Journal of Management Sciences. Vol., 1 (12), 385-390, 2015 Available online at http://www.jmsjournal.com ISSN: 2149-3324 2015 The Relationship between the Academic Procrastination and the Academic Self-efficacy for Academic Achievements in Female High School Students in Isfahan in the 2013 2014 Academic Year Leila Roghani 1*, Taghi Aghahoseini 2, Fazlollah Yazdani 2 1 Department of Curriculum development, Meymeh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Meymeh, Iran 2 PhD, Faculty Member Department of Curriculum development, Meymeh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Meymeh, Iran Corresponding Author Email: Leila_roghani@gmail.com Received: 20 March 2015 Accepted: 25 June 2015 Published: 25 October 2015 Abstract: The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between the academic procrastination and the academic self-efficacy for academic achievements of female high school students in Isfahan in the 2013 2014 academic year. A descriptive correlation design was used in this research. The statistical population of this research was all of the female high school students in Isfahan in the 2013 2014 academic years. One hundred and sixteen students were selected through random multi-stage sampling using a Morgan table. The data were gathered from Solomon and Roth Blum's PASS questionnaire (1984), Yilmaz et al 's academic self-efficacy questionnaire (2007), and an education operation form. Correlation tests, multiple regression, variance analysis, and structural equations were used to analyze the data. The results showed that self-efficacy and academic procrastination could explain the changes related to academic achievement. Among academic procrastination indices, procrastinating for examinations had a negative and meaningful relationship with academic achievement. The path coefficients of procrastination on examinations and procrastination on assignments on self-efficacy were 0.43 and 0.21, respectively, which were meaningful. In addition, the path coefficients of procrastination on examinations and procrastination on assignments and self-efficacy for academic achievement were 0.26, 0.14, and 0.25, respectively, which were also meaningful. In general, the research findings showed that procrastination and self-efficacy were powerful predictors of academic achievement. Keywords: Academic Procrastination, Academic Self-efficacy, Academic Achievement. Introduction Procrastination in Latin is the synthesis of pro, which means forward, forth, or supporting from and crustiness, which means tomorrow or till tomorrow. Synonyms for this term are shillyshallying, dilatoriness, and putting off till tomorrow, particularly because of habitual carelessness, laziness, or unnecessary postponement or delay. The definition of procrastination has a wide range, from delaying beginning or completing an action,to delaying continuing an action because of a mental disorder (Solomon and Roth Blum, 1984) to irrationally delaying behavior. In general, however, it is defined as delaying or postponing an action that a person should do and, as a result, experiencing a level of anxiety from the procrastination. 385
According to its complexity and cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dimensions, procrastination presents in different ways, including academic procrastination, procrastination in decision making, and obsessive procrastination. The most common manifestation of its form, however, especially in education, is academic procrastination, which is a problem of students that is defined as tendency to refuse an activity, delay a task until the future, or use an excuse to justify a delay in doing an academic activity. The rate of procrastination in students is 46% to 95%.According to some researchers, approximately one-fourth of student's report that they procrastinate despite how much it causes them stress or low education operations. Solomon and RothBlum (2006) showed that students whose procrastination was a habit believed that their tendency to procrastinate was meaningfully related to their academic situations, their ability to master classroom materials, and their quality of life. Different research has cited many reasons for academic procrastination such as low classroom grades, education drops examination stress and anxiety, low achievement (Howell and Watson, 2007), time management, weak self-efficiency, unhappiness at the difficulty of doing tasks (Alexander & Onwuegbuzie, 2007), and irrational beliefs based on being unable to progress (Kagan et al., 2010). Therefore, procrastination behavior in students causes them to be unable to apply their real abilities in the learning process and consequently to fail (Kagan et al., 2010). In fact, procrastination is related to the incorrect perception of one s own abilities that is known as self-efficacy. Everyone s actions in certain situations depend on behavioral, environmental and cognitive conditions, especially the cognitive factor. This factor is related to people s beliefs about whether their behaviors in particular situations will have desirable outcomes or not. According to Barnard s self-efficacy theory (1993), early experiences and cognitive behaviors determine when people find that they have not been admitting their incorrect beliefs or what causes them fear in different situations, but then find themselves more able and effective if they come to accept what has threatened them. When they are working, in spite of doing their work successfully, they doubt their ability and efficacy, and this decreases their efficiency. Judge and Bono (2009) believe that self-efficacy not only decreases fears and expectable visits but also increases the amount of a person s effort through his or her expectations of possible success. The expectation of efficacy determines where people make efforts and where they resist encountering restrictions. As the level of self-efficacy increases, the person shows better actions and behaviors and tries to work better. Probably no homework is without procrastination and self-efficacy. Some authors have mentioned cognitive elements of doing homework. Therefore, it is not surprising that the main key of academic achievement is a powerful sense of self-efficacy, or, belief in one s ability to do a task to achieve a certain goal. So, homework depends greatly on procrastination or delaying beginning or completing a task in a desirable time limit. Procrastination and self-efficacy are two constructs that influence academic achievement. In a survey about students academic achievements with perfectionism, self-efficacy, and procrastination as related variables, the results showed that perfectionism as a mediating variable between procrastination and selfefficacy was associated with positive and negative effects. In spite of this, other evidence has shown that academic procrastination has little relationship with academic self-efficacy. Klassen et al (2008), through correlation analysis, showed that academic procrastination had an inverse relationship with mean scores, academic self-efficacy, self-regulation, and self-respect. The extreme inverse relationship between the selfefficacy required for self-regulation and procrastination showed that learners with powerful beliefs in their personal abilities regulated their learning environments and minimized procrastination. Moreover, in this survey, the results of multiple linear regressions showed when self-efficacy for self-regulation entered the study, the mean scores and academic self-efficacy were not individually meaningful predictors of procrastination, but selfregulation and self-respect remained as important factors for predicting procrastination. After calculating all variables, self-efficacy for self-regulation was an important predictor of procrastination. In this survey, academic self-efficacy was a weak predictor of procrastination while self-efficacy for self-regulation appeared as an effective factor in procrastination. According to the above-mentioned discussion, the research about the relationship between the academic procrastination and the academic self-efficacy for academic achievement is partially paradoxical. This subject has not been surveyed in Iran, particularly in high school. So the basic question of this research is Is there any relationship between academic procrastination and academic self-efficacy and academic achievement in girl students in Isfahan high schools? Therefore, the main goal of this study is to survey the relationship between academic procrastination and self-efficacy and academic achievement of girl students in Isfahan high schools. Materials and Methods According to descriptive and survey research and with the aim of studying the relationship between the academic procrastination and the academic self-efficacy for academic achievement using correlation, 116 students were selected through random multi-stage sampling in Isfahan s girls high schools in academic year 2013-2014. 386
Research tools: The Procrastination Assessment Student Version Scale (PASS) was created by Solomon and RuthBlum (1984), who worked with 21 students to survey academic procrastination in three dimensions: homework preparation, preparing for examinations, and midterm report preparation. The respondents replied to each statement using a Likert 4-point scale from seldom to almost always. For academic achievement, the students averages from their final tests, which were prepared by the Ghalamchi Cultural Center in academic year 2013-2014, were used for academic performance appraisal. Results Due to recognition of the research sample, demographic features of the sample were calculated related to frequency and percent and are reported in Table 1. Table 1. Demographic features relating to frequency and percent. Variable Classes Frequency Percent 15 years 15 12.9 Age 16 years 30 25.9 17 years 49 42.2 18 years 22 19.0 First grade 22 19.0 Grade Second grade 26 22.4 Third grade 51 44.0 Pre university grade 17 14.7 Descriptive indicators of the research variables relating to mean score, standard deviation, and Pearson s correlation coefficient are reported in Table 2. Table 2. Descriptive indicators and Pearson s correlation coefficient. Variable Mean score SD 1 2 3 4 Academic achievement 5150 529.06 1 - - - Academic self-efficacy 20.41 3.12 0.45 1 - - Academic procrastination 30.77 6.32-0.39-0.44 1 - Procrastination in exam 13.58 3.32-0.38-0.47-0.79 1 preparation Procrastination in doing assignment 17.19 4.21-0.29-0.28 0.87 0.40 As we see in Table 2, there is a significant and positive correlation between academic self-efficacy and academic achievement, which means that increasing self-efficacy, enhances students academic achievement. Moreover, there is a significant and inverse relationship between procrastination and academic achievement. This means that increasing procrastination in student's decreases self-efficacy and academic achievement. Table 3. The results of simultaneous multiple regression analysis between self-efficacy and procrastination for academic achievement. Model level Nonstandard coefficient B Standard coefficient Standard error Beta Procrastination 4621.79 482.93-9.57 0.000 In exam preparation -27.65 15.50 - -1.78 0.07 Procrastination 0.17 In doing assignment -15.75 11.22 - -1.40 0.16 0.12 Self-efficacy 57.56 15.81 0.34 3.64 - t Sig. R R 2 F sig. 0.51 0.26 13.11 0.001 387
The results in Table 3 show that the multiple correlation coefficients (R) between the sum of the predicting variables (self-efficacy and academic procrastination) and the criterion variable (academic achievement) is 0.51 and the determination coefficient (R 2 ) is 0.26. This shows that the amount of variance explained and academic achievement change with the predicting variables and the significance of F shows that the regression model is suitable. The significance levels of T for self-efficacy, procrastination on examinations, and procrastination on assignments are less than 0.05, and therefore, the regression coefficients for predicting academic achievement by procrastination on exams and assignments and self-efficacy variables are significant. We will then survey the structural equation model s goodness of fit with the research variables using smart PLS. A structural equation model is a multi-variable tool for showing reasonableness, and it is based on the path analysis of variables. No H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 Table 4. Path coefficients, t-test and the results of research hypothesis. Research hypothesis Exam procrastination academic self-efficacy Assignment procrastination academic self-efficacy Exam procrastination academic self-efficacy Assignment procrastination Academic achievement Academic self-efficacy academic achievement Effect coefficient 0.4337 0.2113 0.2607 0.145 0.251 /T/> 1.96 significant p<0.05, /T/ >2.58 significant at p<0.05 T 7.706 3.7867 3.9905 2.4446 3.7583 Sig. Result As reported in Table 4, the path coefficients for exam procrastination and assignment procrastination on selfefficacy are 0.43 and 0.21, respectively. The T significance levels of these paths are less than 0.01, and therefore, they are significant. Also, the path coefficients of exam and assignment procrastination and selfefficacy for academic achievement are 0.26 and 0.14, respectively. The T levels of these paths are also less than 0.01, so they are significant too. Direct and indirect effect coefficients resulted in model goodness of fit being calculated to determine the mediator role of self-efficacy related to exam and assignment procrastination. Table 5. Direct and indirect path coefficients of research variables on academic achievement. Measurement variables Academic self-efficacy Exam procrastination Assignment procrastination Direct effect 0.251 0.260 0.145 Indirect effect ----- 0.107 0.03 Total effect 0.251 0.367 0.175 As seen in Table 5, corrected model goodness of fit and exam and assignment procrastination have values of 0.26 and 0.14 for direct effects and 0.10 and 0.03 for indirect effects. So the total effects of these variables on academic achievement after considering the mediator effect of self-efficacy are 0.36 and 0.17, respectively. Conclusion Students academic achievement is one of the most important dimensions of our country s education system and can be mentioned as the main indicator of education quality assessment. Academic achievement is the effect of internal and external factors, and the internal factors include academic procrastination and selfefficacy. So the aim of the present research was to determine the relationship between academic procrastination and academic self-efficacy and academic achievement in female high school students in Isfahan. Multiple correlation coefficient results show that there is a significant relationship between self-efficacy and academic procrastination and academic achievement. These findings are the same as the findings of Howell et al (2006), Solomon and Roth Blue (2005), Hewitt (2011), Yao (2009). No education assignment is without procrastination and self-efficacy. Bandura (1977) believed that the main key to academic achievement is a powerful sense of self-efficacy, or a belief in one s ability to do a task in order to reach a certain goal. On the other hand, education assignments depend heavily on procrastinating or delaying beginning or completing a task in a desirable time limit (Ferrari et al., 2005). Procrastination and selfefficacy are two constructs that influence academic achievement. In this case, the inverse relationship between 388
self-efficacy and procrastination shows that learners with powerful beliefs about their abilities adjust their own learning activities and minimize procrastination. To explain this finding, it can be said that students with high self-efficacy are certain in their homework, such as reading books, doing classroom assignments and being ready for exams, and they also accept their behavioral outcomes, so they refuse to postpone their academic affairs. Therefore, this group has reported higher academic achievement (Rothblum et al., 2006). Other research findings have determined the multiple correlation coefficients between the academic procrastination and the academic self-efficacy. Kelassen et al (2008) showed that procrastination has a negative impact on academic self-efficacy. Also, it can be said that this finding is the same as those of Klassen and Kuzucu (2009) that showed a relationship between the academic self-efficacy and the academic procrastination. Procrastinators have such features as refusing to explain their abilities, preferring low-level homework, weak time management, concentrating on the past, and having difficulty with decision making. Therefore, they lose opportunities, delay completing work, and leave their tasks incomplete. So their self-efficacy, or, beliefs and expectations about their abilities to do tasks effectively and do what they have to do is decreased (Bandura, 1997). Another finding from this research is that academic procrastination components can well explain the changes in academic achievement. In this regard, Lee (2005) showed that there is a negative relationship between academic procrastination and academic achievement and that students with low academic procrastination had better academic achievement than did those with high academic procrastination. Path analysis results show that exam and assignment procrastination and self-efficacy have a significant effect on students academic achievement. This finding conforms to the findings of Duru (2007), Locke and Latham (2000), Wolters et al (2005), Hewitt (2011) and Yao (2009). Anxiety that results in procrastination, fear of failure, and inadequacy compared with other people causes reduced positive and logical perceptions of one s own abilities, so people reduce their endeavors, which activates processes that decrease time. Thus, the ground for procrastination is laid, reading on examination night is adequate for the student, and he/she will postpone studying until exam night (Effert and Ferrari, 2009), with the result being decreased academic achievement. Also, it can be said that academic achievement is not the result of only one factor but that various factors influence this variable, some of which are attitudinal factors. Although there are many attitude structures that have direct application in the classroom, it is a student s beliefs in his/her own abilities that enable able him/her to do the tasks. The research results show that learners who believe they have ability use higher-level learning strategies (such as meta-cognitive strategies), show more discipline in their academic affairs, earn higher grades, have fewer psychological problems compared with those who do not trust in their abilities, and have more sustainability (Locke and Letham, 2000). Also, Wolters et al (2005) reported that low levels of self-efficacy cause academic procrastination. They argued that learners with high levels of attitude and cognitive involvement and low levels of procrastination are very purposeful and have high levels of self-efficacy, which is a powerful predictor of their academic achievement. In this regard, Herrington et al (2003) and Patrick et al (2009) explained that low levels of procrastination accompanied by high levels of self-efficacy cause successful academic performance. The limitation of this research is that it was restricted to girls in high school. This is important because the psychological features of women and men and also academic grades may have influenced the research results. Thus, on the basis of the results, it is suggested that in education processes, plans be developed with the aim of students acceptance of academic responsibility to prevent the arousal of procrastination. Also, teachers should design the classroom structure so that students insist on development, empowerment, and mastering the assignments instead of insisting on competition and/or fear of lack of competency. References Alexander E, Onwuegbuzie A, 2007. Academic procrastination and the role of hope as a coping strategy. Personality Differences. 42: 1301 1310. Bandura A, 1977. Self-efficacy Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review. 84(2): 216-248. Duru MBE, 2007. The Evaluation of the Major Characteristics and Aspects of the Procrastination in the Framework of Psychological Counseling and Guidance. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. 7 (1): 376-385. Effert B, Ferrarie J, 2009. Decisional procrastination: Examining personality correlates. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 56: 478-484. Ferrari JR, O Callaghan J, Newbegin I, 2005. Prevalence of procrastination in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia: Arousal and avoidance delays among adults. North American Journal of Psychology. 7: 1-6. 389
Herrington J, Oliver R, Reeves TC, 2003. Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology. 19(1): 59-71. Hewitt A, 2011. Perfectionism Is Multidimensional: a reply to Shafran, Cooperand Fairburn. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 41: 1221 1236. Howell A, Watson DC, 2007. Procrastination: associations with achievement goal orientation and learning strategies. Personality and Individual Differences. 18: 127133. Howell J, Watson D, Powell RA, Buro K, 2006. Academic procrastination: thepattern and correlates of behavioural postponement. Personality and Individual Differences. 40: 1519-1530. Judge T, Bono JE, 2009. Relationship of core self-evaluations traits self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. 86: 80-92. Kagan M, Cakir O, Ilhan T, Kandemir M, 2010. The explanation of the academic procrastination behavior of university students with perfectionism obsessive compulsive and five factor personality traits. Procedia Social and Behavior Sciences. Vol. 2. Klassen RM, Krawchuk LL, Rajani S, 2008. Academic procrastination of undergraduates: Low self-efficacy to self-regulate predicts higher levels of procrastination. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 33: 915 931. Klassen RM, Kuzucu E, 2009. Academic Procrastination and Motivation of Adolescents in Turkey. Educational Psychology. 29 (1): 69-81. Lee E, 2005. The relationship of motivation and flow experience to academic procrastination in university students. The Journal of Genetic Psychology. 166: 5 14. Locke EA, Latham GP, 2000. Atheory of goal setting & task performance. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Patrick H, Allison R, Kaplan A, 2009. Early adolescents' perceptions of classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 99(1): 83-98. Rothblum ED, Solomon LJ, Murakami J, 2006. Affective, cognitive, and behavioral differences between high and low procrastinators. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 33: 387-394. Solomon J, Rothblum D, 2006. Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive- behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 31: 503-509. Solomon LJ, Rothblum ED, 1984. Academic procrastination: frequency and cognitivebehavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 31(4): 503 509. Wolters CA, Pintrich PR, Karabenick SA, 2005. Assessing academic self-regulated achievement. Psychology Bulletin. 91: 461-481. Yao M, 2009. An Exploration of Multidimensional Perfectionism, Academic Self- efficacy, Procrastination Frequency, and Asian American Cultural Values. Graduate Program in Psychology. The Ohio State University. Yilmaz M, Gürçay D, Ekici G, 2007. Akademik öz-yeterlik ölçeginin Türkçeye uyarlanmasi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Egitim Fakültesi Dergisi (Hacettepe University Journal of Education). 33: 253 259. 390