Mathematics self-efficacy and mathematical problem solving: Implications of using different forms of assessment

The mathematics self-efficacy and problem-solving performance of 327 middle-school students were assessed using two forms of assessment (traditional multiple-choice vs. open-ended fill-in-the-blank). The purpose was to determine whether varying the assessment format would influence students' self-efficacy judgments or alter the relationship between self-efficacy and performance. No differences in self-efficacy resulted from the different forms of assessment. Students who took the multiple-choice performance test obtained higher scores than did students who took the open-ended test. The latter group had poorer calibration, that is, the degree to which students' judgments of their capability reflect their actual competence. This finding suggests that students' self-perceptions of their mathematics capability may be less accurate than has previously been reported or that students' familiarity with traditional assessment formats creates an expectancy of a performance task that is multiple choice in nature; this expectancy influences self-efficacy judgments regardless of the format used to assess confidence. Differences in the format for assessing self-efficacy and performance altered the predictive utility of self-efficacy judgments. These differences must be accounted for in subsequent studies before researchers can make sound generalizations about the strength of the self-efficacy/performance relationship or the accuracy of students' self-perceptions.