José Manuel Gutiérrez Arceo

Research proposal:The development of the

research self-efficacy in the students from the Master of

Education

The master of education from the University of Quintana Roo is designed to provide specialization to those students who want to teach English or implement technology in their classrooms, but as a master program, it would be incomplete without aiming to teach how to do research.

Introduction

Self-efficacy is defined by Bandura (1997) as the beliefs in one´s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments. Many studies have focused on measuring the research self-efficacy but none has been found approaching it from a qualitative design.

Introduction

Not only this study could contribute to the research done in the university because of its novelty, it is also concerned with a crucial aspect of the formation of the master student which is the conduction of research. This study could be very valuable at exploring the procedures and experiences under which this takes place because the results might raise questions as well as propose solutions towards the improvement of this phenomenon.

Rationale

To understand the master students´ experiences about the development of the research in self-efficacy that they have had throughout the completion of their major and especially their master.

Objective

How do the master students feel, experience, live research as a means of obtaining the master´s degree?

  And the sub questions:What are the participants´ experiences in research?What are the stories that can be told from these

experiences?What are the turning points in these stories?How their perception about their self-efficacy in

research has evolved?What are some theories that relate to these individuals

´ lives?

Research questions

As an essential construct of his social cognitive theory, Bandura (1997) defines the perceived self-efficacy as the beliefs in one´s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments. In other words, it is not concerned with the actual ability that one has to achieve a goal but with their beliefs of how well one can perform a task. It is about the belief of what one can do under different circumstances with whatever skills one possesses.

Conceptual framework

Self-efficacy applied to this study would then be linked to the beliefs of how well the students from the master can perform tasks such as reviewing literature, citing properly, and writing up their findings. For instance, when carrying out one of these tasks for the thesis, a student with high self-efficacy could perform them as if they were homework from another subject. A student with low self-efficacy, on the other hand, might feel stressed or worried because of the importance of the thesis, the deadlines and the workload and could attribute those feelings to his incompetence which will probably lead to failure.

Conceptual framework

Most of the studies involving research self-efficacy are focused on measuring it by means of the different scales that have been developed like the RSES and the SERM. Authors such as Unrau and Beck (2004) and Lane, Devonport and Horrell (2004) concluded not only that research self-efficacy should be promoted in the curriculum but also that it can be enhanced through it. These studies, however, have a quantitative approach so they did not explore self-efficacy development.

Literature review

Qualitative research, on the other hand, has been focused on exploring the socialization of doctors. Even though authors like Moreno (2010) and Shawm, Holbrook, Scevak and Bourke (2008) carried out studies within educational programs, they do not include research self-efficacy and its development in their work except from Baltes, Hoffman-Kipp, Lynn and Weltzer-Ward (2010). Besides, most of the studies analyzed doctoral programs so self-efficacy in research during master level appears to have been ignored and to be needed.

Literature review

Method

8 students from the Master in Education2 men and 6 women

Participants

Open-ended interviews 1 hour-longInterview guide

Instrument

Interviews will be one-on-oneThey will be recorded to later be transcribed Two or three interviews will be conducted to

every participant

Procedure

The interviews should be transcribed for a better analysis.

In the analysis, I will be looking for codes, themes, patterns.

The results will be presented in a narration and arranged chronologically.

Data analysis

To avoid subjectivity it would be good:To have someone like my supervisor checked

itTo have someone external to the study

checked itTo ask the participants to check the final

work so as to confirm that what is written is what they meant at the interviews.

How to validate the study?

Baltes, B., Hoffman-Kipp, P., Lynn, L., & Weltzer-Ward, L. (2010). Students´ research self-efficacy during online doctoral research courses. Contemporary Issues In Education Research, 3 (3) 51-58. Retrieved from http://journals.cluteonline.com/index.php/CIER/index

  Bandura, A. (1977). „Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change.

Psychological Review, 84, pp. 191-215  Betz, N. (2007). Career self-efficacy: exemplary recent research and emerging

directions. Journal of Career Assessment, 15 (4), 403-422. doi: 10.1177/1069072707305759

  Brown, S. D., Lent, R. W., Ryan, N. E., & McPartland, E. B. (1996). Self-efficacy as

an intervening mechanizing between research training environments and scholarly productivity: a theoretical and methodological extension. The counseling psychologist, 24, 535-544.

  Büyüköztürk, S., Atalayb, K., Sozgunc, Z., & Kebapç, Ş. (2011). The development of

research self-efficacy scale. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 6 (1), 22-29. Retrieved from http://www.world-education-center.org/index.php/cjes

 

References

Forester, M., Kahn, J. H., & Hesson-McInnis, M. S. (2004). Factor structures of three measures of research self-efficacy. Journal of Career Assessment, 12 (1), 3-16. doi: 10.1177/1069072703257719

Grediaga, K. (2012). Socialización de la nueva generación de investigadores en México. México, D.F.:ANUIES, Dirección de Medios Editoriales

  Jairam, D., & Kahl, D. V. (2012). Navigating the Doctoral Experience: The Role of

Social Support in Successful Degree Completion. International journal of doctoral studies, 7 (2012), 311-329. Retrieved from http://www.informingscience.us/icarus/journals/ijds/

  Lane, A.M., Devonport, T. J. & Horrell, A. (2004). Self-Efficacy and Research Methods.

Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 3 (2), 25-37. doi:10.3794/johlste.32.59

  Lev, E. L., Kolassa, J., & BakkenL.L. (2010).Faculty mentors’ and students’

perceptions of students’ research self-efficacy. Nurse Education Today, 30 (2010), 169–174. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2009.07.007

  Mathews I. G. (2005). Self Efficacy: A Review. ABAC Journal, 25 (2), 1-4. Retrieved

from http://www.journal.au.edu/abacjournal_index.html

 

Moreno, M. G. (2010). Historias de formación para la investigación en doctorados en educación. Mexico: Plaza y Valdés

Shah, M., & Grebennikov, L. (2008). Enhancing the Research Student Experience at University. Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2008. Australia.

Shaw, K., Holbrook, A., Scevak, J., & Bourke, S. (2008). The response of pre-service teachers to a compulsory research project. The Australian Educational Researcher, 35 (3), 89- 109. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/journal/13384

Shivy, V. A., Worthington E. L., Wallis, A. B., & Chris Hogan, C. (2003). Doctoral research training environments (RTEs): Implications for the teaching of psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 3 (4), 297-302. doi: 10.1207/S15328023TOP3004_03

  Unrau, Y., & Beck, A. (2004). Increasing research self-efficacy among students in

professional academic programs. Innovative Higher Education, 28 (3), 187-204. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/journal/10755

Project Timetable Actividades Sept Oct Nov Dic Enero Feb Marz Abril Mayo Junio Julio Agost

Redacción del proyecto X X

Revisión de la literature X X X

Construcción del marco

teórico

X X X

Elaboración de instrumentos X

Levantamiento de datos X X

Procesamiento de los datos X X

Análisis de los datos X X

Discusión X X

Conclusiones X

Integración del primer

borrador de tésis

X X

Correcciones a la tésis X

Entrega del segundo

borrador

X X X

Defensa de la tésis X