Relationship Between Implicit Intelligence Beliefs and Maladaptive Self-Regulation of Learning

Objectives. Although prior research has uncovered shifts in computer science (CS) students’ implicit beliefs about the nature of their intelligence across time, little research has investigated the factors contributing to these changes. To address this gap, two studies were conducted in which the relationship between ineffective self-regulation of learning experiences and CS students’ implicit intelligence beliefs at different times during the semester was assessed. Participants. Participants for Studies 1 (n=536) and 2 (n=222) were undergraduate students enrolled in introductory- and upper-level CS courses at a large, public, Midwestern university. Race-ethnicity information was not collected due to IRB concerns about possible secondary identification of participants from underrepresented groups. Study Method. Participants completed a condensed version of the Implicit Theories of Intelligence Scale [16; 54] and the Lack of Regulation Scale from the Student Perceptions of Classroom Knowledge Building scale [51; 53] at the beginning (Studies 1 and 2), middle (Study 2) and end (Studies 1 and 2) of semester-long undergraduate CS courses. Survey responses were analyzed using path analyses to investigate how students’ lack of regulation experiences throughout the semester predicted their implicit intelligence beliefs at the beginning (Study 2) and end (Studies 1 and 2) of the semester. Findings. Results from Study 1 indicate that undergraduate CS students come to more strongly believe that their intelligence is a fixed, unchanging entity from the beginning until the end of the semester. Moreover, participants’ responses to the lack of regulation scale were predictive of their implicit intelligence beliefs at the end of the semester. Results from Study 2 indicate that ineffective self-regulation experiences early in the semester enhance CS students’ belief in the unchanging nature of intelligence (i.e., during the first half of the semester). Taken altogether, these findings provide evidence that self-regulation experiences influence students’ beliefs about the malleability of intelligence. Conclusions. Findings align with Bandura's [4] contention that students’ behaviors and experiences influence their values and beliefs. Students who experienced poor self-regulated learning came to view intelligence as more of a fixed, unalterable entity than their more successfully self-regulated peers. Findings suggest that CS instructors can positively affect student motivation and engagement by embedding self-regulated learning strategy instruction into their courses and helping CS students adopt an incremental-oriented (e.g., growth-oriented) belief system about their intellectual abilities.

[1]  Brett A. Becker,et al.  Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Programming Education: Theories and Exemplars of Use , 2022, ACM Trans. Comput. Educ..

[2]  Markeya S. Peteranetz,et al.  Shifting Beliefs in Computer Science: Change in CS Student Mindsets , 2022, ACM Trans. Comput. Educ..

[3]  Donggil Song,et al.  Applying computational analysis of novice learners' computer programming patterns to reveal self-regulated learning, computational thinking, and learning performance , 2021, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[4]  L. Lewis,et al.  Growth Mindset Training and Effective Learning Strategies in Community College Registered Nursing Students , 2020 .

[5]  Eleanor O'Rourke,et al.  How Do Students Talk About Intelligence?: An Investigation of Motivation, Self-efficacy, and Mindsets in Computer Science , 2019, ICER.

[6]  Dastyni Loksa,et al.  First Things First: Providing Metacognitive Scaffolding for Interpreting Problem Prompts , 2019, SIGCSE.

[7]  C. Dweck,et al.  Mindsets: A View From Two Eras , 2019, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[8]  Ana Costa,et al.  Implicit Theories of Intelligence and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review , 2018, Front. Psychol..

[9]  Michael M. Barger,et al.  Developmental Systems of Students' Personal Theories About Education , 2017 .

[10]  Leen-Kiat Soh,et al.  Implicit intelligence beliefs of computer science students: Exploring change across the semester , 2017 .

[11]  Michail N. Giannakos,et al.  Understanding student retention in computer science education: The role of environment, gains, barriers and usefulness , 2016, Education and Information Technologies.

[12]  M. Giannakos,et al.  Understanding student retention in computer science education: The role of environment, gains, barriers and usefulness , 2016, Education and Information Technologies.

[13]  Aman Yadav,et al.  Learning to Program: Gender Differences and Interactive Effects of Students' Motivation, Goals, and Self-Efficacy on Performance , 2016, ICER.

[14]  Leen-Kiat Soh,et al.  Students' Initial Course Motivation and Their Achievement and Retention in College CS1 Courses , 2016, SIGCSE.

[15]  C. Dweck,et al.  Mind-Set Interventions Are a Scalable Treatment for Academic Underachievement , 2015, Psychological science.

[16]  Leen-Kiat Soh,et al.  Motivational and Self‐Regulated Learning Profiles of Students Taking a Foundational Engineering Course , 2015 .

[17]  Jennifer Grace Cromley,et al.  Changes in implicit theories of ability in biology and dropout from STEM majors: A latent growth curve approach , 2014 .

[18]  Jenefer Husman,et al.  Engineering Students' Intelligence Beliefs and Learning , 2014 .

[19]  Romain Martin,et al.  “My Questionnaire is Too Long!” The assessments of motivational-affective constructs with three-item and single-item measures , 2014 .

[20]  Anastasia Kitsantas,et al.  Comparing students' self-discipline and self-regulation measures and their prediction of academic achievement , 2014 .

[21]  Nickolas J. G. Falkner,et al.  Increasing the effectiveness of automated assessment by increasing marking granularity and feedback units , 2014, SIGCSE.

[22]  C. Mega,et al.  What makes a good student? How emotions, self-regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. , 2014 .

[23]  Kenneth Reid,et al.  Assessing Changes in Mindset of Freshman Engineers , 2014 .

[24]  Carey S. Ryan,et al.  Longitudinal changes in college math students’ implicit theories of intelligence , 2013 .

[25]  Jessica Watkins,et al.  Retaining Students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Majors , 2013 .

[26]  Eric M. VanEpps,et al.  Mind-sets matter: a meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. , 2013, Psychological bulletin.

[27]  Leen-Kiat Soh,et al.  Profiles of Motivated Self-Regulation in College Computer Science Courses: Differences in Major versus Required Non-Major Courses , 2013 .

[28]  Marisa Cohen The Importance of Self-Regulation for College Student Learning. , 2012 .

[29]  C. Dweck,et al.  Mindsets That Promote Resilience: When Students Believe That Personal Characteristics Can Be Developed , 2012 .

[30]  Catherine Good,et al.  “It's ok — Not everyone can be good at math”: Instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students , 2012 .

[31]  B. Zimmerman,et al.  Enhancing self-reflection and mathematics achievement of at-risk urban technical college students , 2011 .

[32]  Yi Pan,et al.  Exploring relations among college students' prior knowledge, implicit theories of intelligence, and self-regulated learning in a hypermedia environment , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[33]  D. E. Stevenson,et al.  Empirical evidence for the existence and uses of metacognition in computer science problem solving , 2010, SIGCSE.

[34]  Quintin I. Cutts,et al.  Manipulating mindset to positively influence introductory programming performance , 2010, SIGCSE.

[35]  David W. Brooks,et al.  The Unified Learning Model , 2010 .

[36]  Patricia A. Alexander,et al.  What Is Learning Anyway? A Topographical Perspective Considered , 2009 .

[37]  Sue Fitzgerald,et al.  Saying isn't necessarily believing: influencing self-theories in computing , 2008, ICER '08.

[38]  Lynda Thomas,et al.  Dangers of a fixed mindset: implications of self-theories research for computer science education , 2008, ITiCSE.

[39]  Jenefer Husman,et al.  Control, Motivation, Affect, and Strategic Self-Regulation in the College Classroom : A Multidimensional Phenomenon , 2008 .

[40]  Daniel C. Moos,et al.  Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? , 2008 .

[41]  Clayton Lewis,et al.  Attitudes and beliefs about computer science among students and faculty , 2007, SGCS.

[42]  Lisa S. Blackwell,et al.  Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention. , 2007, Child development.

[43]  C. Dweck Mindset: The New Psychology of Success , 2006 .

[44]  Duane F. Shell,et al.  The Impact of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Communities on High School Students' Knowledge Building, Strategic Learning, and Perceptions of the Classroom , 2005 .

[45]  Carol S. Dweck,et al.  Self-Theories: Their impact on competence motivation and acquisition , 2005 .

[46]  C. Mariné,et al.  Implicit Theories of Intelligence, Goal Orientation, Cognitive Engagement, and Achievement: A Test of Dweck's Model with Returning to School Adults. , 2005 .

[47]  R. Azevedo,et al.  Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia? , 2004 .

[48]  C. Dweck,et al.  Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[49]  R. Robins,et al.  Implicit Self-Theories in the Academic Domain: Implications for Goal Orientation, Attributions, Affect, and Self-Esteem Change , 2002 .

[50]  B. Zimmerman Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview , 2002 .

[51]  Reinhard Pekrun,et al.  Positive emotions in education. , 2002 .

[52]  B. Zimmerman Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. , 2000 .

[53]  C. Dweck Self-theoriestheir role in motivation, personality, and development , 1999 .

[54]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[55]  B. Zimmerman,et al.  Self-regulated learning : from teaching to self-reflective practice , 1998 .

[56]  Dale H. Schunk,et al.  Self-efficacy, motivation, and performance , 1995 .

[57]  P. Pintrich,et al.  Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Mslq) , 1993 .

[58]  P. Pintrich,et al.  Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. , 1990 .

[59]  B. Zimmerman Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: An Overview , 1990 .

[60]  M. Pressley,et al.  Good information processing: What it is and how education can promote it , 1989 .

[61]  C. Dweck,et al.  A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality , 1988 .

[62]  B. Zimmerman,et al.  Development of a Structured Interview for Assessing Student Use of Self-Regulated Learning Strategies , 1986 .

[63]  B. Zimmerman Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: Which Are the Key Subprocesses?. , 1986 .

[64]  A. Bandura Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[65]  B. Weiner An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. , 1985, Psychological review.

[66]  B. Weiner,et al.  A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. , 1979, Journal of educational psychology.