ITS-based practice did not improve post-training self-efficacy relative to paper-based practice; baseline self-efficacy was the primary determinant¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Training condition did not significantly predict post-training self-efficacy (t(57.96) = 0.49, p = .629), contrary to expectation. → Xinfei Cen 2026 q2 i? Baseline self-efficacy significantly and positively predicted post-training self-efficacy (t(91.94) = 5.91, p < .001). → Xinfei Cen 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Xinfei Cen 2026¶

Xinfei Cen, Vincent Aleven, Kenneth R. Koedinger, Conrad Borchers, and Paulo F. Carvalho. (2026). Self-Efficacy and Favorability Shape Learning from Tutoring Systems and Paper Practice. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.17470 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.17470

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Linear mixed-effects model with post-training self-efficacy as dependent variable (Table 2), same 54-student within-subject dataset. Neither condition nor favorability was significant; no interaction reached significance. No effect size printed.

"In contrast, training conditions (tutor vs. paper),t(57.96) = 0.49,p=.629, and favorability,t(90.00) = 0.96,p=.341, did not independently predict changes in self-efficacy."

Xinfei Cen 2026 (2)¶

Xinfei Cen, Vincent Aleven, Kenneth R. Koedinger, Conrad Borchers, and Paulo F. Carvalho. (2026). Self-Efficacy and Favorability Shape Learning from Tutoring Systems and Paper Practice. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.17470

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Same RQ2 model (Table 2): baseline self-efficacy was the only significant fixed effect, "t(91.94) = 5.91,p < .001". No effect size printed; impact null.

"baseline self-efficacy had a significant positive ef-fect on post-training self-efficacy for the specific math skills practiced in the study,t(91.94) = 5.91,p < .001"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Motivation — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
• Self-Efficacy — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Proximal goals and ability attributional feedback for early learning raise self-efficacy more than distant goals and effort feedback, by a review's report of earlier studies — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Adding small peer feedback groups to web-based SRL training and a diary (Group TDP) produced statistically significant gains in SRL knowledge, the SRL overall score, self-efficacy and the mathematics focus score, the last of which Group TD did not show — related
• AI-TPACK positively predicts science teaching self-efficacy among Chinese pre-service science teachers — related
• The effect of practice condition on learning gains was moderated by a three-way interaction of condition, baseline self-efficacy, and favorability — related
• In Study 1, differences in self-efficacy between the three conditions did not reach significance — related
• Students with lower baseline self-efficacy achieved greater learning gains in both practice formats, though the relationship varied with favorability toward each format — related