Adaptation and Validation of an Academic Self-Efficacy Scale for Junior High School Students in Ghana

Background:

Youth’s academic self-efficacy may be fundamental to academic success and overall well-being. Higher levels of academic self-efficacy are important for staying motivated, putting forth effort, achieving desired performance levels, and for protecting against future academic failure and other difficulties (e.g., childhood depression) (Britner & Pajares, 2006; Bandura, Pastorelli, Barbaranelli, & Caprara, 1999). Although self-efficacy is a universal construct across cultures, there are few validated measures of academic self-efficacy in many developing countries, including Ghana. This study assesses the validity and reliability of one academic self-efficacy scale (Muris, 2001) adapted for a Ghanaian context. Using an 11-point response scale, the 7-item academic self-efficacy scale measures students’ belief in their capacity to get help from teachers on school work, and pay attention during every class. Additional items on the scale include students’ belief about how well they can study when there are other interesting things to do, and how well they can study a chapter for a test. The scale also prompts students to indicate their belief about how well they can succeed in finishing all their homework every day, their belief about whether they are passing all subjects and their belief that they can satisfy their parents’ expectations for their school work. Changes to the scale included expansion of the response scale from 5 to 11-points.

Methods:

Data for this study came from a random sample of 4,289 middle school-age youth in Ghana. Per best practices in psychometric testing, we randomly divided the sample into calibration, validation, and group invariance subsamples. We used Mplus 7.11, Maximum Likelihood estimation method, and covariance matrix for all analyses. To evaluate the factor structure and loadings of the scale, we conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with the calibration subsample and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with the validation subsample. We examined the invariance of the scale for boys and girls using the group invariance subsample.

Results:

The EFA yielded a 7-item one-factor solution with an eigenvalue of 2.37, consistent with Muris’ (2001) conceptualization of a 1-factor structure. The 1-factor CFA model produced acceptable fit with the data (χ2=138.68, df = 14, p < .001, RMSEA = .04 [90% CI .04 – .05]; CFI=.93). All 7 items were retained as they produced statistically significant factor loadings ranging from .38 to .67, which is above the recommended .30 cutoff. Chi-square difference tests between metric and configural invariance (Δx²= 9.07, Δdf = 6, p =.17) and scalar and metric invariance (Δx² = 5.65, Δdf = 6, p = .46) yielded statistically nonsignificant results, suggesting the scale is gender invariant.

Conclusion:

The CFA results suggest the adapted academic self-efficacy scale could be useful for education and psychosocial research among Ghanaian youth. The scale is relatively short in length and parsimonious. Thus, use of this scale represents a viable option for researchers in Ghana who are interested in assessing student self-efficacy. Moreover, the gender invariance finding implies that the scale measures the same self-efficacy traits in boys and girls, and therefore may be used more widely.