ABSTRACT
Psychology 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 Computer Science (CS) has not been directly investigated. Self-theories research has shown that students with a fixed mindset are more likely to exhibit a helpless response to substantial challenges and to experience decreases in self-esteem during college. Those with a growth mindset welcome challenges, displaying a mastery-oriented response, and maintaining self-esteem, primarily because they attribute failure to a lack of effort rather than a lack of intellectual ability. This paper introduces self-theories research, and relates this research to several issues in CS Education. We then make suggestions for how CS educators can consider self-theories in their teaching and research.
- Computing Curricula 2001. J. of Educational Resources in Computing, 1(3es):1, 2001.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. J. of Experimental Social Psyc., 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: Proc. of the 17th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, pages 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. 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. Self-Theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Taylor & Francis, 1999.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- K. Garvin-Doxas and L. J. Barker. Communication in computer science classrooms: understanding defensive climates as a means of creating supportive behaviors. J. of Educ. Resources in Computing, 4(1):2, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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
- L. E. Hitchner, J. Gersting, P. B. Henderson, P. Machanick, and Y. N. Patt. Programming early considered harmful. In Proceedings of the 32nd SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education, pages 402--403, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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
- P. Kinnunen, R. McCartney, L. Murphy, and L. Thomas. Through the eyes of instructors: a phenomenographic investigation of student success. In ICER ?07: Proceedings of the 2007 international workshop on Computing education research, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Margolis and A. Fisher. Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. MIT Press, 2002.Google Scholar
- C. McDowell, L. Werner, H. E. Bullock, and J. Fernald. Pair programming improves student retention, confidence, and program quality. Communications of the ACM, 49(8):90--95, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. M. Mueller and C. S. Dweck. Praise for intelligence can undermine children?s motivation and performance. J. of Personality and Social Psyc., 75(1):33--52, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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, pages 261--279. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986.Google Scholar
- R. W. Robins and J. L. Pals. Implicit Self-Theories in the Academic Domain: Implications for Goal Orientation, Attributions, Affect, and Self-Esteem Change. Self & Identity, 1(4):313--336, Oct 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. Vygotsky. Mind in Society: development of higher psychological processes. Harvard Univ. Press, 1978.Google Scholar
- S. Wiedenbeck. Factors affecting the success of non-majors in learning to program. In ICER ?05: Proceedings of the 2005 international workshop on Computing education research, pages 13--24, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Yorke and P. Knight. Self-theories: some implications for teaching and learning in higher education. Studies on Higher Ed., 29(1):25--37, 2004.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
Dangers of a fixed mindset: implications of self-theories research for computer science education
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 '08Psychology 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