Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2508.18631

Development of the Measure of Assessment Self-Efficacy (MASE) for Quizzes and Exams

Kaitlin Riegel·Tanya Evans·Jason M. Stephens
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Self-efficacy is a significant construct in education due to its predictive relationship with achievement. Existing measures of assessment-related self-efficacy concentrate on students' beliefs about content-specific tasks but omit beliefs around assessment-taking. This research aimed to develop and test the Measure of Assessment Self-Efficacy (MASE), designed to assess two types of efficacy beliefs related to assessment (i.e., 'comprehension and execution' and 'emotional regulation') in two scenarios (i.e., a low-stakes online quiz and a high-stakes final exam). Results from confirmatory factor analysis in Study 1 (N = 301) supported the hypothesised two-factor measurement models for both assessment scenarios. In Study 2, results from MGCFA (N = 277) confirmed these models were invariant over time and provided evidence for the scales' validity. Study 3 demonstrated the exam-related MASE was invariant across cohorts of students (Ns = 277; 329). Potential uses of the developed scales in educational research are discussed.

Explore related subjects

math.HOcs.CY

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kaitlin Riegel, Tanya Evans, Jason M. Stephens. 2025-08-26. Development of the Measure of Assessment Self-Efficacy (MASE) for Quizzes and Exams. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2022.2162481

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO↗