.simplypsychology.org; simply
psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/self-efficacy.html
Gao, J. (2019, May 28). Sources of mathematics self-efficacy in Chinese

students: A mixed-method study with Q-Sorting Procedure - International
Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. SpringerLink. Retrieved
November 8, 2022, from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10763-
019-09984-1
Han, S., Liou-Mark, J., Yu, K., & Zeng, S. (2015). Self-efficacy and Attitudes
Towards Mathematics of Undergraduates: A U.S. and Taiwan
Comparison. Journal of Mathematics Education © Education for All
Spring, 8(1), 1–15.
https://www.educationforatoz.com/images/Han_Spring_2015_.pdf
In’am, A., & Sutrisno, E. S. (2021). Strengthening Students’ Self-efficacy and

Motivation in Learning Mathematics through the Cooperative Learning
Model. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 395–410.
https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14123a
Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. SpringerLink.

Retrieved November 8, 2022, from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10763-019-09984-1
Kasturi, K., Sulton, S., & Wedi, A. (2021, April). How self-efficacy in
mathematic based on gender perspective? Edcomtech: Jurnal Kajian
Teknologi Pendidikan. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from
http://journal2.um.ac.id/index.php/edcomtech/article/view/13270/pdf
Kontas, H., & Ozcan, B. (2017). Adapting Sources of Middle School

Mathematics Self-Efficacy Scale to Turkish Culture. International Journal
of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 6(4), 288–294.
https://doi.org/https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1166886.pdf
Kurt, S. (2020, January. Problem-Based Learning (PBL). Educational

Technology. https://educationaltechnology.net/problem-based-learning-
pbl/

90
Lambros, N. (2017). Self-efficacy in students [Review of Self-efficacy in
students]. COBIS_-_Conferences_and_Professional_Development.
https://www.cobis.org.uk/uploaded/COBIS_-
_Conferences_and_Professional_Development/Annual_Conference/Pre
sentations/NLambros_COBIS_2017_presentation.pdf
LaMorte, W. W. (2019). Behavioral change models. The Social Cognitive

Theory. Retrieved June 2, 2022, from
https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/mphmodules/sb/behavioralchangetheo
ries/behavioralchangetheories5.html#:~:text=Social%20Cognitive%20T
heory%20(SCT)%20started,person%2C%20environment%2C%20and
%20behavior.
Li, Y., & Linan Zhong, L. (2020). Research on Strategies to Improve Students
self-efficacy in Mathematics Learning. 8(2056–5852).
https://www.idpublications.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/
Lopez-Garrido, G. (2020, August 9). Self-efficacy theory. Self-efficacy

Theory | Simply Psychology. Retrieved May 26, 2022, from
https://www.simplypsychology.org/Self-efficacy.html
Margolis and McCabe (2006).Improving Self-Efficacy and Motivation: What to

Do, What to Say. Serc.carleton.edu.https://serc.carleton.edu/resources/
37486.html
Masitoh, L. F., & Fitriyani, H. (2018). Improving students’ mathematics self-

efficacy through problem based learning. Malikussaleh Journal of
Mathematics Learning (MJML), 1(1), 26.
https://doi.org/10.29103/mjml.v1i1.679
May, D. K. (2009). Mathematics Self-efficacy and anxiety questionnaire.

Retrieved August 2022, from
https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/may_diana_k_200908_phd.pdf
Meera, & Jumana. (2015). The effective implementation of professional

learning communities - ed. Retrieved May 21, 2022, from
Meilleur, C. (2022, May 31). Catherine Meilleur archives. KnowledgeOne.

Retrieved May 20, 2022, from
https://knowledgeone.ca/category/catherine-meilleur-2/
91
Michael,I.(2015). Factors Leading to Poor Performance in Mathematics
Subject in Kibaha Secondary Schools A Dissertation Submitted in Partial
Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education in
Administration, Planning And Policy Studies (Med. Apps) of the Open
University Of Tanzania
Miller, R. (2019, December 12). The importance of Self-efficacy. ScopeNI.

Retrieved June 1, 2022, from https://scopeni.nicva.org/article/the-
importance-of-Self-efficacy
Mozahem, N. et.al.,(2020).Secondary school students and Self-efficacy in

mathematics: Gender and age differences. International Journal of
School and Educational Psychology.Volume 9 Issue supp.1 pages s142-
s152.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21683603.2020.17638
77
Ogutu, J. P., Odera, P., & Maragia, S. N. (2017). Education Resources

Information Center. ERIC. Retrieved December 15, 2022, from
https://eric.ed.gov/
Olave, B. J. (2019). ScholarWorks. Retrieved May 17, 2022, from

https://scholarworks.calstate.edu/
Özcan B.,Kültür,Y.(2021,July).The Relationship Between Sources of

Mathematics Self-efficacy and Mathematics Test and Course
Achievement in High School Seniors.SAGE Open.Retrieved from
November 8,
2022.https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/215824402110401
24
Probst, J. (2019). A Causal-Comparative Analysis of Mathematics Self-

Efficacy Based on Gender and Math Acceleration. Doctoral Dissertations
and Projects. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/2045/
Putri,W. and Prabawanto,S. (2019).The analysis of students’ Self-efficacy in

learning mathematics.Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1157
032113.Retrieved from November 8, 2022.from
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/3/032113/pdf
Ramacciotti.M.(2020).Self-efficacy in Learning. https://www.mindbrained.org/

2020/02/Self-efficacy-in-Learning/
92
Reflective journals. (2020). The University of Edinburgh.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/institute-academic-development/learning-
teaching/staff/assessment/online-remote/types/reflective-journals
Rozgonjuk, D., Kraav, T., Mikkor, K. et al. Mathematics anxiety among STEM
and social sciences students: the roles of mathematics Self-efficacy,
and deep and surface approach to learning. IJ STEM Ed 7, 46 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00246-z
Sarıcı, E., & Kondakçı, E. (2017). Gender differences in the sources of high
school students’ chemistry self-efficacy beliefs. ECER 2017 (European
Conference on Educational Research) (21 - 25 Ağustos 2017),
Copenhagen, Denmark. https://hdl.handle.net/11511/78627
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive

theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, Article 101832.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych. 2019.101832
Sheu, Hung-Bin & Lent, Robert & Miller, Matthew & Penn, Lee & Cusick,
Megan & Truong, Nhi. (2018). Sources of Self-efficacy and outcome
expectations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
domains: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 109.
10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.003. Retrieved September 1, 2022,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001879118301131
Sillah, O. (2022). The Effect of Teachers’ Characteristics and School Factors

on the Self-Efficacy OF K-12 Mathematics Teachers. Https://Eric/Ed.Gov
/?Id=ED621265
Spoelma, J. (2018, August 14). What is Self-efficacy and how does it relate to
leadership? Career Foresight Coaching. Retrieved May 22, 2022, from
https://careerforesight.co/blog-feed/what-is-Self-efficacy-and-how-does-
it-relate-to-leadership
Strategy Archives(2022). Toolshero. https://www.toolshero.com/strategy/
Street, K.E.S., Malmberg, LE. & Stylianides, G.J.(2022). Changes in students’

Self-efficacy when learning a new topic in mathematics: a micro-
longitudinal study. Educ Stud Math (. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-
022-10165-1

93
StudyCorgi. (2020, October 1). Self-efficacy Motivation in Mathematics
Learning. Retrieved from https://studycorgi.com/Self-efficacy-
motivation-in-mathematics-learning/
Taylor, N. (2014). Desmond Gerard Taylor. BMJ, 349(sep19 10), g5742–

g5742. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5742
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008, November 6). Sources of Self-efficacy in

Mathematics: A validation study. Contemporary Educational Psychology.
Retrieved June 11, 2022, from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361476X080005
7X
Vosniadou, S., Lawson, M., Stephenson, H., & Bodner, E. (2021). Educational
Practices Series Teaching students how to learn: Setting the stage for
lifelong learning.
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/sites/default/files/resources/english_33_teachi
ng_students_how_to_learn_0.pdf
Withy H.(2019, September 22). Strategies for developing and maintaining self-
efficacy in teachers. The Education Hub.
https://theeducationhub.org.nz/strategies-for-developing-and-
maintaining- self-efficacy-in-teachers/
Yildizi P.(2019).Mathematics Self-efficacy beliefs and sources of self-

efficacy: A descriptive study with two Elementary School Students.
Retrieved from September 2022.
Yilmaz, E. (2022). Self-efficacy: Theory, examples, and tips. The Berkeley

Well-Being Institute. Retrieved November 8, 2022, from
https://www.berkeleywellbeing.com/Self-efficacy.html
Youngs, R. (2022, May 10). The importance of self-efficacy in students and

teachers: BYU McKay School of Education. David O. McKay School of
Education. Retrieved May 17, 2022, from
https://education.byu.edu/news/the-importance-of-self- efficacy-in-
students-and-teachers

94
Zander L., Höhne E.,Harms S.,Pfost M., and Hornsey

M.J.,(2020,October).When Grades Are High but Self-efficacy Is
Low: Unpacking the Confidence Gap Between Girls and Boys in
Mathematics.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.552
3

95
APPENDICES

96
APPENDIX A
LETTER REQUEST FOR THE SCHOOL DIVISION OFFICE
SUPERINTENDENT FOR THE PERMISSION TO DISTRIBUTE
THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES

97
APPENDIX B
LETTER REQUEST TO THE PRINCIPAL OF BATANGAS CITY
INTEGRATED HIGH SCHOOL FOR THE PERMISSION TO DISTRIBUTE
THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES

98
APPENDIX C
LETTER REQUEST TO THE AUTHOR OF SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

99
APPENDIX D
APPROVAL LETTER FROM THE AUTHOR OF SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
ELSEVIER LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Oct 16, 2022
This Agreement between Maria Juliet Cleofe ("You") and Elsevier ("Elsevier") consists of your license details and the terms and
conditions provided by Elsevier and Copyright Clearance Center.
License Number 5410240087716

License date Oct 15, 2022
Licensed Content Publisher Elsevier
Licensed Content Publication Contemporary Educational Psychology
Licensed Content Title Sources of self-efficacy in mathematics: A validation study
Licensed Content Author Ellen L. Usher,Frank Pajares

Licensed Content Date Jan 1, 2009
Licensed Content Volume 34
Licensed Content Issue 1
Licensed Content Pages 13
Start Page 89
End Page 101
Type of Use reuse in a thesis/dissertation
Portion figures/tables/illustrations
Number of figures/tables/illustrations 1
Format electronic
Are you the author of this Elsevier article? No
Will you be translating? No
Title Sources of Self efficacy in Mathematics among Junior and Senior High School Students
Institution name Westmead International School

Expected presentation date Oct 2022
Portions Table 4
Maria Juliet Cleofe
Lobo,Batangas
Requestor Location
Batangas, 4229
Philippines
Attn: Students
Publisher Tax ID GB 494 6272 12
Total 0.00 USD

100
APPENDIX E
SAMPLE LETTER REQUEST FOR THE VALIDATION OF SURVEY
QUESTIONNAIRES

101
APPENDIX F
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE WITH TABULATION OF RESULTS

Dear Respondents,
Good day!
We are 4th year students at Westmead International School and are currently
working on our thesis entitled ‘’Sources of Self-efficacy in Mathematics among
Junior and Senior High School Students of Batangas City Integrated High
School’’.
In connection with this, may we request a few minutes of your time to answer
this survey questionnaire as part of our data gathering for the success of our
study.
Rest assured that the information which will be gathered from you will be
treated with strict confidentiality.
Thank you very much and God Bless!
Sincerely,
Jenny Atienza
Maria Juliet Cleofe
Jaysa Marie Orca

102
Part 1. Respondent’s Profile:
Student -Respondents
Grade Level Frequency Percentage Rank
Grade 9 100 25 2.5
Grade 10 100 25 2.5
Grade 11 100 25 2.5
Grade 12 100 25 2.5
Total 400 100
Gender Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
Male 200 50 1.5
Female 200 50 1.5
Total 400 100
Age Frequency Percentage (%) Rank
13-15 years old 187 47% 2
16-18 years old 195 49% 1
19 and up 18 5% 3
Total 400 100
Teacher-Respondents
Teaching Experience Frequency Percentage (%) Rank

10 years and below 8 44% 2
11 years and above 10 56% 1
Total 18 100
Educational Attainment Frequency Percentage (%) Rank

With Bachelor’s Degree 12 67% 1
With Postgraduate Degree 6 33% 2
Total 18 100

103
Part 2. Likert Scale
A. Sources of Self-efficacy
Directions: Kindly put a check on the column that matches your answer.
MASTERY EXPERIENCE
This term refers to the experiences one has after successfully overcoming a new task (Garrido,2020)
Definitely False Mostly False A little bit False A little bit True Mostly True Definitely True
1 2 3 4 5 6
1.I make excellent grades on math tests. 24 70 185 79 24 18
2.I have always been successful with
8 53 177 98 45 19
math.
3.Even when I study very hard, I do poorly
12 83 128 89 56 32
in math.
4.I got good grades in math on my last
31 107 150 70 24 18
report card.
5.I do well on math assignments. 43 122 151 52 24 8
6.I do well on even the most difficult math
23 71 151 89 42 24
assignments.
VICARIOUS EXPERIENCE
This term refers to the second source of Self-efficacy which is gained from our observation of those around us, particularly those who we view as role models.
(Akhtar,2008)
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Seeing adults do well in math pushes
102 122 109 43 7 17
me to do better.
2. When I see how my math teacher
solves a problem, I can picture myself 49 117 153 43 30 8
solving the problem in the same way.
3. Seeing kids do better than me in math
77 115 120 54 20 14
pushes me to do better.
4. When I see how another student solves
a math problem, I can see myself solving 43 118 154 51 19 15
the problem in the same way.
5. I imagine myself working through
challenging math problems successfully. 47 114 144 57 19 19
6. I compete with myself in math

37 94 151 69 26 23
SOCIAL PERSUASION
This term refers to the act of being persuaded by the opinions of others (Bandura,1970)
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. My math teachers have told that I am 25 65 145 109 28 28

good at learning math.
2.People have told me that I have a talent
20 54 133 98 57 38
for math.
3.Adults in my family have told me what a
23 63 131 89 46 48
good math student I am.
4. I have been praised for my ability in
18 52 146 95 56 33
math
5. Other students have told me that I’m
good at learning math.
6. My classmates like to work with me in

math because they think I’m good at it. 20 78 121 91 53 37
30 56 119 100 49 46
PHYSIOLOGICAL AND EMOTIONAL STATES

This term describes the connection between exhaustion or tiredness and a reduction in ability to perform. (Celestine,2019).
Definitely Mostly A little bit A little bit Mostly Definitely
False False False True True True
6 5 4 3 2 1
1. Just being in math class makes
34 32 49 135 88 62
feel stressed and nervous.
32 23 54 138 108 45
2. Doing math work takes all of my
22 29 80 151 76 42
energy.
3. I start to feel stressed-out as soon
27 38 74 129 84 48
as I begin my math work.
4. My mind goes blank and I am
unable to think clearly when doing 53 47 110 110 47 33
math work
5.I get depressed when I think about
learning math.
35 35 94 122 67 47
6. My whole body becomes tense
when I have to do math.

104
B. Level of Self-efficacy
Directions: Kindly put a check on the column that matches your answer.
ALWAYS OFTEN SOMETIMES NEVER

(4) (3) (2) (1)
1. I feel confident enough to ask questions in my mathematics class. 52 82 234 32
2. I believe I can do well on a mathematics test. 65 112 203 20
3. I believe I can complete all of the assignments in a mathematics course. 92 122 160 26
4. I believe I am the kind of person who is good at mathematics. 41 100 190 69
5. I believe I will be able to use mathematics in my future career when
138 111 117 34
needed.
6. I believe I can understand the content in a mathematics course. 66 145 171 18
7. I believe I can understand the content in a mathematics course. 47 151 182 20
8.I believe I can learn well in a mathematics course. 73 151 151 25
9.I feel confident when taking a mathematics test. 45 109 199 47
10.I believe I am the type of person who can do mathematics. 40 129 191 40
11.I feel that I will be able to do well in future mathematics courses. 61 129 175 35
12.I believe I can do the mathematics in a mathematics course. 50 123 184 43
13.I believe I can think like a mathematician. 46 66 167 121
14.I feel confident when using mathematics outside of school.
61 101 182 56
C. Strategies to Improve Self-efficacy in Mathematics
ALWAYS OFTEN SOMETIMES NEVER

Strategies
(4) (3) (2) (1)
1.I use interesting activities in the classroom that may reveal and empower
7 11 0 0
students.
2.I use intervention tools (i.e., goal setting on their learning mathematics). 5 12 1 0
3.I demonstrate how a task is accomplished using peer models. 6 8 4 0
4.I ask my students to keep a reflection journal. 2 11 5 0
5.I focus on providing tasks that learners can complete with significant effort. 12 6 0 0
6. I encourage social cooperation instead of fostering a competitive
11 7 0 0
environment.
7.I assess students’ understanding of mathematical ideas and confidence
using self-assessment tools (i.e., posters, mind maps, drop boxes) 5 8 5 0
8.I assist my students in articulating their specific educational strategic plan

8 8 2 0
and advise them to do so.
9.I give my students moderately difficult mathematics tasks that are slightly
1 13 4 0
above their critical ability level.
10.I impart to them particular learning methods or a clear strategy for
6 11 1 0
completing their assignments.
11.I provide frequent, detailed and positive feedback. 7 11 0 0
12.I use problem-based learning (PBL), in which actual challenges are
presented to students as a setting for learning about problem solving 3 11 4 0
methods.
13. I hold make up classes when a large number of my students perform
4 7 7 0
poorly on the mathematics exam.
14. I tailor the teaching material or topics to the interest of the students, such
2 13 3 0
as sports popular, culture, movies or technology.
15. I assist and guide my students, holding weekly meetings with them to
6 6 6 0
review their progress in relation to their objective.

105
APPENDIX G
STATISTICAL RESULTS
Sources that Contribute the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics with respect to Mastery Experience
Mastery Experience Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
1. I make excellent grades on math tests. 3.84 A little bit true 3
2. I have always been successful with math. 3.56 A little bit true 5
3. Even when I study very hard, I do poorly in math. 3.53 A little bit true 6
4. I got good grades in math on my last report card. 3.99 A little bit true 2
5. I do well on math assignments. 4.21 A little bit true 1
6. I do well on even the most difficult math assignments. 3.68 A little bit true 4
Area Mean 3.80 A little bit true
Sources that Contribute the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics with respect to Vicarious Experience
Vicarious Experience Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
1. Seeing adults do well in math pushes me to do better. 4.55 Mostly True 1
2. When I see how my math teacher solves a problem, I can
4.22 A little bit true 3
picture myself solving the problem in the same way.
3. Seeing kids do better than me in math pushes me to do
better.
4. When I see how another student solves a math problem, I
can see myself solving the problem in the same way.
5. I imagine myself working through challenging math
problems successfully.
6. I compete with myself in math. 3.95 A little bit true 6
Social Persuasion Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking

1. My math teachers have told that I am good at learning
math.
2. People have told me that I have a talent for math. 3.42 A little bit false 6
3. Adults in my family have told me what a good math student
3.46 A little bit false 3.5
I am.
4. I have been praised for my ability in math. 3.46 A little bit false 3.5
5. Other students have told me that I’m good at learning
math.
6. My classmates like to work with me in math because they
3.45 A little bit false 5
think I’m good at it.
Sources that Contribute the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics with respect to Physiological and Emotional States
Physiological and Emotional States Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
1. Just being in math class makes feel stressed and nervous. 3.01 A little bit true 5
2. Doing math work takes all of my energy. 3.00 A little bit true 6
3. I start to feel stressed-out as soon as I begin my math work. 3.11 A little bit true 4
4. My mind goes blank and I am unable to think clearly when
doing math work.
5. I get depressed when I think about learning math. 3.63 A little bit false 1
6. My whole body becomes tense when I have to do math. 3.27 A little bit true 2
Summary of the Means of the Sources that Contributes the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics when Grouped
according to Age
Age
Sources of Self-efficacy 15-16
Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
Master Experience 3.83 A little bit true
Vicarious Experience 4.31 A little bit true
Social Persuasion 3.39 A little bit false
Physiological and Emotional States 3.24 A little bit true
according to Age
Age
Sources of Self-efficacy 16-18
Master Experience 3.82 A little bit true 2
Vicarious Experience 4.23 A little bit true 1
Social Persuasion 3.42 A little bit false 3
Physiological and Emotional States 3.14 A little bit true 4

106
according to Age
Age
Sources of Self-efficacy 19 and up
Master Experience 3.90 A little bit true 2
Vicarious Experience 4.00 A little bit true 1
Social Persuasion 3.79 A little bit true 3
Physiological and Emotional States 3.07 A little bit true 4
Level of Students’ Self-efficacy in Mathematics

Level of Self-efficacy Mean Verbal Interpretation Rank
1. I feel confident enough to ask questions in my mathematics class. 2.39 Average Self-efficacy 11
2. I believe I can do well on a mathematics test. 2.56 High Self-efficacy 6
3. I believe I can complete all of the assignments in a mathematics course. 2.70 High Self-efficacy 2
4. I believe I am the kind of person who is good at mathematics. 2.28 Average Self-efficacy 13
5. I believe I will be able to use mathematics in my future career when
needed.
6. I believe I can understand the content in a mathematics course. 2.65 High Self-efficacy 4
7. I believe I can get an “A” when I am in a mathematics course. 2.56 High Self-efficacy 5
8. I believe I can learn well in a mathematics course. 2.68 High Self-efficacy 3
9. I feel confident when taking a mathematics test. 2.38 Average Self-efficacy 12
10. I believe I am the type of person who can do mathematics. 2.42 Average Self-efficacy 9
11. I feel that I will be able to do well in future mathematics courses. 2.54 High Self-efficacy 7
12. I believe I can do the mathematics in a mathematics course. 2.45 Average Self-efficacy 8
13. I believe I can think like a mathematician. 2.09 Average Self-efficacy 14
14. I feel confident when using mathematics outside of school.
2.42 Average Self-efficacy 10
Composite Mean 2.50 High Self-efficacy
Summary of the Means of the Level of students' Self-efficacy in Mathematics when grouped according to Grade Level
Grade Level Mean Verbal Interpretation Rank
Grade 9 2.46 Average Self-efficacy 4
Grade 10 2.53 High Self-efficacy 1
Grade 11 2.51 High Self-efficacy 2
Grade 12 2.48 Average Self-efficacy 3
Summary of the Means of the Level of students' Self-efficacy in Mathematics when grouped according to Gender
Gender Mean Verbal Interpretation Rank
Male 2.54 High Self-efficacy 1
Female 2.46 Average Self-efficacy 2
Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics

Teaching Strategies Mean Verbal Interpretation Rank
1. I use interesting activities in the classroom that may reveal and empower
3.39 Sometimes 3.5
students.
2. I use intervention tools (i.e., goal setting on their learning mathematics). 3.22 Sometimes 7
3.I demonstrate how a task is accomplished using peer models. 3.11 Sometimes 8
4.I ask my students to keep a reflection journal. 2.83 Sometimes 14
5.I focus on providing tasks that learners can complete with significant effort. 3.67 Always 1
6.I encourage social cooperation instead of fostering a competitive
3.61 Always 2
environment.
3.00 Sometimes 9.5
using self-assessment tools (i.e., posters, mind maps, drop boxes)
3.33 Sometimes 5
9. I give my students moderately difficult mathematics tasks that are slightly
2.83 Sometimes 14
10. I impart to them particular learning methods or a clear strategy for
3.28 Sometimes 6
11.I provide frequent, detailed and positive feedback. 3.39 Sometimes 3.5
12. I use problem-based learning (PBL), in which actual challenges are
presented to students as a setting for learning about problem solving 2.94 Sometimes 11.5
methods.
2.83 Sometimes 14
2.94 Sometimes 11.5
as sports, popular, culture, movies or technology.
3.00 Sometimes 9.5
review their progress in relation to their objectives.

107
Summary of the Means of the Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics when grouped
according to Teaching Experience
10 Years and Below
Teaching Strategies
Mean Verbal Interpretation Rank
1. I use interesting activities in the classroom that may reveal and empower
3.50 Always 3.5
students.
2. I use intervention tools (i.e., goal setting on their learning mathematics). 3.25 Sometimes 6
3.I demonstrate how a task is accomplished using peer models. 3.00 Sometimes 9.5
4.I ask my students to keep a reflection journal. 2.88 Sometimes 13
5.I focus on providing tasks that learners can complete with significant effort. 3.63 Always 1.5
3.63 Always 1.5
environment.
2.88 Sometimes 13
3.25 Sometimes 6
9. I give my students moderately difficult mathematics tasks that are slightly
2.88 Sometimes 13
3.25 Sometimes 6
11.I provide frequent, detailed and positive feedback. 3.50 Always 3.5
presented to students as a setting for learning about problem solving 3.00 Sometimes 9.5
methods.
2.75 Sometimes 15
3.00 Sometimes 9.5
as sports, popular, culture, movies or technology.
15.I assist and guide my students, holding weekly meetings with them to
3.00 Sometimes 9.5
Summary of the Means of the Teaching Strategies Used to Enhance Self-efficacy of Students in Mathematics when grouped
according to Teaching Experience
11 Years and Above
Teaching Strategies Verbal
Mean Rank
Interpretation
1. I use interesting activities in the classroom that may reveal and
3.30 Sometimes 5
empower students.
2. I use intervention tools (i.e., goal setting on their learning mathematics). 3.20 Sometimes 7.5
3.I demonstrate how a task is accomplished using peer models. 3.20 Sometimes 7.5
4.I ask my students to keep a reflection journal. 2.80 Sometimes 14.5
5.I focus on providing tasks that learners can complete with significant
3.70 Always 1
effort.
3.60 Always 2
environment.
3.10 Sometimes 9
3.40 Sometimes 3
9. I give my students moderately difficult mathematics tasks that are
2.80 Sometimes 14.5
slightly above their critical ability level.
3.30 Sometimes 5
11.I provide frequent, detailed and positive feedback. 3.30 Sometimes 5
presented to students as a setting for learning about problem solving 2.90 Sometimes 12
methods.
2.90 Sometimes 12
14. I tailor the teaching material or topics to the interest of the students,
2.90 Sometimes 12
such as sports, popular, culture, movies or technology.
3.00 Sometimes 10
Significant Difference in Self-efficacy Levels in Mathematics

Profile F-value P-value Decision Ho Verbal Interpretation
Year Level 0.29 0.84 Accept Not Significant
Gender 1.28 0.27 Accept Not Significant
Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy in Mathematics when grouped according to Gender
Verbal
Sources of Self-efficacy F-value P-Value Decision
Interpretation
Master Experience 0.18 0.68 Accept Not Significant
Vicarious Experience 2.64 0.14 Accept Not Significant
Social Persuasion 0.75 0.41 Accept Not Significant
Physiological and Emotional States 0.77 0.40 Accept Not Significant

108
Significant Difference in the Sources of Students’ Self-efficacy in Mathematics when grouped according to Age
Verbal
Interpretation
0.16 0.85 Accept Not Significant
Master Experience
Vicarious Experience 2.52 0.11 Accept Not Significant
9.33 0.00 Reject Significant

Social Persuasion
Physiological and Emotional States 0.50 0.62 Accept Not Significant
Significant difference in the sources of students’ Self-efficacy in Mathematics when grouped according to Level of Self-efficacy
Verbal
Interpretation
Reject Significant
Mastery Experience 3.84 0.03
Vicarious Experience 27.95 0.00 Reject Significant
Significant
Social Persuasion 327.61 0.00 Reject
Physiological and Emotional States 12.31 0.00 Reject Significant
Significant difference in the teaching strategies used to enhance Self-efficacy of students in mathematics with respect to teachers’
profile
Verbal
Profile F-value P-Value Decision
Interpretation
Accept Not Significant
Years of Teaching Experience 0.00 0.99
Educational Attainment 0.46 0.50 Accept Not Significant

109
APPENDIX H
TALLY RESULTS PER SOURCE OF SELF-EFFICACY
Sources that Contribute the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics with respect to Mastery Experience
Mastery Experience Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
1. I make excellent grades on math tests. 3.84 A little bit true 3
2. I have always been successful with math. 3.56 A little bit true 5
3. Even when I study very hard, I do poorly in math. 3.53 A little bit true 6
4. I got good grades in math on my last report card. 3.99 A little bit true 2
5. I do well on math assignments. 4.21 A little bit true 1
6. I do well on even the most difficult math assignments. 3.68 A little bit true 4
Sources that Contribute the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics with respect to Vicarious Experience
Vicarious Experience Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
1. Seeing adults do well in math pushes me to do better. 4.55 Mostly True 1
2. When I see how my math teacher solves a problem, I can
picture myself solving the problem in the same way.
3. Seeing kids do better than me in math pushes me to do
better.
4. When I see how another student solves a math problem, I
can see myself solving the problem in the same way.
5. I imagine myself working through challenging math
problems successfully.
6. I compete with myself in math. 3.95 A little bit true 6
Sources that Contribute the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics with respect to Social Persuasion
Social Persuasion Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
1. My math teachers have told that I am good at learning
math.
2. People have told me that I have a talent for math. 3.42 A little bit false 6
3. Adults in my family have told me what a good math student
3.46 A little bit false 3.5
I am.
4. I have been praised for my ability in math. 3.46 A little bit false 3.5
5. Other students have told me that I’m good at learning
math.
6. My classmates like to work with me in math because they
3.45 A little bit false 5
think I’m good at it.
Sources that Contribute the Most to Student’s Self-efficacy in Mathematics with respect to Physiological and Emotional States
Physiological and Emotional States Mean Verbal Interpretation Ranking
1. Just being in math class makes feel stressed and nervous. 3.01 A little bit true 5
2. Doing math work takes all of my energy. 3.00 A little bit true 6
3. I start to feel stressed-out as soon as I begin my math work. 3.11 A little bit true 4
4. My mind goes blank and I am unable to think clearly when
doing math work.
5. I get depressed when I think about learning math. 3.63 A little bit false 1
6. My whole body becomes tense when I have to do math. 3.27 A little bit true 2

110
RESUME

111
APPENDIX I
RESUME
JENNY A. ATIENZA
San Isidro, Batangas City
(+63)995-464-5564
atienza.jenny190125@gmail.com
EDUCATION Westmead International School

2019-Present
Comet St.,Golden Country Homes
Subdivision Alangilan, Batangas City,
Philippines
UNDERGRADUATE
RESEARCH PAPER Sources of Self-Efficacy in Mathematics
among Junior and Senior High School
Students in Batangas City Integrated High
School
EXTRA CURRICULAR Organization of Future Educators

ACTIVITIES Treasurer
August,2021-May,202
Class Treasurer
August,2020-May,2021
SEMINARS ATTENDED WASTFI Faculty Webinar

"Designing Effective Learning Experiences
in Hybrid or Blended Classrooms"
August 20, 2022
Guest Speaker: Ms. Winona Y. Diola

112
CTE Annual Webinar Forum

"Developing Professionalism in the
Workplace"
April,2022
Guest Speakers: Dr. Vivian A. Perez
Mr. Jayson B. Reyes
WIS Student Council Webinar

"Act SMART, Be SAFE: Earthquake
Preparedness, COVID-19 Mitigation & Fire
Prevention Webinar Series"
March 25,2022
WIS HERO Annual Multidisciplinary

Research Forum
December,2021
WIS Student Council Leadership Webinar

"Transformational Student Leadership
Through Challenging Times"
October 15,2021
11th Annual Business Forum

"Winning Disciplines for Success"
December 12, 2020
Guest Speaker: Francis J. Kong
John Iavhan Paz
Mathematics Seminar 2020

"The New Normal Classroom: EXPLORE,
DISCOVER, EMPOWER".
November 13, 2022
PERSONAL Date of Birth: November 15,1980

BACKGROUND Sex: Female
Religion: Members Church of God
International
Civil Status: Married
113
Language: Filipino, English, Basic

Nihongo
Skills: Adapt easily to new
concepts and
responsibilities
Skills on Microsoft Office:
MS Word, Powerpoint
Presentation MS Excel
and other Google
Applications
REFERENCES Dr. Regie B. Abila

Program Head, College of Teacher Education
Dr. Arlene Castor
Dean, College of Teacher Education
I hereby certify that the above information is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
JENNY A. ATIENZA

114
MARIA JULIET GUNO CLEOFE

Sawang,Lobo,Batangas
09150472384
cleofe.mariajuliet190081c@gmail.com

2019-Present
Comet St. Golden Country Homes
Philippines
UNDERGRADUATE Sources of Self-efficacy in Mathematics

RESEARCH PAPER Junior and Senior High School Students
in Batangas City Integrated High School
EXTRA CURRICULAR Class President

ACTIVITIES August,2020-May,2021
Organization of Future Educators

President
13th CTE Month Celebration

Host
September,2021
Class President
August,2022-Present
Organization of Future Educators

411 Representative
August,2022-Present

115
WEBINARS ATTENDED Mathematics Seminar 2020
DISCOVER, EMPOWER".
November 20, 2020

December 12, 2020
CTE Month Celebration

"Pursuing Excellence in the New Educational
Landscape"
September,2021
Guest Speakers: Bryan S. Cabreros
John Iavhan Paz

"Transformational Student Leadership
Through Challenging Times"
October 15,2021

Research Forum
December, 2021

March 25,2022

"Developing Professionalism in the Workplace"
April,2022
Mr. Jayson B. Reyes

116
PERSONAL BACKGROUND Date of Birth: June 30,1995
Sex: Female
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Language: English, Filipino
Skills: Oral and Written
Communication
REFERENCE Dr. Regie Abila

Program Chair
09120524140
I hereby certify that the above information is true and correct

based on my knowledge and belief.
______________________
Maria Juliet Cleofe

117
JAYSA MARIE MILITAR ORCA

Barangay Banay-Banay,Padre Garcia
Batangas
09951391546
orca.jaysamarie190589@gmail.com

2019-Present
Comet St. Golden Country Homes
Philippines
UNDERGRADUATE Sources of Self-efficacy in Mathematics

RESEARCH PAPER Junior and Senior High School Students
in Batangas City Integrated High School
EXTRA CURRICULAR Organization of Future Educators

ACTIVITIES Secretary
Class Secretary
S.Y. 2022-2023
WEBINARS ATTENDED Mathematics Seminar 2020

DISCOVER, EMPOWER"
November 20,2020

December 12, 2020

118
CTE Month Celebration
"Pursuing Excellence in the New Educational
Landscape"
September,2021
Guest Speakers: Bryan S. Cabreros
John Iavhan Paz

"Transformational Student
Leadership Through Challenging Times"
October 15,2021

Research Forum
December,2021

March 25,2022

"Developing Professionalism in the
Workplace"
April,2022
Mr.Jayson B. Reyes
PERSONAL BACKGROUND Date of Birth: August 5,1998

Sex: Female
Religion: Roman Catholic
Civil Status: Single
Language: English, Filipino
Skills: Oral and Written
Communication

119
REFERENCE Dr. Regie Abila
Program Chair
09120524140
I hereby certify that the above information is true and correct

based on my knowledge and belief.
______________________
Jaysa Marie Orca

120

For Binding Sop 2.0 Space

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

For Binding Sop 2.0 Space

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

For Binding Sop 2.0 Space

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Westmead International School

College of Teacher Education

SOURCES OF SELF-EFFICACY IN MATHEMATICS AMONG

JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

This study entitled

SOURCES OF SELF-EFFICACY IN MATHEMATICS AMONG

JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

after having been presented is hereby approved by

PROF. ROSANA B. DE CHAVEZ MARITES D. MANLONGAT, Ph.D

ARLENE D. CASTOR, Ph.D

Accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree

ADVISER’S RECOMMENDATION SHEET

This study entitled

SOURCES OF SELF-EFFICACY IN MATHEMATICS AMONG

JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree

REGIE D. ABILA, Ed.D

The researchers would like to extend their deepest gratitude to the

To Dr. Regie D. Abila, their Research Adviser and Program Head of

To Dr. Arlene D. Castor, Dean of College of Teacher Education and Lead

To Dr. Marites D. Manlongat, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and

Jaysa, Jenny, Juliet

Self-efficacy has been identified as an important determinant for

successfully completing tasks. It influences an individual on what goals to

efficacy in mathematics among junior and senior high school students at

Batangas City Integrated High School.

students and eighteen (18) mathematics teachers of Batangas City Integrated

High School as respondents. This study used Sources of Middle School

Mathematics Self-efficacy Scale by Usher & Pajares (2009), Mathematics Self-

efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire by Diana K. May (2009), and a self-

constructed questionnaire for teacher-respondents.

contributory source to students’ self-efficacy. The findings also showed that

there was no significant difference in the level of self-efficacy in mathematics

among the student-respondents when grouped according to grade level and

of self-efficacy among male and female respondents. Furthermore, there was a

significant difference in the four sources of self-efficacy among the respondents

when grouped according to their level of self-efficacy.

SUMMARY OF THE STUDY

Title: SOURCES OF SELF-EFFICACY IN MATHEMATICS

Name of Authors: JAYSA MARIE M. ORCA

Course: Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics

School: Westmead International School

Address: Alangilan, Batangas City

The study focused on the sources of self-efficacy in mathematics among

This research determined the profile of the student-respondents in terms of

terms of years of teaching experience and educational attainment. It also

efficacy in mathematics among the key sources namely: mastery experience,

vicarious experience, social persuasions, and physiological and emotional

states. Additionally, it sought to determine the student-respondents’ self-efficacy

strategies that were used by the teacher-respondents to enhance the self-

efficacy of the students in mathematics.

efficacy, vicarious experience is the most contributory to the self-efficacy of the

student-respondents in Batangas City Integrated High School while

showed that males have higher self-efficacy level as compared to females. In

efficacy. Meanwhile, there was a significant difference in social persuasion

experience, vicarious experience, physiological and emotional states.

Furthermore, when it comes to self-efficacy level, there was a significant

difference in the four sources of self-efficacy among the respondents.