Self-Efficacy and Favorability Shape Learning from Tutoring Systems and Paper Practice

Synthesis: Students with lower baseline Self-Efficacy achieved greater learning gains regardless of practice format.

Key Findings

• Among students with lower baseline self-efficacy, greater favorability toward the tutor was associated with greater learning gains during tutor practice, whereas the pattern differed in paper-based practice.
• Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS)-based practice did not significantly improve post-training self-efficacy relative to paper-based methods.
• The benefits of tutor- and paper-based practice varied with baseline self-efficacy and favorability, so no single format dominated for all learners.
• The findings underscore the potential value of tailoring practice format to students' motivational profiles.

Study Design & Method

The study examined how self-efficacy and favorability toward practice shape learning across two common practice formats: paper-based practice and system-based tutoring practice. Using a counterbalanced within-subject design with matched problem sets, the authors isolated the effect of practice format while modeling motivational differences. The work builds on the observation that technology-enhanced learning systems in domains such as mathematics and science can improve learning outcomes through scaffolded support, step-level feedback, and individualized practice, but that learners' motivational profiles may influence how they respond to one format versus another.

What this means for practice

• Instructors. Do not standardize one practice format across a class. The benefits of tutor-based and paper-based practice varied with baseline Self-Efficacy and favorability toward the format, so no single format dominated for all learners.
• Instructors. Steer scaffolded tutor practice toward students with lower baseline self-efficacy. Those students achieved greater learning gains regardless of format, and among them greater favorability toward the tutor was associated with greater gains during tutor practice.
• Learners. Do not expect a tutoring system to change how confident you feel within a week of practice: ITS-based practice did not significantly improve post-training self-efficacy relative to paper practice over the two approximately 40-minute sessions.
• Designers. Treat practice format as a variable to match to motivational profile rather than a neutral delivery channel. Students less favorable toward the paper format actually improved more under paper-based practice, which the authors suggest may reflect their seeking support from teachers or peers, or exerting more effort — neither of which the study measured directly.

Limitations

• Missing performance and survey data left 54 of the 97 participants (55.67%) in the final analytic sample, a loss the authors say limited statistical power and may have made subtler effects and interactions harder to detect.
• Favorability was measured after the posttest; the authors note that collecting it earlier, ideally before the pretest, would be more informative, though their mediation analysis found no significant link between learning gains and favorability.
• The study spanned five days with two approximately 40-minute practice sessions per student, which the authors say limited their ability to observe meaningful change in self-efficacy, a relatively stable construct.
• The sample came from seven ninth-grade mathematics classes at a single suburban middle school and from one intelligent tutoring system covering linear algebra topics; the authors could not rule out carryover effects between the two practice units, and generalization to other subjects or ITS designs remains untested.

Citation

Xinfei Cen, Vincent Aleven, Kenneth R. Koedinger, Conrad Borchers, Paulo F. Carvalho (2026). Self-Efficacy and Favorability Shape Learning from Tutoring Systems and Paper Practice. EC-TEL 2026.