Tag: Motivational

  • Personal Characteristics of the Entrepreneur

    Personal Characteristics of the Entrepreneur

    An entrepreneur is typically in control of a commercial undertaking, directing the factors of production – the human, financial and material resources that are required to exploit a business opportunity. They act as the manager and oversee the launch and growth of an enterprise. Entrepreneurship is the process by which an individual (or team) identifies a business opportunity and acquires and deploys the necessary resources required for its exploitation. The exploitation of entrepreneurial opportunities may include actions such as developing a business plan, hiring the human resources, acquiring financial and material resources, providing leadership, and being responsible for the venture’s success or failure.

    How did Michael Dell come up with the idea of a “build it yourself” computer company? How did Dave Roberts, the founder of Pop Cap Games, figure out that there is a large and growing market for “casual” electronic games?

    Researchers have identified several characteristics that tend to make some people better at recognizing opportunities than others. Before we talk about them, there is an important yet subtle difference between two key terms pertaining to this topic. We’ve already defined an opportunity as a favorable set of circumstances that create the need for a new product, service, or business. But, the term opportunity recognition refers to the process of perceiving the possibility of a profitable new business or a new product or service. That is, an opportunity cannot be pursued until it’s recognized. Now let’s look at some Personal or specific characteristics shared by those who excel at recognizing an opportunity.

    Prior Experience

    Several studies show that prior experience in an industry helps entrepreneurs recognize business opportunities. For example, evidence over time about the founders of firms appearing on the Inc. 500 list shows that well over 40 percent of those studied got the idea for their new businesses while working as employees for companies in the same industries. This finding is consistent with the findings of research studies the National Federation of Independent Businesses’ group has completed over time. There are several explanations for these findings. By working in an industry, an individual may spot a market niche that is under-served. It is also possible that while working in a particular area, an individual builds a network of social contacts in that industry that may provide insights that lead to opportunities.

    Once an entrepreneur starts a firm, new venture opportunities become apparent. This is called the corridor principle, which states that once an entrepreneur starts a firm, he or she begins a journey down a path where “corridors” leading to new venture opportunities become apparent. The insight provided by this principle is simply that once someone starts a firm and becomes immersed in an industry, it’s much easier for that person to see new opportunities in the industry than it is for someone looking in from the outside.

    Cognitive Factors

    Opportunity recognition may be an innate skill or a cognitive process. There are some who think that entrepreneurs have a “sixth sense” that allows them to see opportunities that others miss. This sixth sense is called entrepreneurial alertness, which is formally defined as the ability to notice things without engaging in the deliberate search. Most entrepreneurs see themselves in this light, believing they are more “alert” than others. Alertness is largely a learned skill, and people who have more knowledge of an area tend to be more alert to opportunities in that area than others? A computer engineer, for example, would be more alert to needs and opportunities within the computer industry than a lawyer would be.

    The research findings on entrepreneurial alertness are mixed. Some researchers conclude that alertness goes beyond noticing things and involves a more purposeful effort. For example, one scholar believes that the crucial difference between opportunity finders (i.e., Entrepreneurs) and non-finders is their relative assessments of the marketplace. In other words, entrepreneurs may be better than others at sizing up the marketplace and inferring the likely implications.

    Social Networks

    The extent and depth of an individual’s social network affects opportunity recognition. People who build a substantial network of social and professional contacts will be exposed to more opportunities and ideas than people with sparse networks. This exposure can lead to new business

    starts. Research results over time consistently suggest that somewhere between 40 percent and 50 percent of those who start businesses got their ideas through social contacts. In a related study, the differences between solo entrepreneurs (those who identified their business ideas on their own) and network entrepreneurs (those who identified their ideas through social contacts) were examined. The researchers found that network entrepreneurs identified significantly more opportunities than solo entrepreneurs but were less likely to describe themselves as being particularly alert or creative.

    An important concept that sheds light on the importance of social networks to opportunity recognition is the differential impact of strong-tie versus weak-tie relationships. Relationships with other people are called “ties.” We all have ties. Strong-tie relationships are characterized by frequent interaction and ties between coworkers, friends, and spouses. Weak-tie relationships are characterized by infrequent interaction and ties between casual acquaintances. According to research in this area, it is more likely that an entrepreneur will get a new business idea through a weak-tie than a strong-tie relationship because strong-tie relationships, which typically form between like-minded individuals, tend to reinforce insights and ideas the individuals already have. Weak-tie relationships, on the other hand, which form between casual acquaintances, are not as apt to be between like-minded individuals, so one person may say something to another that sparks a completely new idea. An example might be an electrician explaining to a restaurant owner how he solved a business problem. After hearing the solution, the restaurant owner might say, “I would never have heard that solution from someone in my company or industry. That insight is completely new to me and just might help me solve my problem.”

    Creativity

    Creativity is a phenomenon whereby something new and somehow valuable is formed. The created item may be intangible (such as an idea, a scientific theory, a musical composition, or a joke) or a physical object (such as an invention, a literary work, or a painting).

    Scholarly interest in creativity involves many definitions and concepts pertaining to a number of disciplines: engineering, psychology, cognitive science, education, philosophy (particularly philosophy of science), technology, theology, sociology, linguistics, business studies, songwriting, and economics, covering the relations between creativity and general intelligence, mental and neurological processes, personality type and creative ability, creativity and mental health; the potential for fostering creativity through education and training, especially as augmented by technology; the maximization of creativity for national economic benefit, and the application of creative resources to improve the effectiveness of teaching and learning.

    Creativity is the process of generating a novel or useful idea. Opportunity recognition may be, at least in part, a creative process. On an anecdotal basis, it is easy to see the creativity involved in forming many products, services, and businesses. Increasingly, teams of entrepreneurs working within a company are sources of creativity for their firm.

  • What are Effects of Goal Orientation on Student Achievement?

    What are Effects of Goal Orientation on Student Achievement?

    The extent to which students have a learning or performance goal orientation is associated with a variety of student behaviors and beliefs. These have been divided into cognitive strategies and engagement and motivational beliefs and actions.

    Cognitive Strategies and Engagement

    Learning goals foster cognitive engagement and effort (Meece, Blumenfeld, & Hoyle, 1988). Fifth- and sixth-grade science students who placed greater emphasis on learning goals also reported more active cognitive engagement. Students with performance goals (pleasing the teacher or seeking social recognition) had a lower level of cognitive engagement. Wolters, Yu, and Pintrich (1996) found that task value and interest were related to learning goals. The use of cognitive strategies and information processing is related to goal orientations of students at different levels of schooling. Learning that is potentially more meaningful or complex, requiring deep-level processing, appears to be the most vulnerable to the negative effects of performance goals (Graham & Golan, 1991). When the emphasis was on ability, as in the performance goal situation, there was interference with memory for tasks that required a great deal of cognitive effort. Performance goals also undermined the problem-solving strategies of children (Elliott & Dweck, 1988). In contrast, learning goals were the strongest predictor of seventh- and eighth-grade students’ cognitive strategy use (Wolters et al., 1996). These goals were also predictive of deep processing, persistence, effort, and exam performance of college students (Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999).

    Motivational Beliefs and Actions

    The particular goal orientation affects motivation beliefs such as the role of effort in learning, self-efficacy beliefs, the tendency to use self-handicapping strategies, help seeking, and helpless patterns.

    Self-Efficacy: A learning goal orientation was generally found to be associated with higher self-efficacy. Wolters et al. (1996) reported that seventh- and eighth-grade students who reported greater endorsement of a learning goal also tended to report higher levels of self-efficacy. Learning goals were also positively related to self-efficacy in the subjects of writing and science (Pajares, Britner, & Valiante, 2000). In contrast, performance goals were related to low self-efficacy (Pintrich, Zusho, Schiefele, & Pekrun, 2001).

    Self-Handicapping: Self-handicapping strategies, such as low effort, are associated with performance goals (Midgley & Urden, 2001). Elliott and Dweck (1988) found that children with performance goals were more likely to avoid challenge and exhibit low persistence. These strategies undermine student achievement. Another type of self-handicapping strategy associated with performance goals is cheating (Anderman, Griesinger, & Westerfield, 1998). The authors explained that, by cheating, not only do students protect themselves against perceptions of low ability, they improve their grades.

    Help Seeking: The particular goal orientation was also found to influence help-seeking behaviors (Butler & Neuman, 1995). Second- and sixth-grade students were more likely to seek help when the task was presented to them as an opportunity to develop competence. When tasks were presented to students as a measure of their ability, they were less likely to seek help. Students were more likely to seek help in classrooms with a learning goal focus and to avoid help seeking in a performance goal structure (Butler & Neuman, 1995; Ryan, Gheen, & Midgley, 1998).

    Helpless Patterns: Finally, one of the most debilitating effects of performance goals is the vulnerability to helpless patterns (Dweck, 1986). Goals that focus students on using performances to judge their ability can make them vulnerable to a helpless pattern in the face of failure (Dweck & Sorich, 1999; Heyman & Dweck, 1992; Midgley et al., 2001).

    In conclusion, performance goal beliefs are generally seen as the most maladaptive pattern as students are more extrinsically motivated, focused on outcome and not on learning (C. Ames, 1992), and focused on being superior to others (Nicholls, 1990). At the same time, there is continued agreement that the learning goal pattern is the more adaptive one, fostering long-term achievement that reflects intrinsic motivation (C. Ames, 1992; Heyman & Dweck, 1992; Kaplan & Middleton, 2002; Meece, 1991; Midgley et al., 2001). As Kaplan and Middleton asked, “Should childhood be a journey or a race?”

  • Learning Development and Exercise of Self-Efficacy Over the Lifespan!

    Learning Development and Exercise of Self-Efficacy Over the Lifespan!

    Different periods of life present certain types of competency demands for successful functioning. These normative changes in required competencies with age do not represent lock-step stages through which everyone must inevitably pass. There are many pathways through life and, at any given period, people vary substantially in how efficaciously they manage their lives. The sections that follow provide a brief analysis of the characteristic developmental changes in the nature and scope of perceived self-efficacy over the course of the lifespan.

    Origins of a Sense of Personal Agency

    The newborn comes without any sense of self. Infants exploratory experiences in which they see themselves produce effects by their actions provide the initial basis for developing a sense of efficacy. Shaking a rattle produces predictable sounds, energetic kicks shake their cribs, and screams bring adults. By repeatedly observing that environmental events occur with action, but not in its absence, infants learn that actions produce effects. Infants who experience success in controlling environmental events become more attentive to their own behavior and more competent in learning new efficacious responses, than are infants for whom the same environmental events occur regardless of how they behave.

    Development of a sense of personal efficacy requires more than simply producing effects by actions. Those actions must be perceived as part of oneself. The self becomes differentiated from others through dissimilar experience. If feeding oneself brings comfort, whereas seeing others feed themselves has no similar effect, one’s own activity becomes distinct from all other persons. As infants begin to mature those around them refer to them and treat them as distinct persons. Based on growing personal and social experiences they eventually form a symbolic representation of themselves as a distinct self.

    Familial Sources of Self-Efficacy

    Young children must gain self-knowledge of their capabilities in broadening areas of functioning. They have to develop, appraise and test their physical capabilities, their social competencies, their linguistic skills, and their cognitive skills for comprehending and managing the many situations they encounter daily. Development of sensorimotor capabilities greatly expands the infants’ exploratory environment and the means for acting upon it. These early exploratory and play activities, which occupy much of children’s waking hours, provide opportunities for enlarging their repertoire of basic skills and sense of efficacy.

    Successful experiences in the exercise of personal control are central to the early development of social and cognitive competence. Parents who are responsive to their infants’ behavior, and who create opportunities for efficacious actions by providing an enriched physical environment and permitting freedom of movement for exploration, have infants who are accelerated in their social and cognitive development. Parental responsiveness increases cognitive competence, and infants’ expanded capabilities elicit greater parental responsiveness in a two-way influence. Development of language provides children with the symbolic means to reflect on their experiences and what others tell them about their capabilities and, thus, to expand their self-knowledge of what they can and cannot do.

    The initial efficacy experiences are centered in the family. But as the growing child’s social world rapidly expands, peers become increasingly important in children’s developing self-knowledge of their capabilities. It is in the context of peer relations that social comparison comes strongly into play. At first, the closest comparative age-mates are siblings. Families differ in number of siblings, how far apart in age they are, and in their sex distribution. Different family structures, as reflected in family size, birth order, and sibling constellation patterns, create different social comparisons for judging one’s personal efficacy. Younger siblings find themselves in the unfavorable position of judging their capabilities in relation to older siblings who may be several years advanced in their development.

    Broadening of Self-Efficacy Through Peer Influences

    Children’s efficacy-testing experiences change substantially as they move increasingly into the larger community. It is in peer relationships that they broaden self-knowledge of their capabilities. Peers serve several important efficacy functions. Those who are most experienced and competent provide models of efficacious styles of thinking and behavior. A vast amount of social learning occurs among peers. In addition, age-mates provide highly informative comparisons for judging and verifying one’s self-efficacy. Children are, therefore, especially sensitive to their relative standing among the peers in activities that determine prestige and popularity.

    Peers are neither homogeneous nor selected indiscriminately. Children tend to choose peers who share similar interests and values. Selective peer association will promote self-efficacy in directions of mutual interest, leaving other potentialities underdeveloped. Because peers serve as a major influence in the development and validation of self-efficacy, disrupted or impoverished peer relationships can adversely affect the growth of personal efficacy. A low sense of social efficacy can, in turn, create internal obstacles to favorable peer relationships. Thus, children who regard themselves as socially inefficacious withdraw socially, perceive low acceptance by their peers and have a low sense of self-worth. There are some forms of behavior where a high sense of efficacy may be socially alienating rather than socially affiliating. For example, children who readily resort to aggression perceive themselves as highly efficacious in getting things they want by aggressive means.

    School as an Agency for Cultivating Cognitive Self-Efficacy

    During the crucial formative period of children’s lives, the school functions as the primary setting for the cultivation and social validation of cognitive competencies. School is the place where children develop the cognitive competencies and acquire the knowledge and problem-solving skills essential for participating effectively in the larger society. Here their knowledge and thinking skills are continually tested, evaluated, and socially compared. As children master cognitive skills, they develop a growing sense of their intellectual efficacy. Many social factors, apart from the formal instruction, such as peer modeling of cognitive skills, social comparison with the performances of other students, motivational enhancement through goals and positive incentives, and teachers interpretations of children’s successes and failures in ways that reflect favorably or unfavorably on their ability also affect children’s judgments of their intellectual efficacy.

    The task of creating learning environments conducive to development of cognitive skills rests heavily on the talents and self-efficacy of teachers. Those who are have a high sense of efficacy about their teaching capabilities can motivate their students and enhance their cognitive development. Teachers who have a low sense of instructional efficacy favor a custodial orientation that relies heavily on negative sanctions to get students to study.

    Teachers operate collectively within an interactive social system rather than as isolates. The belief systems of staffs create school cultures that can have vitalizing or demoralizing effects on how well schools function as a social system. Schools in which the staff collectively judge themselves as powerless to get students to achieve academic success convey a group sense of academic futility that can pervade the entire life of the school. Schools in which staff members collectively judge themselves capable of promoting academic success imbue their schools with a positive atmosphere for development that promotes academic attainments regardless of whether they serve predominantly advantaged or disadvantaged students.

    Students’ belief in their capabilities to master academic activities affects their aspirations, their level of interest in academic activities, and their academic accomplishments. There are a number of school practices that, for the less talented or ill prepared, tend to convert instructional experiences into education in inefficacy. These include lock-step sequences of instruction, which lose many children along the way; ability groupings which further diminish the perceived self-efficacy of those cast in the lower ranks; and competitive practices where many are doomed to failure for the success of a relative few.

    Classroom structures affect the development of intellectual self-efficacy, in large part, by the relative emphasis they place on social comparison versus self-comparison appraisal. Self- appraisals of less able students suffer most when the whole group studies the same material and teachers make frequent comparative evaluations. Under such a monolithic structure students rank themselves according to capability with high consensus. Once established, reputations are not easily changed. In a personalized classroom structure, individualized instruction tailored to students’ knowledge and skills enables all of them to expand their competencies and provides less basis for demoralizing social comparison. As a result, students are more likely to compare their rate of progress to their personal standards than to the performance of others. Self-comparison of improvement in a personalized classroom structure raises perceived capability. Cooperative learning structures, in which students work together and help one another also tend to promote more positive self-evaluations of capability and higher academic attainments than do individualistic or competitive ones.

    Growth of Self-Efficacy Through Transitional Experiences of Adolescence

    Each period of development brings with it new challenges for coping efficacy. As adolescents approach the demands of adulthood, they must learn to assume full responsibility for themselves in almost every dimension of life. This requires mastering many new skills and the ways of adult society. Learning how to deal with pubertal changes, emotionally invested partnerships and sexuality becomes a matter of considerable importance. The task of choosing what lifework to pursue also looms large during this period. These are but a few of the areas in which new competencies and self-beliefs of efficacy have to be developed.

    With growing independence during adolescence some experimentation with risky behavior is not all that uncommon. Adolescents expand and strengthen their sense of efficacy by learning how to deal successfully with potentially troublesome matters in which they are unpracticed as well as with advantageous life events. Insulation from problematic situations leaves one ill-prepared to cope with potential difficulties. Whether adolescents foresake risky activities or become chronically enmeshed in them is determined by the interplay of personal competencies, self- management efficacy and the prevailing influences in their lives.

    Impoverished hazardous environments present especially harsh realities with minimal resources and social supports for culturally-valued pursuits, but extensive modeling, incentives and social supports for transgressive styles of behavior. Such environments severely tax the coping efficacy of youth enmeshed in them to make it through adolescence in ways that do not irreversibly foreclose many beneficial life paths.

    Adolescence has often been characterized as a period of psychosocial turmoil. While no period of life is ever free of problems, contrary to the stereotype of “storm and stress,” most adolescents negotiate the important transitions of this period without undue disturbance or discord. However, youngsters who enter adolescence beset by a disabling sense of inefficacy transport their vulnerability to distress and debility to the new environmental demands. The ease with which the transition from childhood to the demands of adulthood is made similarly depends on the strength of personal efficacy built up through prior mastery experiences.

    Self-Efficacy Concerns of Adulthood

    Young adulthood is a period when people have to learn to cope with many new demands arising from lasting partnerships, marital relationships, parenthood, and occupational careers. As in earlier mastery tasks, a firm sense of self-efficacy is an important contributor to the attainment of further competencies and success. Those who enter adulthood poorly equipped with skills and plagued by self-doubts find many aspects of their adult life stressful and depressing.

    Beginning a productive vocational career poses a major transitional challenge in early adulthood. There are a number of ways in which self-efficacy beliefs contribute to career development and success in vocational pursuits. In preparatory phases, people’s perceived self-efficacy partly determines how well they develop the basic cognitive, self-management and interpersonal skills on which occupational careers are founded. As noted earlier, beliefs concerning one’s capabilities are influential determinants of the vocational life paths that are chosen.

    It is one thing to get started in an occupational pursuit, it is another thing to do well and advance in it. Psychosocial skills contribute more heavily to career success than do occupational technical skills. Development of coping capabilities and skills in managing one’s motivation, emotional states and thought processes increases perceived self-regulatory efficacy. The higher the sense of self-regulatory efficacy the better the occupational functioning. Rapid technological changes in the modern workplace are placing an increasing premium on higher problem-solving skills and resilient self-efficacy to cope effectively with job displacements and restructuring of vocational activities.

    The transition to parenthood suddenly thrusts young adults into the expanded role of both parent and spouse. They now not only have to deal with the ever-changing challenges of raising children but to manage interdependent relationships within a family system and social links to many extrafamilial social systems including educational, recreational, medical, and caregiving facilities. Parents who are secure in their parenting efficacy shepherd their children adequately through the various phases of development without serious problems or severe strain on the marital relationship. But it can be a trying period for those who lack a sense of efficacy to manage the expanded familial demands. They are highly vulnerable to stress and depression.

    Increasing numbers of mothers are joining the work force either by economic necessity or personal preference. Combining family and career has now become the normative pattern. This requires management of the demands of both familial and occupational roles. Because of the cultural lag between societal practices and the changing status of women, they continue to bear the major share of the homemaking responsibility. Women who have a strong sense of efficacy to manage the multiple demands of family and work and to enlist their husbands’ aid with childcare experience a positive sense of well-being. But those who are beset by self-doubts in their ability to combine the dual roles suffer physical and emotional strain.

    By the middle years, people settle into established routines that stabilize their sense of personal efficacy in the major areas of functioning. However, the stability is a shaky one because life does not remain static. Rapid technological and social changes constantly require adaptations calling for self-reappraisals of capabilities. In their occupations, the middle-aged find themselves pressured by younger challengers. Situations in which people must compete for promotions, status, and even work itself, force constant self-appraisals of capabilities by means of social comparison with younger competitors.

    Reappraisals of Self-Efficacy With Advancing Age

    The self-efficacy issues of the elderly center on reappraisals and mis-appraisals of their capabilities. Biological conceptions of aging focus extensively on declining abilities. Many physical capacities do decrease as people grow older, thus, requiring reappraisals of self-efficacy for activities in which the biological functions have been significantly affected. However, gains in knowledge, skills, and expertise compensate some loss in physical reserve capacity. When the elderly is taught to use their intellectual capabilities, their improvement in cognitive functioning more than offsets the average decrement in performance over two decades. Because people rarely exploit their full potential, elderly persons who invest the necessary effort can function at the higher levels of younger adults. By affecting level of involvement in activities, perceived self- efficacy can contribute to the maintenance of social, physical and intellectual functioning over the adult life span.

    Older people tend to judge changes in their intellectual capabilities largely in terms of their memory performance. Lapses and difficulties in memory that young adults dismiss are inclined to be interpreted by older adults as indicators of declining cognitive capabilities. Those who regard memory as a biologically shrinking capacity with aging have low faith in their memory capabilities and enlist little effort to remember things. Older adults who have a stronger sense of memory efficacy exert greater cognitive effort to aid their recall and, as a result, achieve better memory.

    Much variability exists across behavioral domains and educational and socioeconomic levels, and there is no uniform decline in beliefs in personal efficacy in old age. The persons against whom the elderly compare themselves contribute much to the variability in perceived self-efficacy. Those who measure their capabilities against people their age are less likely to view themselves as declining in capabilities than if younger cohorts are used in comparative self-appraisal. Perceived cognitive inefficacy is accompanied by lowered intellectual performances. A declining sense of self-efficacy, which often may stem more from disuse and negative cultural expectations than from biological aging, can thus set in motion self-perpetuating processes that result in declining cognitive and behavioral functioning. People who are beset with uncertainties about their personal efficacy not only curtail the range of their activities but undermine their efforts in those they undertake. The result is a progressive loss of interest and skill.

    Major life changes in later years are brought about by retirement, relocation, and loss of friends or spouses. Such changes place demands on interpersonal skills to cultivate new social relationships that can contribute to positive functioning and personal well-being. Perceived social inefficacy increases older person’s vulnerability to stress and depression both directly and indirectly by impeding development of social supports which serve as a buffer against life stressors.

    The roles into which older adults are cast impose sociocultural constraints on the cultivation and maintenance of perceived self-efficacy. As people move to older-age phases most suffer losses of resources, productive roles, access to opportunities and challenging activities. Monotonous environments that require little thought or independent judgment diminish the quality of functioning, intellectually challenging ones enhance it. Some of the declines in functioning with age result from sociocultural dispossession of the environmental support for it. It requires a strong sense of personal efficacy to reshape and maintain a productive life in cultures that cast their elderly in powerless roles devoid of purpose. In societies that emphasize the potential for self-development throughout the lifespan, rather than psychophysical decline with aging, the elderly tend to lead productive and purposeful lives.

  • What is Efficacy of Activated Processes?

    What is Efficacy of Activated Processes?

    Much research has been conducted on the four major psychological processes through which self-beliefs of efficacy affect human functioning.

    Cognitive Processes

    The effects of self-efficacy beliefs on cognitive processes take a variety of forms. Much human behavior, being purposive, is regulated by forethought embodying valued goals. Personal goal setting is influenced by self-appraisal of capabilities. The stronger the perceived self-efficacy, the higher the goal challenges people set for themselves and the firmer is their commitment to them.

    Most courses of action are initially organized in thought. People’s beliefs in their efficacy shape the types of anticipatory scenarios they construct and rehearse. Those who have a high sense of efficacy, visualize success scenarios that provide positive guides and supports for performance. Those who doubt their efficacy, visualize failure scenarios and dwell on the many things that can go wrong. It is difficult to achieve much while fighting self-doubt. A major function of thought is to enable people to predict events and to develop ways to control those that affect their lives. Such skills require effective cognitive processing of information that contains many ambiguities and uncertainties. In learning predictive and regulative rules people must draw on their knowledge to construct options, to weight and integrate predictive factors, to test and revise their judgments against the immediate and distal results of their actions, and to remember which factors they had tested and how well they had worked.

    It requires a strong sense of efficacy to remain task oriented in the face of pressing situational demands, failures and setbacks that have significant repercussions. Indeed, when people are faced with the tasks of managing difficult environmental demands under taxing circumstances, those who are beset by self-doubts about their efficacy become more and more erratic in their analytic thinking, lower their aspirations and the quality of their performance deteriorates. In contrast, those who maintain a resilient sense of efficacy set themselves challenging goals and use good analytic thinking which pays off in performance accomplishments.

    Motivational Processes

    Self-beliefs of efficacy play a key role in the self-regulation of motivation. Most human motivation is cognitively generated. People motivate themselves and guide their actions anticipatorily by the exercise of forethought. They form beliefs about what they can do. They anticipate likely outcomes of prospective actions. They set goals for themselves and plan courses of action designed to realize valued futures.

    There are three different forms of cognitive motivators around which different theories have been built. They include causal attributions, outcome expectancies, and cognized goals. The corresponding theories are attribution theory, expectancy-value theory and goal theory, respectively. Self-efficacy beliefs operate in each of these types of cognitive motivation. Self-efficacy beliefs influence causal attributions. People who regard themselves as highly efficacious attribute their failures to insufficient effort, those who regard themselves as inefficacious attribute their failures to low ability. Causal attributions affect motivation, performance and affective reactions mainly through beliefs of self-efficacy.

    In expectancy-value theory, motivation is regulated by the expectation that a given course of behavior will produce certain outcomes and the value of those outcomes. But people act on their beliefs about what they can do, as well as on their beliefs about the likely outcomes of performance. The motivating influence of outcome expectancies is thus partly governed by self-beliefs of efficacy. There are countless attractive options people do not pursue because they judge they lack the capabilities for them. The predictiveness of expectancy-value theory is enhanced by including the influence of perceived self- efficacy.

    The capacity to exercise self-influence by goal challenges and evaluative reaction to one’s own attainments provides a major cognitive mechanism of motivation. A large body of evidence shows that explicit, challenging goals enhance and sustain motivation. Goals operate largely through self-influence processes rather than regulate motivation and action directly. Motivation based on goal setting involves a cognitive comparison process. By making self-satisfaction conditional on matching adopted goals, people give direction to their behavior and create incentives to persist in their efforts until they fulfill their goals. They seek self-satisfaction from fulfilling valued goals and are prompted to intensify their efforts by discontent with substandard performances.

    Motivation based on goals or personal standards is governed by three types of self-influences. They include self-satisfying and self-dissatisfying reactions to one’s performance, perceived self-efficacy for goal attainment, and readjustment of personal goals based on one’s progress. Self-efficacy beliefs contribute to motivation in several ways: They determine the goals people set for themselves; how much effort they expend; how long they persevere in the face of difficulties; and their resilience to failures. When faced with obstacles and failures people who harbor self-doubts about their capabilities slacken their efforts or give up quickly. Those who have a strong belief in their capabilities exert greater effort when they fail to master the challenge. Strong perseverance contributes to performance accomplishments.

    Affective Processes

    People’s beliefs in their coping capabilities affect how much stress and depression they experience in threatening or difficult situations, as well as their level of motivation. Perceived self-efficacy to exercise control over stressors plays a central role in anxiety arousal. People who believe they can exercise control over threats do not conjure up disturbing thought patterns. But those who believe they cannot manage threats experience high anxiety arousal. They dwell on their coping deficiencies. They view many aspects of their environment as fraught with danger. They magnify the severity of possible threats and worry about things that rarely happen. Through such inefficacious thinking they distress themselves and impair their level of functioning. Perceived coping self-efficacy regulates avoidance behavior as well as anxiety arousal. The stronger the sense of self-efficacy the bolder people are in taking on taxing and threatening activities.

    Anxiety arousal is affected not only by perceived coping efficacy but by perceived efficacy to control disturbing thoughts. The exercise of control over one’s own consciousness is summed up well in the proverb: “You cannot prevent the birds of worry and care from flying over your head. But you can stop them from building a nest in your head.” Perceived self-efficacy to control thought processes is a key factor in regulating thought produced stress and depression. It is not the sheer frequency of disturbing thoughts but the perceived inability to turn them off that is the major source of distress. Both perceived coping self-efficacy and thought control efficacy operate jointly to reduce anxiety and avoidant behavior.

    Social cognitive theory prescribes mastery experiences as the principal means of personality change. Guided mastery is a powerful vehicle for instilling a robust sense of coping efficacy in people whose functioning is seriously impaired by intense apprehension and phobic self-protective reactions. Mastery experiences are structured in ways to build coping skills and instill beliefs that one can exercise control over potential threats. Intractable phobics, of course, are not about to do what they dread. One must, therefore, create an environment so that incapacitated phobics can perform successfully despite themselves. This is achieved by enlisting a variety of performance mastery aids. Feared activities are first modeled to show people how to cope with threats and to disconfirm their worst fears. Coping tasks are broken down into subtasks of easily mastered steps. Performing feared activities together with the therapist further enables phobics to do things they would resist doing by themselves. Another way of overcoming resistance is to use graduated time. Phobics will refuse threatening tasks if they will have to endure stress for a long time. But they will risk them for a short period. As their coping efficacy increases the time they perform the activity is extended. Protective aids and dosing the severity of threats also help to restore and develop a sense of coping efficacy.

    After functioning is fully restored, the mastery aids are withdrawn to verify that coping successes stem from personal efficacy rather than from mastery aids. Self-directed mastery experiences, designed to provide varied confirmatory tests of coping capabilities, are then arranged to strengthen and generalize the sense of coping efficacy. Once people develop a resilient sense of efficacy they can withstand difficulties and adversities without adverse effects.

    Guided mastery treatment achieves widespread psychological changes in a relatively short time. It eliminates phobic behavior and anxiety and biological stress reactions, creates positive attitudes and eradicates phobic ruminations and nightmares. Evidence that achievement of coping efficacy profoundly affects dream activity is a particularly striking generalized impact.

    A low sense of efficacy to exercise control produces depression as well as anxiety. It does so in several different ways. One route to depression is through unfulfilled aspiration. People who impose on themselves standards of self-worth they judge they cannot attain drive themselves to bouts of depression. A second efficacy route to depression is through a low sense of social efficacy. People who judge themselves to be socially efficacious seek out and cultivate social relationships that provide models on how to manage difficult situations, cushion the adverse effects of chronic stressors and bring satisfaction to people’s lives. Perceived social inefficacy to develop satisfying and supportive relationships increases vulnerability to depression through social isolation. Much human depression is cognitively generated by dejecting ruminative thought. A low sense of efficacy to exercise control over ruminative thought also contributes to the occurrence, duration and recurrence of depressive episodes.

    Other efficacy-activated processes in the affective domain concern the impact of perceived coping self-efficacy on biological systems that affect health functioning. Stress has been implicated as an important contributing factor to many physical dysfunctions. Controllability appears to be a key organizing principle regarding the nature of these stress effects. It is not stressful life conditions per se, but the perceived inability to manage them that is debilitating. Thus, exposure to stressors with ability to control them has no adverse biological effects. But exposure to the same stressors without the ability to control them impairs the immune system. The impairment of immune function increases susceptibility to infection, contributes to the development of physical disorders and accelerates the progression of disease.

    Biological systems are highly interdependent. A weak sense of efficacy to exercise control over stressors activates autonomic reactions, catecholamine secretion and release of endogenous opioids. These biological systems are involved in the regulation of the immune system. Stress activated in the process of acquiring coping capabilities may have different effects than stress experienced in aversive situations with no prospect in sight of ever gaining any self-protective efficacy. There are substantial evolutionary benefits to experiencing enhanced immune function during development of coping capabilities vital for effective adaptation. It would not be evolutionarily advantageous if acute stressors invariably impaired immune function, because of their prevalence in everyday life. If this were the case, people would experience high vulnerability to infective agents that would quickly do them in. There is some evidence that providing people with effective means for managing stressors may have a positive effect on immune function. Moreover, stress aroused while gaining coping mastery over stressors can enhance different components of the immune system.

    There are other ways in which perceived self-efficacy serves to promote health. Lifestyle habits can enhance or impair health. This enables people to exert behavioral influence over their vitality and quality of health. Perceived self-efficacy affects every phase of personal change–whether people even consider changing their health habits; whether they enlist the motivation and perseverance needed to succeed should they choose to do so; and how well they maintain the habit changes they have achieved. The stronger the perceived self-regulatory efficacy the more successful people are in reducing health-impairing habits and adopting and integrating health-promoting habits into their regular lifestyle. Comprehensive community programs designed to prevent cardiovascular disease by altering risk-related habits reduce the rate of morbidity and mortality.

    Selection Processes

    The discussion so far has centered on efficacy-activated processes that enable people to create beneficial environments and to exercise some control over those they encounter day in and day out. People are partly the product of their environment. Therefore, beliefs of personal efficacy can shape the course lives take by influencing they types of activities and environments people choose. People avoid activities and situations they believe exceed their coping capabilities. But they readily undertake challenging activities and select situations they judge themselves capable of handling. By the choices they make, people cultivate different competencies, interests and social networks that determine life courses. Any factor that influences choice behavior can profoundly affect the direction of personal development. This is because the social influences operating in selected environments continue to promote certain competencies, values, and interests long after the efficacy decisional determinant has rendered its inaugurating effect.

    Career choice and development is but one example of the power of self-efficacy beliefs to affect the course of life paths through choice-related processes. The higher the level of people’s perceived self-efficacy the wider the range of career options they seriously consider, the greater their interest in them, and the better they prepare themselves educationally for the occupational pursuits they choose and the greater is their success. Occupations structure a good part of people’s lives and provide them with a major source of personal growth.

  • Help Seeking

    What do you understand by Help Seeking?

    Help seeking theory postulates that people follow a series of predictable steps to seek help for their inadequacies, it is a series of well-ordered and purposeful cognitive and behavioral steps, each leading to specific types of solutions.

    Help seeking theory falls into two categories where some consider similarity in the process’ (e.g. Cepeda-Benito & Short, 1998) while others consider it as dependent upon the problem (e.g. Di Fabio & Bernaud, 2008). In general help seeking behaviors are dependent upon three categories, attitudes (beliefs and willingness) towards help-seeking, intention to seek help, and actual help-seeking behavior.

    Helped A Dog Named Cheeseburger

    Do you ask for help when you need it or do you have the view, “I have to do it myself, no one can do it except me?” From a motivational perspective, help seeking is an adaptive cognitive strategy that indicates a striving for mastery and achievement (R. Ames, 1983; Karabenick, 1998; Newman, 1998) and a general problem-solving strategy (Nelson-Le Gall, 1985). If help seeking is an adaptive strategy, why do teachers observe that students

    who are most in need of help are often the most reluctant to seek help? We have learned from research that seeking help from others can have negative connotations (Newman, 1990, 1991).

    Help Seeking 00

    Help seeking may be seen as threatening if the student thinks it is a sign of low ability. In this case, there is a personal cost to seeking help: Students may feel incompetent. Help seeking is positive when students seek assistance in order to make a change in their learning. The attributional process is an important factor in whether help seeking is seen as positive or negative and consequently whether students attend academic help sessions. R. Ames and Lau (1982) identified factors that affected the extent that college students attend help sessions:

    • Low-performing students were more likely to attend help sessions if they were given specific positive information about the effects of the sessions (e.g., “students who attended improved their performance”).
    • Students who attributed success to effort were more likely to attend.
    • Students who did not seek help used more external attributions for failure, such as “tricky test questions,” and used these external reasons as excuses.

    Newman’s (1990, 1991) investigations of help seeking among children in Grades 3, 5, and 7 provided a fuller understanding of help seeking. For example, who seeks help, individuals with high or low self-esteem? For all grades, the higher the perceived competence of the children, the less they felt there were personal costs to help seeking (e.g., being thought of as low ability). Students with low self-esteem were especially unlikely to seek help, whereas those with high self-esteem were more likely to seek help. Similar results were obtained by Nelson-Le Gall and Jones (1990) for average-achieving African-American children. Newman (1991) also found differences between younger and older students in views about help seeking. Seventh graders were more aware than younger children that negative fallout might result from help seeking (e.g., embarrassment). However, older children were also more likely than younger ones to believe that smart classmates rather than “dumb” ones ask questions of the teacher. Help seeking by college students showed a pattern similar to that of children. Karabenick and Knapp (1991) found that students with low self-esteem were more threatened by seeking help.

    Help Seeking 01

    One important and perhaps surprising finding was that students who use more learning strategies are more likely to seek help when needed, whereas students who use fewer strategies are less likely to seek help when needed. This attitude presents a double bind for those needing help. Not only do they lack the necessary strategies for success, but they do not seek the needed study assistance. The authors concluded that students need to learn to judge when they need help and that help seeking should be included in learning strategy and motivation programs. These findings on help seeking are important for teachers and counselors so that they can plan ways to get students to attend help sessions or seek help in counseling when needed. Nelson-Le Gall (1985) emphasized the need to think of help seeking as an adaptive coping strategy rather than as a self-threatening activity. Some ways to accomplish this are listed in Strategy.

    Types of Help Seeking

    Help seeking behavior is divided into two types, adaptive behavior and non-adaptive behavior. It is adaptive when exercised to overcome a difficulty and it depends upon the person’s recognition, insight and dimension of the problem and resources for solving the same, this is valued as an active strategy. It is non-adaptive when the behavior persists even after understanding and experiencing the problem solving mechanism and when used for avoidance. Dynamic barriers in seeking help can also affect active process (e.g.: culture, ego, classism, etc.). Nelson-Le Gall (1981) distinguished between instrumental help-seeking, which she regarded as being essential for learning, and passive dependency.

    Strategy of Help Seeking

    • The overriding task is to have students view help seeking, when needed, as a smart move instead of a dumb one.
    • Establish a classroom climate where students are encouraged to ask questions.
    • Document attendance and improved performance as a result of the help sessions and show this to students.
    • Be sure students who have improved after attending help sessions attribute the improvement to the help sessions.
    • Teach students a self-talk script to practice asking teachers for help in classes where they were having problems, as one middle school teacher did.

  • Helpless

    What is a meaning of Helpless?

    Meaning of helpless: “Unable to defend oneself or to act without help.” A student who has a history of failure and does not expect this to change will attribute failure to ability an internal and stable factor. This pattern is characteristic of students classified as having learned helplessness. These individuals expect that their actions will be futile in affecting future outcomes. Consequently, they give up. Learned helplessness was first investigated in young animals who had been presented with inescapable electric shocks in one situation; when placed in a different situation, they failed to try to escape or avoid the shock (Seligman & Maier, 1967). Animals that demonstrated no connection between their activity and avoiding the shock had learned to be helpless. It was further hypothesized that humans responded the same way: they were passive in situations where they believed their actions would have no effect on what happens to them. In this original explanation, helplessness was viewed as global affecting all domains of one’s life. Later research found that people may experience helplessness in one situation and not in others (Alloy, Abramson, Peterson, & Seligman, 1984). This means that a student may feel helpless in learning math but not in learning history.

    Helplessness exists in achievement situations when students do not see a connection between their actions and their performance and grades. The important aspect of learned helplessness is how it affects the motivational behavior of students in the face of failure. The attributions a student makes for failure act as a bridge between a student’s willingness to try again and the student’s tendency to give up.

    Helpless and Mastery Orientation

    Helpless 02

    In a now-classic study, Diener and Dweck (1978) identified two patterns of responses to failure following success in problem-solving tasks: a maladaptive-helpless orientation and an adaptive-mastery orientation. Children showed different response patterns to failure in their thinking, self-talk, affect, and actions. Keep in mind that the students in the study had the same failure experience while performing the tasks, but there were two different patterns of response to the failure outcome. The thinking, self-talk, and actions of the helpless-oriented children formed a self-defeating pattern. When failure is attributed to lack of ability, there is a decline in performance. Attribution to lack of effort does not show this decline (Dweck & Goetz, 1978).

    Are there ability differences in learned helplessness? Butkowsky and Willows (1980) compared good, average, and poor readers. They found that poor readers had lower expectancies of success on a reading task. Poor readers overwhelmingly attributed their failures to lack of ability (68% compared with 13% for average readers and 12% for good readers). They took less responsibility for success, attributing success more to task ease an external cause than did the good and average readers. In the face of difficulty, poor readers became less persistent a self-defeating behavior. Helplessness was also found when children studied new material that required them to read passages with confusing concepts.

    In a study by Licht and Dweck (1984), half the children received material with a clear passage, and the other half received a confusing passage. There were no differences between mastery orientation and helpless orientation when the passage was clearly written. In contrast, when the passage was not clear, most of the mastery children reached the learning criterion, whereas only one third of the helpless children did. This investigation is important because some academic subjects, like math, are characterized by constant new learning, which may be initially confusing to students. Mastery students will not be discouraged by the initial difficulty, whereas helpless students immediately lose confidence although they may be equally competent. When teaching new material, teachers can be especially alert for this pattern of helplessness in the face of initial difficulty.

    Learned Helplessness and Students with Learning Disabilities

    Helpless 01

    Are some students more prone to experience a sense of helplessness? Students particularly susceptible to the pattern of learned helplessness are those students who are identified as having learning disabilities (LD) (Licht, 1983). Children with LD experience much failure over a long period of time on a variety of school tasks. As a result, these children come to doubt their academic abilities, with the accompanying belief that nothing they can do will help them be successful. This is followed by the self-defeating response of decreasing effort. Children with LD have been found to exhibit the following characteristics of the learned helplessness pattern (Licht, 1983):

    • Score lower than non-LD children on measures of self-esteem and perceptions of ability,
    • Are more likely to attribute difficulty with tasks to lack of ability,
    • Are less likely to attribute failure to insufficient effort, and
    • Lower their expectations for future success and display greater decline in expectation following failure.

    It is important for teachers to be aware of the characteristics of helplessness because learned helplessness may explain the students’ apparent lack of motivation. How can a teacher identify a helpless pattern? What can a teacher do to lessen the likelihood of helplessness and help students who have this tendency? Butkowsky and Willows (1980) suggested that educators must begin to rethink failure as a necessary component of the learning process and not as a damaging experience to be avoided.

    Does the pattern of learned helplessness show up in young children? Dweck and Sorich (1999) concluded that there is clear evidence of a helplessness pattern in children younger than age 8. After experiencing failure or criticism, they show signs of helplessness like self-blame, lowered persistence, and lack of constructive strategies. Mastery-oriented children, in contrast, assumed they were still good even when their work had errors, and believed they could improve through effort. An important implication for parents and teachers, according to the authors, is to be very cautious when giving feedback to children. Extremely positive or negative feedback can be detrimental to children’s beliefs about their competence.

  • Attribution and Motivation Among Ethnicity

    Understanding of Attribution and Motivation Among Ethnicity?

    What is Ethnicity? Meaning of Ethnicity “The fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition.” Some about of Ethnic; Relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition. Relating to national and cultural origins. Denoting origin by birth or descent rather than by present nationality. Characteristic of or belonging to a non-Western cultural tradition.

    An ethnic group or ethnicity is a category of people who identify with each other based on similarities, such as common ancestral, language, social, cultural or national experiences. Unlike other social groups (wealth, age, hobbies), ethnicity is often an inherited status based on the society in which one lives. In some cases, it can be adopted if a person moves into another society. Membership of an ethnic group tends to be defined by a shared cultural heritage, ancestry, origin myth, history, homeland, language or dialect, symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, art, and physical appearance.

    Ethnic groups, derived from the same historical founder population, often continue to speak related languages and share a similar gene pool. By way of language shift, acculturation, adoption and religious conversion, it is sometimes possible for individuals or groups to leave one ethnic group and become part of another (except for ethnic groups emphasizing racial purity as a key membership criterion).

    Ethnicity is often used synonymously with ambiguous terms such as nation or people. In English, it can also have the connotation of something exotic (cf. “White ethnic”, “ethnic restaurant”, etc.), generally related to cultures of more recent immigrants, who arrived after the founding population of an area was established.

    Now reading – Attribution and Motivation Among Ethnicity; Do attributional explanations for success and failure act as an important motivational force in different ethnic groups? According to Graham (1989,1994), because attributional theory considers the role of thought in determining behavior, it is particularly fruitful in examining motivation in different cultures and ethnic groups.

    Beliefs About Effort and Ability

    Are attributional belief patterns similar among different ethnic groups? A comparison of poor African-American, Hispanic, Indo-Chinese, and White fifth- and sixth-grade students found similar attribution patterns for all groups (Bempechat, Nakkula, Wu, & Ginsberg, 1996). All groups rated ability as the most important factor for success in math. In a subsequent study comparing African-American, Hispanic, Indo-Chinese, and White fifthand sixth-graders, Bempechat, Graham, and Jimenez (1999) found cultural similarities as well as cultural specifics. For all ethnic groups, failure was attributed to lack of ability and success to external factors. In contrast, Indo-Chinese students had stronger beliefs that failure was due to lack of effort. Attribution for failure due to lack of ability is a problem for all students because it is believed to be uncontrollable.

    Graham (1984) compared middle- and low-SES African-American and White students on attributions for failure following a problem-solving task. The middle-class children in both ethnic groups were more likely to attribute failure to lack of effort and maintained consistently higher expectancies for success after experiencing failure. For both groups, this is indicative of an adaptive attributional pattern following failure, similar to that found in research by Diener and Dweck (1978). The findings of this research are important because they demonstrate the positive motivation pattern of African-American students—a pattern that has received little attention.

    Stevenson and Lee (1990) compared beliefs of American and Asian students concerning the role of effort and ability for success in mathematics. They asked mothers in Minnesota, Japan, and Taiwan to assign 10 points among ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck to rank their importance in academic success and school performance. All the mothers assigned the points in the same rank order: (1) effort, (2) ability, (3) task, and (4) luck. American mothers scored ability and effort as about equal. In contrast, Taiwanese and Japanese mothers assigned effort a higher value than ability. Peak (1993) noted that, in Japanese elementary schools, ability is rarely mentioned, whereas effort is consistently portrayed as key to success. In contrast, in the United States, students who try very hard are often labeled nerd or grind.

    These perceptions of effort and ability take on increased importance when homework is considered in the context of effort. Japanese and Chinese students spend at least twice the amount of time and effort on homework than do American students (Stevenson & Lee, 1990). American teachers assign less and consider it less valuable. Peak (1993) pointed out that homework reflects teachers’ beliefs on whether extra practice makes a difference and whether students are willing to engage in extra effort on behalf of their studies. American parents do not appear to consider good study habits as critical to academic success as do Asian parents.

    Implications for Teachers

    What can teachers draw from the attributional beliefs among different ethnic groups in terms of classroom practice? The important issue is to understand the motivational processes, such as attribution, operating within a particular ethnic group (Bempechat et al., 1996; Graham, 1994). When similarities are found across ethnic groups, educational interventions do not necessarily have to be targeted to children differentially based on their ethnic group membership.

    Graham (1989) emphasized the importance of teacher feedback in influencing concepts of ability and expectations of minority, low-SES students. Recall the previous discussion of indirect attributional cues. It is important to be aware of feedback that may indirectly convey to students that they have low ability. Graham (1994) suggested that in view of the number of African- American children in negative educational situations, it is especially important to be sensitive to how minorities feel, think, and act in response to non-attainment of goals.

     

  • What are Source of Attributional Information?

    What are Source of Attributional Information?

    How do we decide what caused our success and failure? What cues do we use to explain whether an outcome was influenced by our ability, effort, or some other factor? Information comes from direct and indirect cues (Graham, 1991). Some information comes from direct cues, like failing a test when other students succeeded. Information is also obtained from more indirect cues, often conveyed unintentionally, such as when a teacher communicates pity to a student who failed a test. In addition, there may be a bias toward causes (Weiner, 1992).

    Direct Attributional Cues

    One of the most important informational cues is the outcome of the task. Here students have a direct cue as to their performance. Another source of attributional information comes from comparing one’s performance to that of others (Weiner, 1992). When most of the class fails a test, students are likely to attribute the failure to the difficulty of the task, not to their ability. However, if Sam failed and everyone else in the class made an A or B, he is likely to believe the failure was due to his low ability. If Sarah fails a test and a peer says, “I didn’t study at all and I made an A,” Sarah may take this as a cue that failure must be due to her ability. When a teacher sees students comparing grades on a test, information other than the test score is being communicated. An important role of the teacher is to help students interpret the possible reasons for test scores and make an adaptive attribution.

    Indirect Attributional Cues

    In school, feedback that students receive from teachers is a source of much information about ability. Students’ attributional interpretations may be based on the attributions that teachers communicated to them (Reyna, 2000). Graham (1991) identified three groups of feedback as sources of indirect cues: praise versus blame, sympathy versus anger, and help versus neglect.

    Praise Versus Blame: The praise or blame a student receives from a teacher can function as an indirect low-ability cue (Graham, 1991). The cue provided by praise or blame interacts with the difficulty of the task and effort expended by a student. Praise acts as a low-ability cue when a student is praised for completing an easy task. A low-ability cue is also conveyed when a student fails a task but receives no blame, like lack of effort. The student can interpret this to mean, “There’s nothing I can do about the failure.”

    Sympathy Versus Anger: Did it ever occur to you that communicating sympathy to a student could be interpreted as evidence that he or she has the low ability? Graham (1984) found that when teachers conveyed sympathy following poor student performance, the failing students took this as a cue that they had low ability. Obviously a statement like “I feel sorry for you because you made such a low score” would be a low-ability cue. What might a teacher say that unintentionally conveys a message of low ability to a student? One student remembers a class being told, “All students have to do this except Holly and Ramon.” Holly took her omission as a cue that she would not be able to do the task. In contrast, mild anger for failure can provide an indirect cue that one is capable. For example, “You can do better than this. You handed this paper in with no editing,” provides a cue to the student that he or she is capable of more.

    Unsolicited Help: Another low-ability cue for students is unsolicited help by the teacher (Graham & Barker, 1990). Graham and Barker found that, regardless of whether a helper was a peer or teacher, other students judged the student who received unsolicited help as lower in ability than non-helped peers. The important factor in this example is unsolicited. When the teacher consistently gives help to Sylvia before she requests it, this suggests that the teacher knows that she will not be able to do it.

    Ability Grouping: One powerful cue for ability that affects large groups of students are tracking according to ability groups. Students in both high and low tracks are defined by labels such as high ability, honors, low-achieving, slow, and average (Oakes, 1985). These labels are powerful cues about one’s ability. Oakes observed that students in the lower track are usually seen by others as dumb and also see themselves in this way. A label may have an adverse effect on students in the high-achieving class as well. Students in a high-track class may take this label as a cue that they naturally have high ability and then assume inflated self-concepts. This belief can interfere with students working to develop their academic skills.

    It is important that teachers be aware of the subtle cues that may have unintentional effects on students’ perception of ability. Commonly accepted practices of generous praise, minimal blame, sympathy, and unsolicited help can sometimes be interpreted by students as they have the low ability (M. D. Clark, 1997; Graham, 1991). M. D. Clark found that responses given to students with LD are often interpreted as low-ability cues. Graham further suggested that these cues raise important questions pertinent to the motivation of minority students such as African-Americans. For example, are minority students more likely to be targeted for feedback that conveys sympathy—thus receiving a cue for low ability? Reyna (2000) took this a step further, stating that labeling and indirect cues can lead to stable beliefs about ability and have the negative effect of stereotyping.

    Attribution Bias

    Attribution bias or Attributional bias is a predisposition to make certain attributional judgments that may be in error (Weiner, 1985). Several variations of attributional bias have been identified that are relevant to achievement settings. A common misjudgment is a hedonic bias, the tendency to attribute success to self rather than to attribute failure to self (Weiner, 2000).

    Previous knowledge can also lead to attributions that are erroneous (Frieze, 1980). Potential sources of errors in attributional judgments can be found in stereotypes about certain groups (Reyna, 2000). These preconceptions about certain groups can serve as ready-made explanations for why a student achieves or does not achieve. There is a danger that the stable, uncontrollable attribution for low performance will lead to lower expectations.

    The implication for educators is to recognize that a number of possible causes may explain any given success or failure. Thus, it is important to be aware of potential stereotypical attributional biases. Explore other possible causes by gathering more information when bias may be a factor (see Strategy).

    Strategy of Collect Attributional Information

    Simply ask students why they succeeded, failed, or improved.

    Some teachers elicit information by having students give their reasons for how well they did after assignments or exams.

    Attribution information can be obtained through the use of learning logs, in which students keep records and write about their goals, successes, and failures.

    Conduct an attributional task analysis of student performance. Is it because the student cannot or will not? A teacher may believe that a student is not performing well because he or she has the low ability or is lazy. Instead, the student may be performing low because he or she does not have the essential skills.

    Look for clues that will enable you to determine if the student has the essential skills. Does the student have prerequisite knowledge or skills? Does the task require formal reasoning whereas the student is functioning at the concrete reasoning level? Does the student have the necessary learning or memory strategies?

    If the student cannot, then teach the prerequisite skill or guide student to the appropriate source of help.

  • Do you want to be a BOSS?

    Do you want to be a BOSS?

    What is a BOSS? A person who is in charge of a worker or organization. A person in control of a group or situation. (In computer gaming) A particularly tough enemy, usually appearing at the end of a section or level.

    Definition of BOSS

    An individual that is usually the immediate supervisor of some number of employees and has certain capacities and responsibilities to make decisions. The term itself is not a formal title and is sometimes used to refer to any higher level employee in a company, including a supervisor, manager, director, or the CEO.

    BOSS as Supervisor

    Supervisor, when the meaning sought is similar to the foreman, foreperson, boss, overseer, cell coach, facilitator, monitor, or area coordinator, is the job title of a low-level management position that is primarily based on authority over a worker or charge of a workplace. A Supervisor can also be one of the most senior in the staff at the place of work, such as a Professor who oversees a Ph.D. dissertation. Supervision, on the other hand, can be performed by people without this formal title, for example by parents. The term Supervisor itself can be used to refer to any personnel who have this task as part of their job description.

    A BOSS is a Business Owner with Success Systems. In business, entrepreneurs create systems that cause continuous movement in their business. Before you even get started with your entrepreneurial endeavors, I want to give you some preliminary systems that will prepare you for the world of business. This is not a “how to start a business” guide, but rather a compass to point you in the right direction. If you have ever thought about starting a business or if you are on the fence about it, this post is here to give the encouragement you need to take that leap of faith. Kevin D. provides the keys to move you toward starting your own business:

    Be Creative: Creativity has no boundaries. Creativity has no limits. Creativity has endless possibilities. Do not allow fear to hinder you from unleashing that which is already inside of you. In order for you to do that, you have to think outside of the box. Tap into your imagination and bring forth that next big idea that will change the world. You have to give yourself permission to do so. Why? Your creativity is the key to unlocking your future. “You can’t use up creativity. The more you use the more you have” By Maya Angelou.

    Be a Dreamer: Dreams aren’t just images you see when you sleep. A real dream is a vision that births a passion that you cannot shake. Dreamers are individuals who make our world go round. Everything you see around you started off as a dream. It was inside somebody’s head before it manifested itself into our reality. Your dream has to be bigger than you. Therefore, when you do dream…dream BIG! “If you can Dream it, you can Achieve it.” By Walt Disney.

    Be a Strategist: Thinking that your business will automatically become a success is wishful and wrongful thinking. If you are going to be an entrepreneur, you have to be a strategist. Simply put, a strategist is an individual who establishes and applies a plan that points to the vision or dream. Not only is it imperative for you to know where you are going, but you also must know how you are going to get there. “All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.” By Sun Tzu.

    Be an Original: One of the worst things in the world for any entrepreneur to do is try to duplicate the look, brand, and success of another. You were created unique. Therefore, you and everything about you has to be unique. There has to be something, or maybe even a few things, that set you apart. So as you begin your entrepreneurial endeavors, find out what makes you different than the competition. Be the one that everyone wants to imitate. “It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation.” By Herman Mellville.

    Be Inspired: There will be times where you will question what you do and why you are doing it. There will be times when discouragement will set in because your business is not doing what you expected and desired it to do. That is not the time for you to give up, but rather to find some sort of inspiration—whether it be through a story, testimony, a song, etc… Find a way to get your fire back even when things around you seem dim and dark. Business is difficult, and only those who are strong and persistent will endure will see success. “Inspiration is the rocket fuel that makes ordinary days into extraordinary!” By Gail Lynne Goodwyn.

    Be Passionate: You were placed here to solve a problem that only you can solve. This problem has to become your obsession. It should keep you awake at night. It should wake you up early in the morning. It should have you constantly writing down new ideas or new ways of accomplishing your goals. You shouldn’t truly rest until the thing that bothers you has been resolved. Some of the great business men and women before us worked long hours every day, sacrificing weekends, giving up vacations in pursuit of their passion to resolve that problem. Ultimately, that passion will become your paycheck. “Passion is the genesis of genius.” By Galileo Galilei.

    Be Mentored: For any person to think they know it all and that they don’t need help is simply idiotic and arrogant. The greatest asset a business person can have is a mentor….an individual or individuals who have been where you have been and done what you have done. Find someone that is doing what you desire to do or can at least give your insight on how to do things better. If you cannot have them physically present then read their materials, listen to their messages, and learn their history. Learn from their successes as well as their mistakes. Their ceiling very well may be your floor. “One of the greatest values of mentors is the ability to see ahead what others cannot see and to help them navigate a course to their destination.” By John C. Maxwell.

    Be Empowered: It is no accident that you are reading this e-Book. Do not be afraid of failing. Let your failures drive you to your success. Do not give up or give in but rather keep moving forward. You were placed on this planet on purpose, with a purpose, and for a purpose. You are more powerful than you know. You may be the next Steve Jobs, Magic Johnson, or Vera Wang. You have the potential within you that will change our world. There is greatness on the inside you to do amazing things. So do it…go be great and do great things. You have permission to do so! You have permission to be a BOSS. Just Do It. By Nike.

    Do you want to be a BOSS or own Business? so build your own way how to start? Where are you do it? How to carry full money for your business? The perfect IDEA for Your business.

  • How to Make Establish an Efficient System?

    How to Make Establish an Efficient System?

    Efficient (of a system or machine) achieving maximum productivity with minimum wasted effort or expense, preventing the wasteful use of a particular resource. Working in a well-organized and competent way. Performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort; having and using requisite knowledge, skill, and industry.

    Abraham Lincoln once gave a sound piece of advice regarding productivity. He said, “Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the Axe.”

    It is apparent that he means that he can do a much more efficient job with the right tool. On the other hand, chopping away on the tree with a dull Axe might cut it down as well, but less efficiently and probably for a longer period of time. In other words, the best way to make the most of your time is by establishing an efficient system. To be more specific, you should first create the most conducive environment, and choosing the best tools, for the task.

    To help you establish an efficient system, there are two main things to do. The first one is to choose the right tools you need to accomplish the task in the best possible way. The second is to organize the space in which you will be doing the task.

    Choose the Best Tools for the Task

    Can you tell off the bat which tools you need the most to accomplish certain tasks? If you cannot, try remembering the following guidelines:

    1. The tool should be the most user-friendly.

    While this does not apply to all cases, it helps to remember to go back to the basics. Often, the tool that is easiest to use is also the more efficient. It does not require much time to learn how to use it and to manipulate it.

    An example of a simple, user-friendly time management tool is the to Do list. It is simple as jotting down tasks on a piece of paper and crossing them out once you are done.

    1. The tool should help you focus.

    Some people who want to enhance their time management skills often tend to buy a number of “organizational tools,” such as planners, calendars, and so on, but then end up not using most of them at all. Worse, some would attempt to use them all at once and end up confused. Therefore, the best solution is to pick no more than one tool you will truly use for a particular project, goal, or task, and then stick to it.

    1. The tool should be the most efficient and effective.

    If a tool requires too much time to set up before you can use it, then it had better be four times more efficient than the other models. Otherwise, you would only end up accumulating wasted time from using it. The bottom-line is to choose a tool that will strike a balance between efficiency and effectiveness by looking at how well it can help you with the task and how quickly it can be used.

    Aside from these, other factors you can consider are accessibility, cost, visibility, and so on, depending on the specific tools you need. After all, some tools are to be used for personal goals and tasks, while others are for professional use or team projects. Nevertheless, it helps to keep these three core guidelines in mind before you decide to choose a certain tool for your project.

    Organize and Develop an Efficient Work Space

    A space that is clean and organized does not just mean it is neat and tidy. Rather, it expands to keeping only the things you need in sight. Everything else that does not serve any purpose to your goal is merely a distraction. This rule applies not just to your physical surroundings, but your digital space as well.

    You can achieve this by taking these simple steps:

    1. Clear all the items off the area first. This will make it easier for you to separate the items and tools you want to use from the ones that only serve as distraction.

    For instance, if your computer desktop is cluttered with all sorts of icons and folders, then create a folder and label it “Mess.” After that, move everything into it in one full sweep.

    1. Re-build or re-organize the area by choosing the tools that you need. Everything else must be removed or stored away more efficiently.

    If we go back to the same example, when you are left with a clear desktop, you can then choose from the “Mess” folder the ones you need for a particular project or goal. Everything else can be deleted or sorted out until you can safely delete the “Mess” folder.

    1. Develop an efficient system for your project or goal.

    Now that only the tools you need remain in the area, your final step is to use them to create an efficient system. It is important to ensure that the system is simple, easy to use, and effective, because you may be using it so often it becomes a habit.

    Let us say you make a living as a medical transcriptionist. Since your desktop is now uncluttered, you now only have your transcribing tool, a spreadsheet icon of a file that helps you track your progress, and folder of projects on it. Your final step is to systematize how you work so that you can maximize your time and efficiency. It can be simple, such as:

    Step 1: Click the spreadsheet icon to monitor and review project.

    Step 2: Open transcribing tool.

    Step 3: Open project to be transcribed.

    Step 4: Put on headset, adjust volume, and start transcribing.

    Once your tools and system are polished and organized, it is guaranteed that all the tasks you need to accomplish will become easier to do. All you need to do at this point is to take action.