LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 

 
LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Learning 

 http://e-journal.usd.ac.id/index.php/LLT 

Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia 
 

651 

 

 

EXPLORING THE LEVEL OF STUDENTS’ SELF-EFFICACY  

IN SPEAKING CLASS 

 

Efrika Siboro1, *Antonius Setyawan Sugeng Nur Agung2,  

and  Charito A Quinones3 

1,2STKIP Pamane Talino, Indonesia 
3Saint Paul Univesity, Philippines 

Efrikasiboro6@gmail.com1, antonius.setyawan.007@gmail.com2,  

and quinoneschari83@gmail.com3 

*correspondence: antonius.setyawan.007@gmail.com  

https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v25i2.4432  

received 1 March 2022; accepted 18 October 2022 

 

Abstract  

Exploring the level of the students’ self-efficacy toward their speaking ability is the 

grand design of this study. The participants of this study were 28 non-native 

students from the suburban area in West Borneo. Those students belong to the third 

semester of the speaking class. In collecting the data, they were given a 

questionnaire. An in-depth interview was also conducted with 3 prominent students 

to validate and triangulate the represented data in the questionnaire result. Adopting 

Bandura’s theory, the results of this study show that the students manifested slightly 

high self-efficacy in the magnitude dimension, slightly high self-efficacy in the 

generality dimension, and very high self-efficacy in the strength dimension. In 

addition, the in-depth interview affirms that the students’ level in magnitude is 

influenced by their educational background; the students’ level in generality is 

affected by their interests in their particular field, and the student's level of strength 

is determined by their strong belief.  

 

Keywords: EFL, generality, magnitude, self-efficacy, speaking 

 

Introduction  

Speaking is one of the most significant skills because of its function in 

classroom daily communication. As a productive skill, it has an important role in 

communication namely to express ideas and thoughts (Effendi, 2018). Considering 

that, mastering speaking skill implies standard English proficiency. Somehow, it is 

not the only standard of success. Gumartifa and Syahri (2021) and Ur (1999) 

vocalize that someone who masters a language should be able to speak that 

language. Speaking is complex because it is the accomplishment of spoken 

communication. Rehearsing speaking skills, and self-efficacy are significant to 

make students motivated and confident (self-efficacy) in their performances. At the 

same understanding, (Paradewari, 2017)utter efficacious student is usually good at 

speaking because it affects their motivation, learning, and performance. If the 

students have higher self-efficacy, they will be better at mastering academic 

subjects  (Khatib, Rubaai, & Muhammad Thangaveloo, 2021). Dodds (2011) states 

mailto:Efrikasiboro6@gmail.com
mailto:antonius.setyawan.007@gmail.com
mailto:quinoneschari83@gmail.com
mailto:antonius.setyawan.007@gmail.com
https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v25i2.4432


 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

652 

 

self-efficacy has a significant positive correlation. Students who are conscious of 

their self-efficacy have the competence to perform better in speaking. Students keep 

struggling when they find some challenges in the learning process. Self-efficacy 

can decide how far individuals can push themselves and how long they can survive 

to face difficulties (Muñoz, 2021). Dealing with these take students’ personal belief 

in their self-capabilities to successfully perform a speaking task. 

Students' self-efficacy in speaking is influenced by several factors, namely 

mastery experience, social persuasion, vicarious experiences, and physiological, 

and affective states (Bandura, 1994). Paradewari (2017) and Kontaş (2022) state 

that mastery experience is the most dominant factor in increasing student self-

efficacy. This factor refers to students' strategies for assessing their achievement at 

a certain level. The experience of success and failure may evaluate the students’ 

learning system. Those who get successful outcomes develop self-belief about their 

capability. However, students who get unsuccessful outcomes undergo a feeling of 

doubt and uncertainty. Social persuasion pertains to constructive feedback or 

observation that we receive from others regarding the involvement of students in 

certain tasks that are believed to be able to change students' self-beliefs (Loo & 

Choy, 2013; Myyry et al., 2022). Vicarious experiences are significant information 

to observe many things. The experiences that students gain affect their level of self-

efficacy. For instance, a student who can complete a difficult task, surely leads a 

strong belief to the other students that they are also capable of doing the same thing 

(El-Abd & Chaaban, 2021; Kang et al., 2021). Physiological and affective states 

play an important role in increasing student efficacy because students' physiological 

states such as fatigue, anxiety, and stress affect students' ability and belief in 

completing tasks. On the psychological aspect, students’ satisfaction has a positive 

correlation with speaking skills achievement (Asakereh & Dehghannezhad, 2015; 

Doordinejad & Afshar, 2014;   Hodges, 2008; Rahemi, 2007).  

Bandura et al. (1999) point out that students’ self-efficacy can be seen from 

these three dimensions: magnitude, generality, and strength dimension. The 

magnitude dimension reflects the students’ ability to finish simple and complex 

tasks based on their abilities. The generality dimension relates to the students’ 

interest in all topics and the effort to master many fields of knowledge. The strength 

dimension focuses on the level of the individual strength on the individual's belief 

in not surrendering easily and boosts more possibilities to perform successfully.   

This study is supported by relevant research which is conducted by Desmaliza 

(2017) “student's self-efficacy and their speaking skill at lower secondary school”. 

The result of this study shows a significant correlation between the students’ self-

efficacy and the students’ speaking skills in the seventh grader students at SMPN 2 

Curug, Tangerang. It reveals the important role of a teacher to enhance the students’ 
speaking skills by increasing their self-efficacy. Previously, the researcher is 

interested to explore the level of Self-efficacy of undergraduate students in one of 

the private colleges in West Borneo. Those students are required to speak English, 

especially in Speaking class regardless they are non-native speakers and English is 

their foreign language. Moreover, it is considered an “alien” language (Agung, 

2019). The researcher will explore the students’ self-efficacy based on the three 

dimensions that have been previously explained. To guide this study, the researcher 

formulated this question:  How is the level of undergraduate students’ self-efficacy 

in speaking activity? 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

653 

 

Method  

Research Design 

This study applied a mixed method. According to (Nath, Sharma, & Shukla, 

2020) mixed method involved quantitative and qualitative which are interpreted 

through an in-depth interview and descriptive statistics. This study aims to find out 

the level of students’ self-efficacy in a speaking activity. The level of the students’ 

self-efficacy is captured in three dimensions namely: Magnitude, Generality, and 

Strength (Bandura et al., 1999).  

 

Research Participants  

In selecting the participants, the researchers considered the availability of the 

presence of a speaking class in one of the private colleges in West Borneo. We 

found the third-semester students which consist of 28 participants (7 males & 21 

females).  

 

Instruments and Data Collection 

Two types of instruments were conducted to obtain the data in this study using 

a questionnaire and an in-depth interview. These questionnaires covered three main 

themes representing each dimension. The first theme in the magnitude dimension 

is connected to individual perception of the students’ ability in facing difficulties in 

completing tasks. The second theme in generality is linked to the students’ belief in 

acclimating to the degree of adjustment. The third theme presented the students’ 

strength to perform the tasks successfully.  

The measurement scale in the questionnaire was written in the Likert style of 

a 4-point scale. The description of the scale is 1- Always (very high self-efficacy), 

2- Sometimes (slightly high self-efficacy), 3- Rarely (low self-efficacy), and 4- 

Never (very low self-efficacy).   

 

Data Analysis  
In the technique of deconstructing the data questionnaire, several steps were 

implemented, namely obtaining, mapping, clustering, analyzing, elaborating, and 

presenting the data. Furthermore, in obtaining the data from the in-depth interview, 

3 students were selected purposively by reviewing the result of the data 

questionnaire following the lowest, intermediate, and highest scores. Those 

students represented the result of the questionnaire elaboration within the three 

dimensions. It is closely related to (Lidiyawati., & Sahara, 2021) which emphasizes 

purposive sampling obligates a researcher to select the sample based on the 

category of the population. The researcher analyzed the data based on dimensions 

of self-efficacy that consist of magnitude, generality, and strength dimension. 
 

Findings and Discussion  

To answer the research question, the researchers developed several questions 

related to the dimensions of self-efficacy. The questions were made based on the 

previous concept of Bandura’s theory. The following are the findings of the average 

levels of the students’ self-efficacy in speaking class. 

 

 

 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

654 

 

Table 1. Magnitude Dimension 

 Item Mean Interpretation 

1  I can complete easy tasks 3.44 Sometimes 

2 I can complete difficult tasks 2.96 Sometimes 

3 I prefer difficult tasks to easy tasks 2.12 Sometimes 

4 I don’t avoid difficult tasks 3.08 Sometimes 

5 Doing difficult tasks doesn't decrease the level of my self-

efficacy 

3.4 Sometimes 

Mean 3.00 Sometimes  

 

Table 1 indicates that the level of the magnitude dimension of the students’ self-

efficacy is at a slightly high level.  
 

Table 2. Generality Dimension 

 Item Mean Interpretation 

1.  I can master many fields of knowledge 2.6 Sometimes 

2. I am interested in learning all the fields of knowledge 

that I master. 

3.4 Sometimes 

3 I believe I can complete all tasks in various fields of 

knowledge 

3.36 Sometimes 

4 I am diligent in doing tasks from various fields of 

knowledge. 

3.24 Sometimes 

5 I always want to increase my skill and knowledge 3.88 Always 

Mean 3.3 Sometimes  

 

Table 2 shows that the level of the generality dimension of the students’ self-

efficacy is at a slightly high level.  
 

Table 3. Strength Dimension 

 Item Mean Interpretation 

1.  I don’t give up easily when I fail 3 Sometimes 

2. I believe I can perform well on a task even though I failed 

once 

3.76 Sometimes 

3 I always motivate myself when I fail 4 Sometimes 

4 I always look for solutions to fix my mistakes 3.76 Always 

5 The experience I have affects my self-efficacy  3.6 Sometimes 

Mean 3.6 Always 

 

Table 3 demonstrates that the level of the generality dimension of the students’ self-

efficacy is very high. The following is the rating scale description of the students’ 

self-efficacy level. 
Table 4. Rating Scale Description 

 Rating Scale Range of Perception Level of Students' Self-Efficacy 

4) 3.50-4.00 Always Very High 

3) 2.50-3.49 Sometimes Slightly High 

2) 1.50-2.49 Rarely Low 

1) 1.00-1.49 Never Very Low 

 

 

 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

655 

 

Magnitude 

The magnitude dimension is related to individuals’ perceptions about their 

capability to face the difficulties that they found in speaking class. (Masitoh & 

Fitriyani, 2018) state magnitude dimension is not only focused on individuals' 

ability in solving problems but is also related to individuals' self-confidence toward 

their competencies in completing tasks at various levels. Table 1 shows all students 

have a slightly high level of self-efficacy. 

Based on the interview, participant NV explained that speaking is a little bit 

difficult for her because acquiring speaking skills is challenging. The difficulty 

level of the occurring topic and her anxiety affect her performance occasionally due 

to her educational background. The lack of experience dealing with the present 

topics is affected by the missing benchmarking of the environmental conditions. 

Previous studies (Efe, 2009; Fraser, 1994; Heikkilä & Lonka, 2006; Kolb & Kolb, 

2005; Schaal, 2010; Waldrip et al., 2009) coincide that the conditions of the 

dynamic environments can impact speaking skills.  

NV: “If the topic of conversation is familiar, I can speak quite fluently but if the 

topic is difficult, it will be hard for me to neutralize my anxiety because I 

experienced no speaking class during my Senior High School years.”  

 

Generality 

The dimension of generality is related to what extent individuals’ beliefs are 

generalized in all situations (Lunenburg, 2011). (Benawa, 2018) states a person 

with high self-efficacy will represent the degree of their adjustment to their 

conditions.  It means that individuals who can implement self-efficacy in all 

situations have high self-efficacy. They can master many fields and they are 

interested in all topics.  

Participant SS tends to choose certain topics that she is interested in. She only 

focuses on the subjects she thinks will be useful for his future. This student has a 

slightly high self-efficacy level because of her fickle interest. According to (Silvia, 

2003) self-efficacy influences the students’ interest; it helps them to resolve the 

problem which finally increases their eagerness to master the topic. One of the four 

factors that influence a student's growth of self-efficacy is their interest in the 

speech topic (Zhang, Ardasheva, & Austin, 2020).  

SS: “not always interested in all the topics. I am only interested in the topics that 

are very crucial for me in the future as a teacher.” 

 

Strength 

The strength dimension refers to an individual’s belief in the ability to 

perform successfully in various tasks (Urban, 2006). Individuals who have high 
self-efficacy in the strength dimension will not be easily shaken by certain 

situations that weigh them down. Students who are more proficient in a second 

language or a foreign language tend to be more confident and less anxious 

(Thompson & Lee, 2014).  

Concerning the result of the interview, participant WD always convinces 

herself every time she speaks in front of the class. The sense of self-efficacy 

changes the perception of stress and disappointment to preserve efficaciously  

(Bandura, 1986; 1994; Bandura et al., 1999). 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

656 

 

WD: “Of course. I feel nervous and sometimes I lost everything that I have prepared 

when I speak in a formal situation, but I always try to regulate and convince myself 

that I can do it.” 

The researchers also contrasted their work with earlier research that examined 

parallels and discrepancies across diverse scenarios.  The first pertinent study was 

carried out by Lestari et al. (2022), and its similarity is the focus on public speaking. 

On the contrary, this study implemented a quantitative method concentrated on the 

effect of self-efficacy on public speaking gathered from 533 professional 

psychology students has an impressive display of the students' high self-efficacy. 

Furthermore, the second study was conducted by (Paradewari, 2017). Having 

similarity in public speaking class which was carried out using a questionnaire is 

the most visible resemblance. The discrepancies indicate that there were 43 

participants, and the findings are as follows: 1) 79% of students have a greater self; 

2) 81.4% of the students are conscious of their efficacy; 3) The students' feelings of 

self-efficacy are influenced by four factors: mastery experience, vicarious 

experience, verbal or social persuasion, and emotional condition. 

 

Conclusion 

Adopting Bandura's theory, this study sets out to explore the level of the 

students’ self-efficacy in speaking class. The results demonstrated that the students 

manifested slightly high self-efficacy in the magnitude dimension, slightly high 

self-efficacy in the generality dimension, and very high self-efficacy in the strength 

dimension. Reviewing Carter et al. (2017) individuals with higher self-efficacy 

ratings expressed greater verbal communication confidence, as may be expected, 

indicating a high magnitude and strength. Reflecting on that theory, this study 

concludes that these students are identified to have pretty high self-efficacy 

indicated by their magnitude and strength.  

The data gathered during the interview affirmed that the students’ level in 

magnitude is influenced by their educational background; students’ level in 

generality is affected by their interests in certain fields and finally, the students' 

level of strength is determined by a strong belief in their capacity to accomplish a 

certain task. The findings of the previous study (Desmaliza & Septiani, 2018) 

focused on the correlation between self-efficacy and speaking skills whereas this 

present study explores the self-efficacy level of the students in their speaking class 

in the three dimensions as explained above. This study can be used as a reference 

to shed a light on a more personal area by gaining in-depth interviews to discover 

their self-efficacy beliefs. Furthermore, using mix method done with in-depth 

interviews involving more participants might have more precise results to elaborate 

on the students' self-efficacy. 

 

References  

Agung, A. S. S. N. (2019). Current challenges in teaching English in least-

developed region in Indonesia. SOSHUM : Jurnal Sosial Dan Humaniora, 

9(3). https://doi.org/10.31940/soshum.v9i3.1317  

Asakereh, A., & Dehghannezhad, M. (2015). Student satisfaction with EFL 

speaking classes: Relating speaking self-efficacy and skills achievement. 

Issues in Educational Research, 25(4), 354. 

 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

657 

 

Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. 

Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359–373. 

https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.359  

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy defined. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 4, 71-

81.  

Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-efficacy: The exercise 

of control. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 13(2), 158-166. 

https://doi.org/10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 

Benawa, A. (2018). The important to growing self-efficacy to improve achievement 

motivation. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science,126, 

1-5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1/012086 

Carter, A., Breen, L., Yaruss, J. S., & Beilby, J. (2017). Self-efficacy and quality of 

life in adults who stutter. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 54(September), 14–

23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfludis.2017.09.004 

Desmaliza, D., & Septiani, T. (2017). Students’ self-efficacy and their speaking 

skill at lower secondary school. International Conference on Education in 

Muslim Society (ICEMS 2017), 122–127. Atlantis Press. 

Dodds, J. (2011). The correlation between self-efficacy beliefs, language 

performance and integration amongst Chinese immigrant newcomers 

(Thesis, Hamline University, Saint Paul, Minnesota). 

Doordinejad, F. G., & Afshar, H. (2014). On the relationship between self-efficacy 

and English achievement among Iranian third grade high school students. 

International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World 

(IJLLALW), 6(4), 461-470. https://doi.org/10.22132/TEL.2017.53185  

Efe, R. (2009). Science student teachers’ attitudes towards reflective practice: 

differences in subjects and grades. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 

4(2), 72-86.  

Effendi, A. (2018). The effectiveness of fishbowl technique towards students’ self 

efficacy in speaking. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 5(2), 

46-51. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v5i2.345 

El-Abd, M., & Chaaban, Y. (2021). The role of vicarious experiences in the 

development of pre-service teachers’ classroom management self-efficacy 

beliefs. International Journal of Early Years Education, 29(3). 

https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2020.1779669 

Gumartifa, A., & Syahri, I. (2021). English speaking anxiety in language learning 

classroom. English Language in Focus (ELIF), 3(2), 99-107. 

https://doi.org/10.24853/elif.3.2.99-108  

Hodges, C. B. (2008). Self-efficacy in the context of online learning environments: 

A review of the literature and directions for research. Performance 
Improvement Quarterly, 20(3–4), 7-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.20001 

Kang, N., Ding, D., Van Riemsdijk, M. B., Morina, N., Neerincx, M. A., & 

Brinkman, W. P. (2021). Self-identification with a virtual experience and its 

moderating effect on self-efficacy and presence. International Journal of 

Human-Computer Interaction, 37(2), 181-196. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1812909 

 

 

 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

658 

 

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing 

experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning 

and Education, 4(2), 193-212. 

https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566 

Kontaş, H. (2022). Explaining middle school students’ mathematical literacy with 

sources of self-efficacy, achievement expectation from family, peers and 

teachers. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 10(1), 

198–206. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.10n.1p.198  

Lestari, B. S., Parung, J., & Sinambela, F. C. (2022). Perception of communication 

competence, self-efficacy, and audience response to public speaking anxiety 

in professional psychology students. Budapest International Research and 

Critics Institute-Journal (BIRCI-Journal), 5(1). 

https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v5i1.4489  

Lidiyawati, L., & Sahara, A. (2021). Factors affecting the interest of accounting 

students in career selection. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of 

Egypt/Egyptology, 18(1), 394–405. 

Loo, C. W., & Choy, J. L. F. (2013). Sources of self-efficacy influencing academic 

performance of engineering students. American Journal of Educational 

Research, 1(3), 86-92. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-1-3-4 

Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Self-efficacy in the workplace: Implications for 

motivation and performance. International Journal and Management, 

Business, and Administration, 14(1), 1-6. 

Masitoh, L. F., & Fitriyani, H. (2018). Improving students’ mathematics self-

efficacy through problem based learning. Malikussaleh Journal of 

Mathematics Learning (MJML), 1(1), 26–30. 

https://doi.org/10.29103/mjml.v1i1.679 

Khatib, F. M. M., Rubaai, N., & Thangaveloo, R. M. (2021). Perceived self-efficacy 

of speaking skills among English as a second language (ESL) technical 

college students. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social 

Sciences,3(1), 60-71. 

Muñoz, L. R. (2021). Graduate student self-efficacy: Implications of a concept 

analysis. Journal of Professional Nursing, 37(1), 112-121. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2020.07.001 

Myyry, L., Karaharju-Suvanto, T., Virtala, A. M. K., R Raekallio, M., Salminen, 

O., Vesalainen, M., & Nevgi, A. (2022). How self-efficacy beliefs are related 

to assessment practices: a study of experienced university teachers. 

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(1), 155–168. 

Nath, N. J., Sharma, S., & Shukla, T. (2020). Exploring the liaising role of 

community health workers in the bordering region of India-Bangladesh: A 
mix-method approach. Online Journal of Health and Allied Sciences, 19(1). 

Paradewari, D. S. (2017). Investigating students’ self-efficacy of public speaking. 

International Journal of Education and Research, 5(10), 97-108. 

Rahemi, J. (2007). Self-efficacy in English and Iranian senior high school students 

majoring in humanities. Novitas-ROYAL, 1(2), 98-111. 

Schaal, S. (2010). Enriching tradtional biology lectures - digital concept maps and 

their influence on achievement and motivation. World Journal on 

Educational Technology, 2(1), 42-54. 

 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 25, No. 2, October 2022, pp. 651-659 
 

 

 

659 

 

Silvia, P. J. (2003). Self-efficacy and interest: Experimental studies of optimal 

incompetence. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62(2), 237-249. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00013-1 

Thompson, A. M. Y. S., & Lee, J. (2014). The impact of experience abroad and 

language proficiency on learning anxiety. Tesol Quarterly,  48(2), 252–274. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.125 

Ur, P. (2009). A course in language teaching trainee book. New York: Cambridge 

University Press. 

Urban, B. (2006). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy in a multicultural society: Measures 

and ethnic differences. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 32(1), 2–10. 

Waldrip, B. G., Fisher, D. L., & Dorman, J. (2009). Identifying exemplary science 

teachers through their students’ perceptions of the assessment process. 

Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(1), 117-129. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140802658958 

Zhang, X., Ardasheva, Y., & Austin, B. W. (2020). Self-efficacy and English public 

speaking performance: A mixed method approach. English for Specific 

Purposes, 59, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.02.001