Of Erikson and Bandura

Bandura and Erikson seem to be the epicenter of social cognitive theory: especially, Bandura. Self efficacy, the belief (or lack of) in ones ability to cognitively succeed, should not be confused with self-esteem (although having a good self image does not hurt self-efficacy). Take myself for example, I have a fairly sizable ego: I feel good about myself! Yet, lately, my self-efficacy, especially in terms of school, has been lower than I anticipated. (Don't worry, I don't feel this for my Ed Psych class: I just plain procrastinated with this journal! ha!.). Part of it is that I've have tons to do, have many distractions, and I get these "I just can't do it" thoughts. What does this mean in terms of the text?

Bandura's model has three interdependent sections: Personal judgments, behavioral, and Environmental (there is a fourth factor, physical/psychological state in reference to health: you're efficacy goes down when you're sick). We have aspects that we can and can't control. So what are the factors that I can't control in my situation? Bandura cited behavioral factors like task difficulty as something as possibly beyond one's control (and that's not necessarily a bad thing). There's also an environmental aspect: I really can't control the fact that there's a poor environment in my other class which is the mandatory use of Blackboard discussion groups. I LOATHE Blackboard's discussion boards. It should be a primary example of poor interface design! I also can't control projects that are given to me at work and so I have to prioritize between getting paid and doing something for an "A." I'll choose getting paid first (and subsequently, "not fired")!

What I can control is how much time I dedicate to the class in question: if I absolutely need to use Blackboard, I should use it in short spurts. I could also do my classwork away from my main computer (which has all of my games on it!) and do it in an environment with less distractions. I could also post discussions that I find interesting (although, I'm not to fond of the subject). I can also control and important factor that Bandura cited: persistence. I may not like it, but I need to "suck it up." I can also do my work earlier in the day (not midnight!).

I think that's a good overview of my own efficacy. Now, self-concept is another issue! That's where Erikson comes in. Self-conceptualization is built over time, and it refers more to your feelings about yourself. Self-efficacy is a "Can I do" while self-concept is "How do I feel about.." (I borrowed the last idea from Frank Pajares and Dale H. Schunk's article on "Self-beliefs and School Success" (a wonderful monograph!). Erikson divided our life stages into self-conceptual stages: our self-concept changes over time and it can be matched to certain physiological/age phases. Since I'm 31, I'm somewhere in the "Intimacy vs. Loneliness" and "Generativety vs. Stagnation" stages (young adult and middle age stages). My self-concept is still in flux because I'm a) single b) trying to be productive/generate meaningful work. If I feel I'm not succeeding, then my concept of myself will change for the worse. Does this affect my self-efficacy? It could if I make judgments and behavioral choices based on not being able to find meaningful relationships or I feel I can not produce anything meaningful. However, I don't think that will happen. I guess we'll see how it turns out!