Classroom instruction, a key feature of formal education, where teacher’s control is exercised (Colley, Hodkinson & Malcolm, 2003), ensures implementation of the curriculum. Implementation animates the planned curriculum and is directly related to the teacher who creates conducive environment for learning and “ensures that it engages the learner, collaborating with other learners, resources and experts to construct knowledge” (Cohen, Manion, Morrison, & Wyse, 2010).

Ewing (2010) argues that curriculum implementation in the classroom primarily depends upon the question that how a teacher conceptualizes the curriculum? And how he/she plans activities for instruction accordingly? This implies that implementation of a new curriculum is determined by teachers’ readiness and reception for innovation and change. Nevertheless, it can arise difficulties for teachers too; therefore, they should be provided with opportunities and time to follow, as Marsh (2004) has pointed out that for implementation of new curriculum, teachers need considerable period of time to Comprehend the changes and to build their confidence and develop their competency to implement it.

It is important for a nation to preserve its cultural heritage for which education could be instrumental, but it also responsible for the development of individual’s self. Thus, curriculum owes a dual role i.e. cultural preservation and individuals’ self-development. The self-development of individual includes, “courage, perseverance, self-confidence, friendliness [and] appropriate management of one’s bodily appetites” (White, 2004, p.22).

Self-confidence is determined by the self-efficacy of students which is the main concern of this paper. Self-efficacy is “a judgment of capability to execute given types of performance” (Bandura, 2006, p.309). It refers to the belief that people hold about their “capability of organizing and performing tasks within a specific domain to effectively lead to specific goals” (Carr, 2004, p.208). Therefore, it is the pivot of human strengths for variety of reasons: first, it contributes to decision-making process and its materialization; second, it stimulates cognitive and emotional factors that influence performance; third, it regulates the effect of potential variables to improve achievement (Caprara, Scabini, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli,Regalia, & Bandura, 1999). However, it has little impact upon human functioning in a biased socio-economic situation, for instance, self-efficacy of students may not be working in a school if it lacks the men and materials required for the academic functioning (Schunk & Pajares, 2002).

Self-efficacy is a social construct, not an inborn quality; therefore, Bandura (1977; 2006) identified four sources for its development. These include both personal and social as well as primary and secondary experiences, social persuasion and somatic and emotional states; however, these have not the same impact but are rather “described in order of their power to influence self-efficacy” (Alderman, 2004, p.72). Individually, all of these affect self-efficacy for a specific situation; however, collectively their impact is long-lasting (Bandura, 2006). Realizing the role and importance of efficacy belief, this study was carried out with the aim to analyze the secondary level curriculum for the provisions of the sources of self-efficacy as identified by Bandura (1977) in the guidelines for classroom instruction that could affect students’ efficacy belief and to answer these research questions to arrive conclusion.

1. What are the provisions, in the curriculum, for the performance accomplishment of the students during classroom instruction at the secondary level?

2. What types of vicarious experience are included in the curriculum for students during classroom instruction at secondary level?

3. What are the inclusions for social persuasion in classroom instruction at secondary level?

4. What are the provisions for the physical and emotional states of the student during classroom instruction at secondary level?

Theoretical Framework

The underpinning for the study was provided by Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy (1977). However, analysis of the data was carried out through using the lens of a critical theory of Apple (1986; 1995; 2004) and Freire (1970/2000) substantiated by Gramsci’s (1971/1992) concept of hegemony by applying Foucauldian discourse analysis. Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy was the main framework of the study, which had been discussed earlier in this paper.

Apple (1995; 2004) argues that school, hegemonizes the society, through its instructional program. He identified schools as “agents of cultural and ideological hegemony” (Apple, 2004, p.5), which mostly offer “a mechanism for reproduction of division of labor” (Apple, 1995, p.35), relevant in the context of Indian subcontinent that Pakistan is a part of, validating Macaulay’s educational thoughts, forwarded through his Minutes on Indian Education of 1835 preserving the social disparities. This was explained by Gramsci’s (1971/1992) concept of hegemony, where supremacy of some people perpetuates through the “intellectual and moral leadership” (Gramsci, 1971/1992, p.57) without using force. Freire’s (1970/2000) banking concept of education where “the students extend only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits” (Freire, 1970/2000, p.72).

Discourse is a “particular way of talking” (Jorgensen & Phillips, 2002, p.1) whereas discourse analysis is “the analysis of language in use … considers the relationship between language and the contexts in which it is used and, is concerned with the description and analysis of both spoken and written interactions” (Paltridge, 2006, p.3). The discourses in curriculum explain Foucault’s knowledge/power relationship, which provides that the “level of on-going subjugation, at the level of those continuous and uninterrupted processes which subject our bodies, govern our gestures, dictate our behaviors, etc.…” (Foucault, 1981b, p.97). Students in the educational institutions are thus, chained through discursive practices affecting their daily lives by “a set of unwritten and often unarticulated rules” (Walshaw, 2007, p.66). Curriculum, as an educational plan, proves instrumental in the exercise of hegemony over people by affecting their efficacy belief. The discourses, provided in the curriculum, have strong repercussions for a nation, therefore, Foucauldian discourse analysis was applied to underline the knowledge/power relationship.

The study was qualitative by design and discourse analysis was employed for the analysis of curriculum documents. Curricula of the core subjects were the main concern; however, Urdu, Mathematics and Islamiyat compulsory (referred hereafter as Islamiyat) were sampled for the study. National Curriculum 2006 was analyzed for the subjects while National Curriculum 2002, as implemented, was also analyzed for Islamiyat. The curriculum of Urdu was selected as being representative of languages among the array of subjects and was considered to serve for connecting “people all across Pakistan and is a symbol of national cohesion and integration” (Government of Pakistan, 2009, p.4). Similarly, Mathematics was analyzed in this study because it is considered as “useful to the citizen personally, socially and professionally” and “provides a sound training for the mind” (Gill, 2004, p.104). Islamiyat was one of the core subjects because “the study of religion is morally educative” (Hand, 2004, p.152) and different views of people regarding religion is “a fundamental determinant of their personal identity, of their picture of the world and the shape of their inner life” (ibid, p.162).Classroom instruction, a practical part of the curriculum, was addressed in National Curriculum 2006 by making provisions for teachers’ role, teaching strategies, use of AV aids and time distribution, etc.

The data for this study came from the analysis of the National Curricula for Urdu, Mathematics, and Islamiyat. It was found that both curricula for Islamiyat were devoid of the section on classroom instruction; though required a more elaborative section on classroom instruction as its practitioners were appointed without having proper teacher education. The discussion was, therefore, based on the rest of the two. The sources of self-efficacy, as identified by Bandura (1977), were considered as the main themes and the analysis and discussion were made thereupon.

Performance Accomplishment

The National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu outlined activities that a teacher could conduct during his/her classroom instruction, as discourse code no. 1 analyzes the situation in this respect. Likewise, the use of AV aids is an integral part of classroom instruction meant for explanation, making the subject more “enticing and meaningful” (Mojavezi & Tamiz, 2012, p.484) and therefore, analyze as provision for performance accomplishment in discourse code no. 2. Correspondingly, the situation of classroom instruction provided in the National Curriculum 2006 for Mathematics is analyzed for the performance accomplishment in discourse code no. 3.

Discourse Code Nos. 1 & 2

Discourse code no. 1 discusses that National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu provided that teachers could conduct classroom activities as writing of summaries of the lesson. Analysis of the discourse speaks of the old-fashioned colonial mind of producing clerks for official work and facilitation of the authorities (Pandya, 2014) based on reproduction of what has been referred in Freire’s (1970/2000) banking theory of education. Such type of activities restricted thinking faculties of the students, handicapped them to develop to the level to perform using their critical and creative thinking, and thus adversely affects their efficacy belief. Besides, the National Curriculum for Urdu stressed upon for using various AV aids in teaching the language such as tape recorder and language laboratory for correct pronunciation and intonation of Urdu language, as discusses in discourse code no. 2; however, the same was hard to be available in the schools due to financial restraints, as public spending on education in Pakistan is “one of the lowest in South Asia” (World Bank, 2016, p.42). The subject of Urdu requires proper attention and arrangement; however, Urdu, as the national language (Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Article 251) and unifying force of diverse nation of Pakistan (Government of Pakistan, 2009), has been ignored by the elite class, who even feel degraded to speak Urdu, considering it a language of labourers, in their routine conversation and correspondence (Khalique, 2007). The Unavailability of supporting material for teaching-learning of Urdu at school level affected its proficient acquisition that served the cause of colonial masters to look down upon the native language and culture of the region (ibid) and so adversely affected the efficacy belief of the individuals to maintain hegemony (Gramsci, 1971/1992) of the colonial powers in their absence.

Discourse Code No. 3

The discourse code no. 3 presents the curriculum’s provision for instruction in Mathematics classroom, providing for the challenging situation; however, bulky syllabus compelled teachers to linger on the traditional method of instruction which is “meaningless and rote or denies them opportunities to think and interact” (Turner & Meyer, 2009, p.547). The curriculum also provided that the situation should match students’ abilities and led them to discover new Mathematics seemed impractical as the content of Mathematics was irrelevant to students’ practical life and hence, they failed to develop interest in the subject. Similarly, they also failed to discover new Mathematics on their own as the content taught inevitably turned students into passive beings (Apple, 1986), and thus they mainly relied upon teachers’ efforts that shattered their belief in themselves to do on their own.

Vicarious Experience

Human’s endeavors root in secondary experience, besides, primary experience. National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu was analyzed for the provision of secondary experience in the classroom instruction as discusses in discourse code no. 4. Likewise, such provision in National Curriculum 2006 for Mathematics is studied in discourse code no. 5.

Discourse Code No. 4

Discourse code no. 4 provides that National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu provided for vicarious experience in the form of procedures and use of material during classroom instruction of Urdu at the secondary level. The discourse never encouraged lecture methods for teaching Urdu at school level rather, it provided for activities that engaged students. These activities required the students to master the language through vicarious experience by attending others, directly or indirectly. The dialogue between students provides opportunity for secondary experience; Allegory and drama facilitate students to witness fellows’ performance and get encouraged. Activities like these proved to be encouraging and motivational. However, the effective conduct of these activities suffered in the absence of proper guidance as most teachers did not possess subject mastery proving the curriculum idealistically presented without considering ground realities, which created dismay and causing an adverse effect on students’ beliefs. The dismay resulted in frustration and discouragement at large across the country, which consequently, affected self-efficacy of both the teacher and students negatively.

Discourse Code No. 5

Activities like classroom interaction and discussion among teachers and students provide opportunity for vicarious experience in National Curriculum 2006 for Mathematics as states in discourse code no. 5. The provisions for vicarious experience seem contradictory to the syllabus offered at the level with poor coherence violating principles of ‘simple to complex’ and ‘easy to difficult’. Moreover, completion of assigned tasks on time had provided no room for such activities. However, through the syllabus of Mathematics, it is focused on “men and women as recipients of values and institutions, not on men and women as creators and re-creators of values and institutions” (Apple, 2004, p80) and made both teachers and students worried for its timely coverage as the students have to be assessed universally in the entire course verifying the discourse that “power and knowledge are joined together” (Foucault, 1981a, p. 100). The teachers were trying to cover up the syllabus and little cared for its understanding by the students who got frustrated and were inefficient to grasp the matter of Mathematics. This inefficiency seldom ceases and continues its impact throughout their life.

Social Persuasion

Classroom instruction offers the best situation for effective social persuasion. The provisions for social persuasion was, therefore, analyzed in National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu through educational activities that could be carried out by the teacher during his/her classroom instruction giving confidence to the students to perform in front of their fellows as a token of their abilities that teacher would encourage as analyzes in the discourse code no. 6. Similarly, National Curriculum 2006 for Mathematics provided that the role of a Mathematics teacher should be of an encourager, a negotiator and a mediator, as analyzes in discourse code no. 7.

Discourse Code No. 6

Discourse code no. 6 states that National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu offered the opportunity for teachers to persuade students to share their observations based on their study of Urdu books and magazines, etc. The discourse underlines the availability of huge amount of information regarding Urdu in magazines and books to students grasping through their self-study. The discourse positively persuades teachers and students to be involved in activities regarding Urdu literature; nonetheless, it had no effect for different reasons such as, the scarcity of quality literature, the underdeveloped taste of students for reading; Moreover, they are overburdened with the prescribed syllabus to cover in time and, hence, the suggested activities are seldom materialized. The provision seems as the curriculum developers influence students as “an external political force, an element of cohesive force exercised by the ruling classes and, therefore, an element of subordination to an external hegemony” (Gramsci, 1971/1992, p.420). The idealistic inclusion of such activities in the classroom resulted in students’ inferiority complex and adversely affected their self-efficacy.

Discourse Code No. 7

National Curriculum 2006 for Mathematics in its guidelines for classroom instruction, provided that the teacher must create a stimulating environment by explaining the scope and importance of Mathematics to the students that motivate them for learning the subject as mentions in discourse code no.7. However, at the secondary level, the task is tough for the teachers as the syllabus seemed irrelevant to students’ immediate life and “traditional pedagogies and procedural views of mathematics combine to produce environments in which most students must surrender agency and think in order to follow predetermined routines” (Boaler & Greeno, 2000, p.171). Moreover, analysis of the discourse communicates that the curriculum was developed in a poor vertical alignment for the subject, besides, being voluminous i.e. detailed thirty units (see National Curriculum 2006 for Mathematics) made the situation difficult for the teacher to focus on activities other than traditional teaching of the content. The materialistic societies are neither interested in fostering critical thinking among the students nor favor the creation of emancipatory knowledge. They are rather appealed by the competitive economy and have focused on promoting specific knowledge to ensure the availability of specific human resource for accumulation of capital (Apple, 1976, 1982; Carnoy, 1982) catering little for development of students’ self-efficacy.

Physical and Emotional State

Classroom instruction directly affects students’ physical and emotional states. The provisions for classroom instruction were examined through educational activities offered by National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu concerning students’ control of their fear and anxiety regarding their performance as analyzes in the discourse code no. 8. Similarly, the provision for instruction in Mathematics classrooms is analyzed in discourse code no. 9.

Discourse Code No. 8

National Curriculum 2006 for Urdu offered classroom instruction regarding the physical and emotional state of students, as discusses in discourse code no. 8, through different activities that could be performed by the students, affecting their emotional state. The discourse purports that the stated activities would cause emotional arousal as the students get stressed by doing so because being a second language, the mastery of language was yet to be achieved, and thus, creates anxiety that damage one’s ability of performance (Martin, Carlson, & Buskist, 2010). Similarly, the stressful situation, which resulted inferiority complex in the students, was likely to cause “feelings of inadequacy, incompetence, depression, anxiety, and chronic anger” (Bruno, 2002, p.201). Moreover, these activities were, to be guided through textbooks, which had been rarely done resulting in an unfinished agenda and so failed to achieve the purpose of students’ self-development. It communicated a predisposition to undergo negative reactions to vague events caused “elevated distress and impaired functioning in a variety of everyday ambiguous situations” (Hazlett-Stevens, 2008, p.8). The emotional arousal caused shaking physical state of the students, in the absence of guidance from the stakeholders, adversely affected the efficacy belief of the students.

Discourse Code No. 9

National Curriculum 2006 for Mathematics was analyzed for the provision of the physical and emotional state of the students through classroom instruction at secondary level. The discourse code no. 9 acknowledges the threat of being sometimes lengthy, the process of so much advocated method of problem-solving in the curriculum, might cause anxiety as it was “experienced in anticipation of threat” (ibid, p.65) of failure; besides, the lengthy process of problem-solving is also resulting in fatigue and boredom triggering students’ physical inability (Ewart, 1992) and the efforts would be ended in failure. The anxiety, fatigue, and boredom adversely affected students’ efficacy belief not only during the process but continues ahead as well.

Classroom instruction is the key feature of formal education and implementation of the curriculum expresses teachers’ readiness for change. It ensures both, preservation of cultural heritage and students’ self-development. Students’ self-confidence, being a part of self-development, is determined by their self-efficacy, which rests on four building blocks. Self-efficacy is the main determinant of one’s behavior. The prospects of human-actions rely on the behavior that is produced through deliberate attempts.

These attempts are made through the curriculum. A realistic approach to classroom instruction in curriculum ensures change in behavior. Provisions for activities in the National Curricula meant for performance accomplishment but these were only reproduction of information and were devoid of critical and creative thinking, speaking for Macaulay’s Minutes of colonial time, validated banking theory of education. The unrealistic provisions regarding audiovisual aids suffered classroom instruction and students’ performance and consequently their efficacy belief. The curricular provisions for vicarious experience of students were in the form of different activities that urged teachers to engage and motivate students. Nonetheless, guidelines for their conduct were seldom clearly provided and the instructional strategies for different subjects were incompatible with prescribed syllabi and stipulated time resulted otherwise.

The classroom instruction could be better serving for social persuasion. The curriculum provided for students’ confidence-building activities but was designed in an idealistic manner without considering ground realities in schools. The activities, thus, worked otherwise and develop inferiority complex among the students. The curriculum provided different classroom activities for students’ physical and emotional state, but this required mastery in the language, which the students lacked at this stage and caused fear, tension, and anxiety among them and resulted in lowering their self-efficacy. Collectively, the national curriculum was designed and developed with the colonial mindset of hegemonic design and, hence, insufficiently provided for activities that could be utilized for the development of students’ efficacy belief at secondary level during classroom instruction in the province.