CAUSAL ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS OR FAILURE OF STUDENTS IN COLLEGE ALGEBRA

CORTEZ-SUAREZ, G. &SANDIFORD, J. R.

Scott Furtwengler

EPSY 7350

Overview

Theoretical Background/Literature Purpose Hypotheses Methods Key Results/Findings Conclusions/Implications/Limitations Questions References

Theoretical Background/Literature Attribution Theory

Roots in Social Psychology Provides cognitive methods to approach

academic achievement. Research suggests a relationship between

the way students explain the causes of their academic performance (attributional style) and academic achievement (House, 2003; Kivilu & Rogers, 1998; McMillan & Forsyth, 1981).

Theoretical Background/Literature Attribution Theory

The effort students put into their work is mediated by their attribution for success and failure (Weiner, 1979, 1986).

Theoretical Background/Literature Four Categories (Weiner,1974)

Ability Effort Difficulty of Task Chance/Luck

Theoretical Background/Literature Three Causal Dimensions (Weiner, 1985)

Locus – internal or external Stability – invariant or malleable Controllability – personally controllable or

externally controllable

Theoretical Background/Literature Successful vs. Unsuccessful Students

Successful – internal, stable, and controllable causes

Unsuccessful – internal, unstable, and controllable causes

Theoretical Background/Literature Attributional Style:

A cognitive personality variable that reflects the manner in which individuals explain the causes for the successes and failures in their lives (Peterson & Seligman, 1984).

One of the most successful predictors of academic achievement (Bar-Tal, 1978; Diener & Dweck, 1988; Fennema, 1976; Henry, Martinko, & Pierce, 1993; Kloosterman, 1984, 1988; Wolleat, Pedro, Becker, & Fennema, 1980).

Theoretical Background/Literature Attributional Style:

Attempts to change student attributions could aid in breaking the cycle of self-blame and, therefore, avoid further failure or poor performance (Wilson, Damiani, & Shelton, 2002).

Purpose

To examine the difference in the attributions passing and failing students give for their performance on a college algebra test.

Hypotheses

1. Students who pass a college algebra test will attribute their performance on the test to internal causes.

2. Students who pass a college algebra test will attribute their performance on the test to stable causes.

3. Students who pass a college algebra test will attribute their performance on the test to causes within their personal control.

4. Students who pass a college algebra test will attribute their performance on the test to causes that others do not control.

Methods

Design Experimental IV – self-report & measure of four

dimensions DV – performance on algebra test

Methods

Participants (%) Population: large community college Female (60) Hispanic (67.1), Black Non-Hispanic (20.4), White

Non-Hispanic (10.2), Other (1.3), Unknown (0.9) 18 (7.2), 19-20 (33.1), 21-24 (30.8), 25-30

(14.5), 31-35 (5.8) 36+ (8.6) English, 51.6; Spanish, 41.6; French/Creole, 4.6;

Other, 2.1 Sample: 410 respondents, college freshmen and

sophomores enrolled in an algebra course

Methods

Instrumentation Open-ended statements of causal

attributions Causal Dimension Scale II (CDSII) (McAuley,

Duncan, & Russell, 1992),12 bipolar items (3 of each of the 4 causal dimensions) on a Likert scale of 1-9

Methods

Procedures Self-report of grade on in-class test Described the cause of their performance Rated the cause on the CDSII using a 9-

point Likert scale Means were calculated for each dimension Participants were divided into the top &

bottom 30 % based on reported grade

Major Conclusion 1

The findings of this study support a significant difference between the attributions passing and failing students give for their performance on a college algebra test.

Major Conclusion 2

Students in the passing group attributed their performance in the direction of internality, stability, personal controllability, and external controllability.

Major Conclusion 3

Students in the failing group attributed their performance in the direction of externality, instability, other than personal controllability, and external controllability.

Major Conclusion 4

The findings of this study failed to support the hypothesis that passing students attribute their performance on the test to causes which others cannot control.

Major Conclusion 5

A statistically significant difference was found in the types of attribution statements made by students in the passing and failing groups in the categories of effort and task difficulty.

Major Conclusion 6

The open-ended statements given by students in the passing group reflected that effort and ability were the most frequently used attributions for their performance.

Major Conclusion 7

The open-ended statements given by students in the failing group reflected that effort, ability, and task difficulty were the most frequently used attributions for their performance.

Implications

Measuring the perception students have of their success or failure in college algebra could be used to support the development of additional strategies for success.

Assessing for attributions and attributional style could provide valuable information to students in high-risk courses.

Limitations

Students identified as successful by a passing grade on a test may not have perceived themselves as successful.

Personal controllability and external controllability dimensions could be more distinguishable.

Questions

How might class structure and social comparison affect students’ attributional styles?

Based on research, is there an advantage in perceiving the attribution category of “ability” as stable? As variant?

Reference

Cortés-Suárez, G. & Sandiford, J. R. (2008). Causal attributions for success or failure of students in college algebra. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 32, 325-346.