ABSTRACT
Jane sees 50 compiler errors as a challenge. John sees them as defeat. Psychology research suggests these contrasting reactions may stem from students' self-theories, or their beliefs about themselves. Jane's reaction is characteristic of a growth mindset, the idea that with hard work and persistence, one's intelligence can increase. John's behavior is in line with a fixed mindset, the belief that individuals are born with a certain amount of intelligence and there is little they can do to change it. Numerous studies of self-theories have shown that students with a growth mindset perform better in academic settings; they cope more effectively with challenges, maintain higher grades, and are less susceptible to stereotype threat. In this study we attempted a "saying is believing" intervention to encourage CS1 students to adopt a growth mindset both in general and towards programming. Despite notable success of this type of intervention in a non-CS context, our results offered few statistically significant differences both from pre-survey to post-survey and between control and intervention groups. Further, the statistically significant results we did find differed in direction between institutions (some students exhibited more growth response, others less). We analyzed further evidence to explore possible confounding issues including whether our intervention even registered with students and how students interpreted the questions which we used to assess their self-theories.
- W. K. Adams, K. K. Perkins, N. S. Podolefsky, M. Dubson, N. D. Finkelstein, and C. E. Wieman. New instrument for measuring student beliefs about physics and learning physics: The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 2, 010101, 2006.Google Scholar
- E. Alpay and J. Ireson. Self-theories of intelligence of engineering students. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(2):169--180, 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Aronson, C. Fried and C. Good. Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(2):113--125, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Bergin and R. Reilly. The influence of motivation and comfort-level on learning to program. In PPIG '05: Proceedings of the 17th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, p. 293--304, 2005.Google Scholar
- L. S. Blackwell, K. H. Trzesniewski and C. S. Dweck. Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1):246--263, 2007.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. I. Diener and C. S. Dweck. An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy, and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(5):451--462, 1978.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. S. Dweck. The role of expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4):674--685, 1975.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. S. Dweck. Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10):1040--1048, 1986.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. S. Dweck. Self-Theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality and Development. Taylor & Francis, 1999.Google Scholar
- C. S. Dweck. Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In S. Ceci and W. Williams, editors, Why Aren't More Women in Science?: Top Researchers Debate the Evidence. American Psychological Association, 2007.Google Scholar
- C. S. Dweck, C. Chiu and Y. Hong. Implicit theories and their role in judgments and reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6(4), 267--285, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. S. Dweck and E. L. Leggett. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2):256--273, April 1988.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. S. Dweck and D. Reppucci. Learned helplessness and reinforcement responsibility in children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(1):109--116, 1973.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. S. Elliott and C. S. Dweck. Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1):5--12, 1988.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. M. Felder and L. K. Silverman. Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education. Engineering Education, 78:674--81, 1988.Google Scholar
- K. Garvin-Doxas and L. J. Barker. Communication in computer science classrooms: Understanding defensive climates as a means of creating supportive behaviors. Journal of Educational Resources in Computing, 4(1):2, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Gliem and R. Gliem. Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach's Alpha Reliability Coefficient for Likert-type scales. In 2003 Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing and Community Education, p. 82 -- 88, 2003. http://hdl.handle.net/1805/344 (last accessed April, 2008).Google Scholar
- H. Grant and C. S. Dweck. Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3):541--553, 2003.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. A. Heslin, D. Vandewalle and G. P. Latham. Keen to help? Managers' implicit person theories and their subsequent employee coaching. Personnel Psychology, 59(4):871--902, Winter 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. D. Heyman, B. Martyna and S. Bhatia. Gender and achievement-related beliefs among engineering students. Journal of Woman and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8:41--52, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. E. Higgins and W. S. Rholes. "Saying is Believing": Effects of message modification on memory and liking for the person described. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(4):363--78, 1978.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Holmes. Fixed vs. growth mindset diagram. http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2007/marapr/images/features/dweck/dweck_mindset.pdf (last accessed April, 2008).Google Scholar
- Y. Hong, C. Chiu, C. S. Dweck, D. M.-S. Lin and W. Wan. Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3):588--599, 1999.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Lepper and M. Woolverton. The wisdom of practice: Lessons learned from the study of highly effective tutors. In J. Aaronson, editor, Improving Academic Achievement: Impact of Psychological Factors on Education. Academic Press, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Lewandowski. Using process journals to gain qualitative understanding of beginning programmers. Journal of Computing in Small Colleges, 19(1):299--310, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Lewis. Attitudes and beliefs about computer science among students and faculty. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(2):37--41, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Margolis and A. Fisher. Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. MIT Press, 2002.Google Scholar
- R. McCartney, A. Eckerdal, J. E. Moström, K. Sanders and C. Zander. Successful students' strategies for getting unstuck. In Proceedings of the 12th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE'07), 39(3):156--160, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Murphy and L. Thomas. Dangers of a fixed mindset: Implications of self-theories research for computer science education. In the Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '08), ACM Press, June 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. N. Perkins, C. Hancock, R. Hobbs, F. Martin and R. Simmons. Conditions of learning in novice programmers. In E. Soloway and J. C. Spohrer, editors, Studying the Novice Programmer, p. 261--279. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986.Google Scholar
- S. Wiedenbeck. Factors affecting the success of non-majors in learning to program. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Computing Education Research (ICER '05), p. 13--24, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
Saying isn't necessarily believing: influencing self-theories in computing
Recommendations
Manipulating mindset to positively influence introductory programming performance
SIGCSE '10: Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science educationIntroductory programming classes are renowned for their high dropout rates. The authors propose that this is because students learn to adopt a fixed mindset towards programming. This paper reports on a study carried out with an introductory programming ...
Dangers of a fixed mindset: implications of self-theories research for computer science education
ITiCSE '08: Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science educationPsychology studies have shown that students' beliefs about their own intelligence--whether they view intelligence as fixed or malleable-have an important influence on student development and achievement. Yet the impact of these theories on success in ...
Promoting constructive mindsets for overcoming failure in computer science education
ICER '14: Proceedings of the tenth annual conference on International computing education researchEncountering failure while cultivating computational literacy is inevitable, as debugging is a normal and necessary part of any programmer's workflow. Unfortunately, internalization of this failure is one discouraging factor in many students' choice not ...
Comments