Bulletin of Education & Research

December 2005, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 19-36

Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender on Academic

Achievement in Science

Rizwan Akram Rana*, Muhammad Zafar Iqbal*

Abstract

The major aim of the study was to explore cause-effect relationship between
the independent variables of students’ self-concept and gender and the dependent variable
of academic achievement in science. Data were collected from 2142 students of grade 11
and 12 selected from 88 (44 male and 44 female) colleges throughout the Punjab. The
results of the study showed that students’ self-concept and gender has significant effect
on their achievement in science.

Introduction
A self-concept is a person’s perception of his or her own strengths
and weaknesses. Many researchers discussed that the way students feel
about themselves may be the most important variable in learning. (Woolfolk,
1995; Huitt, 1998). Research has supported the belief that there is a
persistent and significant relation between self-concept and academic
achievement, and that a change in one seems to be associated with a change
in the other (Huitt, 1998; Hattie, 1992). Many research studies concluded
that academic self-concept has been significantly correlated with
academic achievement. These studies also discussed that academic self-
concepts were significant predictors of academic achievement (House, 2000;
Waldrip & Fisher, 1999; Huitt, 1998; House, 1996; Rothenberg, 1995;
Strein, 1995; Koutsoulis, 1995; Marsh, 1992; Marsh & Young, 1997).
Koutsoulis (1995) suggested that teachers must consider students’ self
concept on a specific subject as an important factor for students’
achievement.
Self-concept is a multidimensional structure relating to the
individual’s conceptions or appraisals about his or her self (Hattie, 1992).
According to Purkey (1988) self-concept generally refers to the totality of a
complex, organized, and dynamic system of learned beliefs, attitudes and
opinions that each person holds to be true about his or her personal
existence.

* IER, University of the Punjab, Lahore.

Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 20

Shavelson et al. (1976) conceptualized self-concept as the

organization of individual’s perceptions of oneself in terms of many facets
such as academic self-concept, social self-concept, and physical self-
concept. These facets or dimensions are viewed as hierarchical in nature.
Academic self-concept has been defined as student perception of self as
learner and it is based on the student’s interaction with the learning
environment. Social self-concept describes how a person relates to other
people. The physical aspect of self-concept relates to what is concrete: what
a person likes, what a person wants to wear, what kind of car a person
wants to drive, etc. (Huitt, 1998).
General self-concept is the apex of the hierarchy. Situation-specific
self-concept is the base of the hierarchy. While general self-concept is
hypothesized to be relatively stable, situation-specific self-concept is
hypothesized to vary across time and situation. The facets of self-concept are
viewed as differentiating over the lifespan. Self-concept is characterized as
having both description and evaluative elements. There is much empirical
support (Byrne, 1984; Marsh, 1990) for Shavelson et al.’s (1976) conception
of self-concept.
Studies of the relationship between self-concept and achievement in
educational settings have been a major focus of research and theory for
many years (Hamachek, 1995; House, 1996; Hattie, 1992; Marsh et al.,
1988; Burns, 1979). Research has supported the belief that there is a
persistent and significant relation between the self-concept and academic
achievement, and the change in one seems to be associated with a change in
other (Marsh and Craven, 1997; Marsh, 1993; Felson, 1984). In another
study, House (1996) investigated student expectancies and academic self-
concept as predictors of science achievement and results indicate that
achievement expectancies and specific aspects of academic self-concept are
significant predictors of subsequent science achievement.
Research strongly supports the view that academic self-concept and
academic achievement are mutually reinforcing each other to the extent that
a positive (or negative) change facilitates a commensurate change in the
other. However, some researchers discussed that they have not been able to
resolve the issue of the causal predominance between self-concept and
academic achievement (Byrne, 1996; Hattie, 1992). That is, the issue of
whether academic self-concept facilitates academic achievement or whether
instead, academic achievement facilitates the academic self-concept. Various
self-concepts studies have reported positive self-concept to have causal
predominance over academic achievement (Shavelson & Bolus, 1982;
Felson, 1984; Marsh, 1987). Other studies, however, have argued in the
opposite direction in that their investigations supported the view that
academic achievement precedes a positive self-concept (Bachman &
O’Mally, 1986, Kelly & Jordan, 1990).
Rizwan & Zafar 21

The Self-Concept and Gender

The question of a relation between gender and self-reported self-
concept appears throughout studies on the psychological construct “self-
concept”. Research findings have remarkable differences in conclusions
regarding the influence of gender on self-concept (Crain & Bracken, 1994;
Jackson et al., 1994)
Crain and Bracken (1994) examined gender differences in global
and domain-specific self-concept (Social, Competence, Affect, Academic,
Family, and Physical). They found statistically significant effect of gender
on global and domain-specific self-concepts. Jackson et al. (1994) examined
gender differences in overall evaluation and specific dimensions of self-
concept in college and high school students. Their findings show gender
differences in overall self-evaluation that favored men, and gender
differences in overall self-concept dimensions that were consistent with
gender stereotypes.

Purpose of the Study

The major purpose of the study was to examine cause-effect relationship
between the dependent variable of science achievement and the independent
variables of self-concept, and gender of students in grade 11 and 12.

Procedure and Methodology

The population of the study comprised of intermediate science male
and female students (Grade 11 and 12) appearing in the Intermediate
Examination (Part I and II) 2001 of all the Eight Board of Intermediate and
Secondary Education in Punjab. Total number of students in all the three
hundred sixty six (366= 187 Male and 179 Female) colleges in the province
of Punjab appearing for said examination was about forty five thousands
(Statistics of 2001 Annual Examinations of all the Eight Board of
Intermediate and Secondary Education in Punjab). The population of the
study was not homogeneous populations in terms of gender and
socioeconomic status. To select a more representative sample, it was decided
that a stratified cluster sample might be selected. The stratification was made
on the basis of two variables: gender and socioeconomic status. All of the
colleges constituting the population of the study were segregated colleges in
terms of gender. Stratification of colleges on the basis of socioeconomic
status was made on the basis of population census data in the Population
Census Report, 1998 (Statistics Division, Population Census Organization,
1999). Two parameters were considered for the stratification on the basis of
socioeconomic status. The parameters were the literacy rate of district and
percentage of economically active population.
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 22

On the basis of above mentioned two parameters, 34 Districts of the

Punjab province were classified into five groups. The population of the
study was distributed in 366 (186 male and 180 female) colleges in 34
districts of the province of the Punjab. Stratified Cluster Sampling technique
was used to select the sample of the study. The selection of the sample was
made in two stages. At the first stage, twenty five percent colleges from each
group were randomly selected by using proportionate stratified cluster
sampling technique with equal number of male and female colleges. In this
way, 88 colleges (44 male and 44 female) colleges were selected. At the
second stage, the students of grade 11 and 12 were randomly selected from
the selected colleges. The number of pre-medical and pre-engineering
students of intermediate classes in the selected colleges ranged from 10 to
several hundred students. It was decided to select all the available students
of the college if the total number of students in a college was below 60. If it
was more than 60, the students were selected on first come first serve basis.
In this way, a total number of 2400 students (male=1200 and female=1200)
were selected for the study.

Research Instruments
To collect the data about the variables of the study, two research
instruments were used. These were:

Instrument for Self-Concept

This instrument was developed by the researcher in Urdu in the
light of literature available to measure students’ self-concept. This
instrument was a multidimensional questionnaire, which measured the
following aspect of respondents: a) Academic Self-Concept: ability self-
concept, achievement self-concept, confidence in academic life, b) Social
Self-Concept: peer self-concept, family self-concept, and c) Presentation of
Self: confidence self-concept, physical self-concept, honest/trustworthy self-
concept (Waugh, 1999; Hattie, 2000; Byrne, 2000; Clinton, 2000). The
reason for developing this multidimensional questionnaire was that the
current trends in research studies for the measurement of self-concept are
mostly based on multidimensional, hierarchical models in place of
traditional global self-concepts models. Many researchers in this field
believed that in order to investigate issues relating to self-concept, effective
instrumentation that reflects the multidimensionality and domain-specific
nature is required. (Smith & Croom, 2000; Hattie, 2000; Byrne, 2000;
Clinton, 2000; Waugh, 1999; Marsh & Hattie, 1996; Strein, 1993).
The self-concept questionnaire consisted of 108 Likert Type Scale
items. The number of items in Academic Self-Concept subscale were 30, in
Social Self-Concept subscale were 30, and Self-Concept presentation of Self
Rizwan & Zafar 23

subscale consisted of 48 items.

Before using in the present research, Self-Concept instrument was
pilot tested. Sixty Seven (67) students studying science in grades 11 and 12
(35 male and 32 female) were randomly selected from four colleges of
Lahore. These were Government College of Science, Wahdat Road (22
students), Government F. C. College (13 students), Lahore College for
Women (20 students), and Government Degree College for Women, Wahdat
Road (12 students). They were asked to fill out Self-concept instrument
containing 108 items.
After pilot testing, item analysis was done. The item analysis
procedure of a scale is quite different from the traditional item analysis of a
test. For scales, the mean score of each individual item represents item
difficulty for the particular item. The Pearson “r” of each item with the total
score on all items (referred as Item-to-Total Correlation) acts as a
discrimination index for each item. If the item correlates highly with the
total score it is internally consistent and should be retained. If a zero or very
low correlation coefficient is obtained, it indicates that the statement is not
discriminating between groups and referred as undifferentiating. (Dunn-
Rankin, 1983; McIver and Carmines, 1981). The same criterion was used in
the present study for item analysis.
The reliability coefficient of Self-Concept instrument for pilot test
was determined by applying Cronbach Alpha reliability method and it was
found ∝ =0.9499 The reliability coefficient for subscale of Academic Self-
Concept was .8771, for subscale of Social Self-Concept was .8859, and for
Presentation of Self subscale was .8840.
The final version of Self-Concept instrument used in the present
study comprised of 105 items (Academic Self-Concept subscale 29, Social
Self-Concept subscale 29, and Self-Concept presentation of Self subscale
consisted of 47 items).
The Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of final test was
∝ =0.9670 and The reliability coefficient for subscale of Academic Self-
Concept was .8354, for subscale of Social Self-Concept was .9107, and for
Presentation of Self subscale was .9313.
Researchers developed a Demographic Variable Information
Proforma (DVIP) to collect information related to demographic variables of
the study. The science achievement score of students in Part-I and II at
intermediate level who appeared for annual examination 2001was collected
from the Result Gazette for Annual Examination 2001 of Boards of
Intermediate and Secondary Education, Bahawal Pur, Dera Ghazi Khan,
Faisalabad, Gujranwala, Lahore, Multan, Rawalpindi and Sargodha.
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 24

Collection of Data
Research instruments were administered to subjects in classroom
situation with the permission of the Principal and class teacher of each
selected college. The researchers collected the data from the colleges of
Lahore and Okara personally. The data from all other selected colleges were
collected through personal contacts. At each college, teachers of that college
were selected as contact persons for the administration of research
instruments. The research instruments were sent through messenger to the
contact persons in selected colleges. The instructions for administration of
research instrument were sent to contact persons along with the research
instruments. The contact persons after administering the instruments
returned the filled-in instruments through messenger. Overall 2400 set of
research instruments were sent to selected colleges and 2144(1012 male and
1132 female) filled-in set of research instrument were received back.
On the basis of total score, students’ were classified into three
categories by applying the specific range of scores (Mean ± 1 SD.). The
scores on self-concept sub scales were also calculated by applying the same
criteria. The values are given in Table 1.

Table 1
Classification of Subjects on the basis of Self-Concept Scores
Mean S.D. Score Classification
423.37 52.24 Less than 371 Students’ have low self-concept
371-475 Students’ have average self-concept
More than 475 Students’ have high self-concept
Students’ have academic low self-
concept
Students’ have average academic self-
concept
Students’ have high academic self-
concept
Students’ have social low self-concept
Students’ have average social self-
concept
Students’ have high social self-concept
Students’ have low presentation of self
Students’ have average presentation of
self
Students’ have high presentation of self
Rizwan & Zafar 25

Analysis and Interpretation of Data

This part of paper is divided into two parts. Part-I provides
descriptive information about subjects of the study on different variables.
Part-II discusses the results of hypotheses testing about the dependent
variable of science achievement. All computations were made by utilizing
SPSS-10 Software Package. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and t-Test
were used to test the hypotheses of this study. The alpha (p) level of .05 was
used in all tests of hypotheses.

Table 2
Descriptive information about students’ self-concept, academic self-concept,
social self-concept, presentation of self and science achievement.
Variable Mean S.D.
Self-Concept
Low Self-Concept 515.97 262.64
Average Self-Concept 552.34 224.16
High Self-Concept 554.19 214.43
Academic Self-Concept
Low Academic Self- 524.90 259.56
Concept
Average Academic Self- 560.414 225.80
Concept
High Academic Self- 501.22 207.88
Concept
Social Self-Concept
Low Social Self-Concept 506.13 251.138
Average Social Self- 557.56 226.81
Concept
High Social Self-Concept 537.81 215.77
Presentation of Self
Low 542.42 257.81
Average 550.59 224.30
High 553.78 217.86

Table 2 contains data representing science achievement by self-

concept and its subscales. Students with high self-concept have higher
achievement mean (554.97) than students with low self-concept (515.97).
The standard deviations indicate variability of science achievement on the
basis of students’ self-concept ranging from a low of 214.43 (high self-
concept) to a high of 262.64 (low self-concept). Students with average
academic self-concept have higher achievement mean 566.41 than students
with low academic self-concept 524.90 and high academic self-concept
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 26

501.22. The standard deviations indicate variability of science achievement

on the basis of students’ academic self-concept ranging from a low of 207.88
(high academic self-concept) to a high of 225.80 (average academic self-
concept). Students with average social self-concept have higher achievement
mean 557.56 than students with low social self-concept 506.16 and high
social self-concept (537.81). The standard deviations indicate variability of
science achievement on the basis of students’ social self-concept ranging
from a low of 215.77 (high social self-concept) to a high of 226.81 (average
social self-concept). Students with high presentation of self have higher
achievement mean 553.78 than students with low presentation of self mean
524.42. The standard deviations indicate variability of science achievement
on the basis of students’ presentation of self ranging from a low of 217.86
(high presentation of self) to a high of 257.81 (low presentation of self).

Table 3
Descriptive information about students’ gender, self-concept, academic self-
concept, social self-concept, presentation of self and science achievement.
Variables Gender
Male Female
Self-Concept Mean SD Mean SD
Low 486.89 266.08 567.02 249.37
Average 520.84 229.74 576.38 216.90
High 470.90 178.31 625.72 217.40
Academic Self-Concept
Low Academic Self-Concept 499.02 267.23 561.95 244.32
Average Academic Self-Concept 537.35 234.38 588.39 216.66
High Academic Self-Concept 423.54 157.09 581.11 223.25
Social Self-Concept
Low Social Self-Concept 477.16 252..90 556.98 242.29
Average Social Self-Concept 523.69 233.32 583.43 218.32
High Social Self-Concept 466.97 185.35 603.30 221.64
Presentation of Self
Low 491.14 266.54 569.40 239.13
Average 510.07 223.94 584.67 218.98
High 446.82 172.80 608.51 219.85

Data about students’ gender, self-concept, academic self-concept,

social self-concept, presentation of self and science achievement are
presented in Table 3. The highest mean 625.72 is found for female subjects
with high self-concepts and lowest mean 470.90 is evident for male subjects
with high self-concept. Regarding academic self-concept and gender, the
highest mean 588.39 is found for female subjects with average academic
 Rizwan & Zafar 27

self-concept and lowest mean 423.54 is evident for male subjects with high
academic self-concept. With respect to social self-concept and gender, table
3 indicated that the highest mean 603.30 is found for female subjects with
high social self-concept and lowest mean 477.16 is found for male subjects
with low social self-concept. Data about presentation of self and gender,
table shows that the highest mean 608.51 is found for female subjects with
high presentation of self and lowest mean 446.82 is found for male subjects
with high presentation of self.

Test of hypotheses about science achievement

Table 4
t-Test for Effect of Gender on Science Achievement
t-TEST
Variable N Mean df t-value Significance
Female 1132 583.62 2142 8.019 .000
Male 1012 505.62
Table 4 explains that t-value 8.019 is significant at p=. 000 level of
significance, so our null hypothesis that: there is no significant effect of
students’ gender on their science achievement in grades 11 and 12 is rejected
and it is concluded that gender has significant effect on students’ science
achievement in grades 11 and 12. The performance of female students
(Mean = 583.62) is better than the male students (Mean=505.62).
Table 5 represents the results of Univariate analysis of Variance
about the effect of Students’ Self-Concept, Academic Self-Concept, Social
Self-Concept, and Presentation of Self on science achievement.
Table5
Univariate Analysis of Variance-I
Sources of Variation Sum of df Mean F Sig.
squares square
Self-Concept 406323.637 2 2031.61 3.856 .021*
Academic Self- 1582770.028 2 791385.014 15.177 .000*
Concept
Social Self-Concept 747722.981 2 373861.490 7.177 .001*
Presentation of Self 198834.701 2 99417.350 1.883 .152**
* Significant at p≤.05 level of significance
**Not Significant p≤.05 level of significance

Data from table 5 indicated that Students’ Self-Concept, Academic

Self-Concept, and Social Self Concept except Presentation of Self has
significant effect on science achievement at grade 11 and 12 so our null
hypotheses were rejected.
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 28

Table 6 provides information about the results of Univariate

analysis of Variance about the effect of Students’ gender, Self-Concept,
Academic Self-Concept, Social Self-Concept, and Presentation of Self on
science achievement.

Table 6
Univariate Analysis of Variance-II
Sources of Variation Sum of df Mean square F Sig.
squares
Self-Concept and 696334.016 2 3458167.008 6.824 .001*
Gender
Academic Self- 933454.373 2 466727.187 9.259 .000*
concept and Gender
Social Self-concept 397140.315 2 198570.157 3.889 .021*
and Gender
Presentation of Self 106844.462 2 53422.231 1.041 0.353**
and Gender
* Significant at p≤.05 level of significance
**Not Significant p≤.05 level of significance

It is evident from table 6 that Students’ gender and Self-Concept,

gender and Academic Self-Concept, and gender and Social Self Concept
except gender and Presentation of Self has significant effect on science
achievement at grade 11 and 12 so our null hypotheses were rejected.

Conclusions and Discussion

There is a significant cause-effect relationship between the
independent variables of students’ self-concept, gender, and the dependent
variable of science achievement in grades 11 and 12. The interaction
between the independent variables of students’ gender and self-concept has
significant effect on the science achievement of students in grades 11 and
12.
There is a significant cause-effect relationship between the
independent variables of students’ academic self-concept, students’ social
self-concept and the dependent variable of science achievement in grades 11
and 12, Whereas, the independent variable of students’ presentation of self
has no significant effect on science achievement in grades 11 and 12.
The interaction between the independent variables of students’
academic self-concept and gender, students’ social self-concept and gender
have significant effect on the science achievement of students in grades 11
and 12. On the other hand, the interaction between the independent variables
of students’ presentation of self and gender has no significant effect on the
science achievement of students in grades 11 and 12.
Rizwan & Zafar 29

The literature has established that many factors may influence

achievement of students at different levels of education. The present study
sought to examine the factors of students’ self-concept and gender, and their
affect on selected students’ attitudes towards science and science
achievement in grades 11 and 12.
Greenfield (1996) discussed that statistically significant differences
in achievement were found among students on the basis of their gender.
Subotnik and Strauss (1994) examined gender differences in classroom
participation and achievement and concluded that gender affect the
performance of students in class. Mirza and Malik (2000) concluded that
overall performance of girls was better than that of boys at all levels of
education starting from primary to college level in Pakistan. The present
study concurs with Mirza and Malik (2000) and Greenfield’s (1996) findings
that science achievement of female students (mean=583.62) in the
Intermediate Examination 2001 was better than the science achievement of
male students (mean=505.62).
Felson (1984) found a consistent and positive relation between self-
concept and grade point average. Marsh (1993) found that relation of self-
concept and academic achievement is very specific. Craven et al. (2000)
found that relationship of self-concept to academic achievement was stable
over time. In addition, Marsh and Craven (1997) discussed that academic
achievement is substantially affected by academic component of self-
concept (academic self-concept). The present research study found that
students’ self-concept affect their science achievement. Students with high
self-concept performed better (mean=554.19) than students with low self-
concept (mean=515.97) in the Intermediate Examinations 2001. Similarly
achievement of students with high academic self-concept was high
(mean=566.41) than the achievement of students with low academic self-
concept (mean=524.90).

References
Abu-Hilal, M. (2000). A structural model of attitudes toward school
subjects, academic aspiration, and achievement. Educational
Psychology, 20(1), p. 75-84.

Acosta, E. S. (2001). The relationship between school climate, academic

self-concept, and academic achievement. Dissertation Abstract
International. DAI-A- 62/ 05. p.1717.

Alexopoulou, E. (1997). Gender differences in small group discussion in

physics. International Journal of Science Education, 19 (4), 393-406.
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 30

Arif, M.H. (1982). A comparative study of conservers and nonconservers on

some piagetian tasks with respect to intelligence, school achievement
and socioeconomic status. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Institute
of Education and Research, University of the Punjab, Lahore.

Bartel, N. P., & Reynolds, W. M. (1986). Depression and self-esteem in

academically gifted and non-gifted children: a comparison study.
Journal of School Psychology, 24(1), 55-61.

Becker, B. J. (1989). Gender and science achievement: A reanalysis of

studies from two meta-analyses. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 26, 141-169.

Bell, J. F. (2001). Investigating gender differences in science performance of

16-year-old pupils in the UK. International Journal of Science
Education, 23 (5), 469-486.

Bender, S. (1992). Factors influencing traditional or non-traditional career-

related aspirations among female high school students enrolled in
science courses. Masters Abstracts International, 30 (2), 208.

Bordens, K. S. & Abbott, B. B. (2002). Research design and methods: A

process approach. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Borg, W. R. & Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research: An introduction.

New York: Longman.

Breznitz, Z., & Norman, G. (1998). Difference in concentration ability

among low-and high-SES Israeli students: A follow up study. The
Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159, p. 82-93.

Burns, R. (1979). The self-concept in theory, measurement, development and

behavior. New York: Longman.

Butler, M. B. (1999). Factors associated with students’ intentions to engage

in science learning activities. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 36(4), 455-473.

Byrne B. M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept: a review of

construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54(3),
427-456.
Rizwan & Zafar 31

Byrne, B. M. (2000). Measuring self-concept across cultures: issues, caveats,

and practice. In Rhonda G. Craven and Herbert W. Marsh. (Eds.), Self-
Concept theory, research and practices: advances from the new
millennium. Sydney: Self Research Centre, University of Western
Sydney.

Caldas, S. J., & Bankston, C. L. (1997). Effect of school population

socioeconomic status on individual academic achievement. The
Journal of Educational Research, 90, 269-277.

Campbell, J.R., & Wu, R. (1994). Gifted Chinese girls get the best mix of
family processes to bolster their math achievement. In J.R. Campbell
(Ed.), Different socialization in mathematics achievement: Cross-
national and cross-cultural perspective. International Journal of
Educational Research, 21 (7).

Catsambis, S. (1995). Gender, race, ethnicity, and science education in the

middle grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 243-
257.

Chang, C., & Mao, S. (1999). The effects on students’ cognitive

achievement when using the cooperative learning method in earth
science classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 99(7), 374-79.

Clinton, J. (2000). Self-Concept as an antecedent of adolescent coping

strategies. In Rhonda G. Craven and Herbert W. Marsh. (Eds.), Self-
Concept theory, research and practices: advances from the new
millennium. Sydney: Self Research Centre, University of Western
Sydney.

Cokley, k. (2000). An investigation of academic self-concept and its

relationship to academic achievement in African American college
students. Journal of Black Psychology, 26 (2), 148-164.

Corsini, R. J. (Ed.). (1994). Encyclopedia of psychology. New York: John

Wiley.

Crane, J. (1996). Effects of home environment, SES, and maternal test

scores on mathematics achievement. The Journal of Educational
Research, 89 (5), 305-314.
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 32

Craven, R. G., & Marsh, H. W. (Eds.). (2000). Self-Concept theory, research

and practices: advances from the new millennium. Sydney: Self
Research Centre, University of Western Sydney.

Curry, C., & Trew, K. (1994). The effect of life domains on girls’ possible
selves. Adolescence, 29 (113), 133-151.

Desimone, L. (1999). Linking parent involvement with student achievement:

Do race and income matter? Journal of Educational Research, 93(1),
11-30.

Dunn-Rankine, P. (1983). Scaling methods. London: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (1999). Educational psychology: windows on

classroom. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.

Elliott, S.N., Kratochwill, T.R., Cook, J.N., & Travers, J.F. (2000).
Educational psychology: effective teaching, effective learning. Boston:
McGraw-Hill.

Feiring, C., & Taska, L. (1996). Family self-concept: Ideas on its meaning.
In B. Bracken (Ed.), Handbook of self-concept: Developmental, social,
and clinical considerations. New York: Wiley.

Felson, R. (1984). The effect of self-appraisal of ability on academic

performance. The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47,
944-952.

Filozof, E. M., Albertin, H. K., & Jones, C. R. (1998). Relationship of

adolescent self-esteem to selected academic variables. The Journal of
School Health, 68(2), 68-72.

Fink, R. P. (2000). Gender, self-concept, and reading disabilities. Journal of

the International Academy of Research in Learning Disabilities, 18
(1), 15-33.

Frankel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E. (1993). How to design and evaluate

research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fusco, D., & Barton, A. C. (2001). Representing student achievements in
science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 337-354.
Rizwan & Zafar 33

Giles, W., Leach, P., McGinnis, J. R., & Tippins, D. J. (2002). Gender. In
John Wallace and William Louden (Eds.), Dilemmas of science
teaching: perspectives on problems of practice. London: Routledge.

Greenfield, T. A. (1996). Gender, ethnicity, science achievement and

attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33 (8), 901-933.

Hamacheck, D. (1995). Self-concept and school achievement. Interaction

dynamics and a tool for assessing self-concept component. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 73, 419-425.

Harker, R. (2000). Achievement, gender and single/coeducation debate.

British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(2), 203-215.

Hattie, J. (1992). Self-Concept. London: Erlbaum.

Hattie, J. (2000). Getting back on the correct pathway for self-concept

research in the new millennium: Revisiting misinterpretations of and
revitalizing the contributions of James’ agenda for research on self. In
Rhonda G. Craven and Herbert W. Marsh. (Eds.), Self-Concept theory,
research and practices: advances from the new millennium. Sydney:
Self Research Centre, University of Western Sydney.

House, J. D. (1996). Student expectancies and academic self-concept as

predictor of science achievement. The Journal of Psychology, 130, p.
679-687.

House, J. D. (2000). The effect of student involvement on the development

of academic self-concept. Journal of Social Psychology. Download
from C. D. ROM on 10.10.2000.

Huitt, W. (1998). Self-concept and self-esteem. Retrieved November 3, 2000

from a World Wide Web:
http://www.Chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/self.html

Hunt, T. L. (1997). Achievement: A look at the relationship between the

individual self-concept, level of hope, and academic achievement.
Retrieved from World Wide Web 20.08.2002 on
www.mwsc.edu/psychology/research/psy302/spring 97/teresa. html.
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 34

Koutsoulis, M. K. (1995). Environment and its relationship to self-concept,

attitude toward school, educational aspirations, career expectations,
and achievement of high school students in Cyprus. Dissertation
Abstract International, DAI_A- 56/06A. p.2194.

Lau, I. C., Yeung, A. S. and Jin, P. (1998). Academic self-concept structure

of higher education students. Paper presented at the conference of the
Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia. (7-
10, July 1998 in Auckland, New Zealand).

Lea-Wood, S. S. and Clunies-Ross, G. (1995). Self-esteem of gifted

adolescent girls in Australian Schools. Roeper Review, 17 (3), 195-
197.

Loeb, R. C. & Jay, G. (1987). Self-concept in gifted children: Differential

impact in boys and girls. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(1), 9-14.

Marsh, H. W. (1990). Multidimensional, hierarchical self-concept:

Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology
Review, 2, 77-172.

Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1997). Causal effects of academic self-

concept on academic achievement: Structural equation models of
longitudinal data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, p.41-54.

Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (1997). Academic self-concept: Beyond the

dustbowl. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment:
Learning, achievement and adjustment. US: Academic Press.

Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B., & Shavelson, R. (1988). A multifaceted academic

self-concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic
achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 366-380.

Marsh, H.W. (1993). Academic self-concept: Theory, measurement and

research. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self.
Hillsdate, NJ: Erlbaum.

Mattern, N., & Schau, C. (2002). Gender Differences in Science Attitude-

Achievement Relationships over Time among White Middle-School
Students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39 (4), 324-340.
Rizwan & Zafar 35

Max & Wilkins, J. L. M. (2002). The development of science achievement

in middle and high school: Individual differences and school efforts.
Evaluation Review, 26(4), 395-417.

McIver, J. P., & Carmines, E. D. (1981). Unidemensional scaling. Sage

University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social
Sciences, 07-024. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.

Mendaglio, S., & Pyryt, M. C. (2002). Self-concept and giftedness: A multi-

theoretical perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American education Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Mirza, M. S. & Malik, R. (2000). Gender and academic achievement.

Lahore: Department of Women Studies, University of the Punjab.

Norvilitis, J. M.; Reid, H. M.; Norvilitis, B. M. (2002). Success in everyday

physics: The role of personality and academic variables. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 2002, 39, (5), 394-409

Purkey, W. (1988). An overview of self-concept theory for counselors. ERIC

Clearinghouse on Counseling and Personal Services, Ann Arbor,
Mich. (An ERIC/CAPS Digest: ED304630).

Reisz, E. D., McNabb, T. F., & Stephan, S. L. (1997). Gender patterns in

science attitudes and achievement: Report of a longitudinal study.
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 3, 161-
184.

Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept:

Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational
Research, 46, 407-441.

Smith, I. D. (1996). Gender differentiation: Gender differences in academic

achievement and self-concept in coeducational and single-sex schools.
Sydney: Australian Research Council.

Smith, Kenneth E., & Croom, Laura. (2000). Multidimensional self-concepts

of children and teacher beliefs about developmentally appropriate
practices. Journal of Educational Research, 93(5), p.312-321.

Stark, R. (1999). Gender preferences in learning science. International

Journal of Science Education, 21(6), 633-643.
Effect of Students’ Self-Concept and Gender 36

Strein, W. (1995. Assessment of self-concept. ERIC Digest. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED 3899626). Retrieved
December 1, 2000 from a World Wide Web:
http://www.ed.gov/darabase/ERIC_Digest/ed389962.html

Verna, M.A., & Campbell, J. R. (1999). The differential effects of family

processes and SES on academic self-concept and achievement of
gifted Asian American and gifted Caucasian school students.
Retrieved December 18, 1999 from a World Wide Web: http:// www.
Eric-web.tc.columbia.edu.

Woolfolk, A.E. (1995). Educational psychology. Bostan: Allyn and Bacon.