Computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety in social work students: implications for social work education

ABSTRACT

With the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, communication and learning processes became progressively computer mediated and students were forced to quickly adapt to new information and communication technologies (ICTs). The aim of the present study was to explore social work student’s capabilities to use ICTs. In research, computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety were identified as the most important factors for predicting success in ICTs use and academic performance. Computer self-efficacy reflects belief of one’s capability to use computers. Computer anxiety has been defined as unpleasant affective reaction towards computer usage. In the present study, we used a standardized questionnaire to measure computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety. A sample of 159 students took part in the survey. Students were either at the start (1^st and 2^nd term) or near the end (5^th and 6^th term) of the bachelor programme. Our results indicate average magnitude in both variables at the group level, but also large inter-individual variability with some students having extremely low computer-self efficacy in performing computer activities, which was associated with strong computer anxiety. This is supported by a statistically significant negative correlation of computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety between students at the beginning and the end of the Bachelor study programme. These findings indicate that ICTs did not play a prominent role in social work education so far.

KEYWORDS:

• Computer self-efficacy
• computer anxiety
• social work education
• ICTs
• digitalization

Geolocation information

Germany, EU

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Items were adapted from Huygelier et al. (2019). All items are 5-point Likert rating scales ranging from ‘totally disagree’ (1) to ‘totally agree’ (5), with a neutral position – ‘neither agree nor disagree’ (3).