Teachers’ Implicit Theories of Professional Abilities in the Domain of School Improvement

Abstract

Numerous studies show positive effects of students’ malleable implicit theories of their abilities on their self-regulated learning and learning achievements (Yeager and Dweck, 2012; Burnette et al., 2013), especially when domain-specific implicit theories are assessed (Costa and Faria, 2018). Thinking of school improvement as a collective learning process for the teaching staff, it is reasonable to assume that this relationship also exists on the teacher level. Hence, this study aims to provide answers to the following overarching question: What role do teachers’ implicit theories of professional abilities play for school improvement? In a first step, a measurement instrument was developed to assess teachers’ implicit theories of professional abilities in the domain of school improvement. In a second step, we explored the link between these implicit theories and collective teacher learning in the area of further developing the school’s educational practices. In a sample of N = 1,483 Swiss primary school teachers at N = 59 schools, we analyzed how teachers’ malleable (vs. fixed) implicit theories of professional abilities are related to collective metacognitive and emotional-motivational regulation activities and to the perception that the school is on the right track to improvement. Results show that teachers’ implicit theories of professional abilities can be assessed reliably. Structural equation modeling analyses revealed that the more teachers view professional abilities as malleable and developable, the more positive their perceptions of the schools’ improvement were. This relation was mediated by collective emotional-motivational regulation activities. However, no significant effect of a malleable implicit theory on collective metacognitive regulation was found. It can be concluded that teachers have varying beliefs about the malleability of teachers’ professional abilities that are linked to their collective regulation. It therefore acknowledges the domain-specific effects of teachers’ implicit theories in the area of school improvement.

Growth mindset predicts teachers’ life satisfaction when they are challenged to innovate their teaching

“…Study 2 findings showed that the growth mindset affords the belief that one can learn new skills and apply them to solve pressing problems resulting from suspension of school teaching. This finding resonates with the past finding that teachers with a growth mindset are likely to engage in emotional and motivational regulation activities that enhance their perseverance and selfreinforcement behaviors (Rechsteiner et al, 2021;Zimmerman et al, 2015). Study 2 findings also confirmed Hypothesis 2: through its association with higher taskspecific self-efficacy, having a stronger growth mindset is accompanied by higher life satisfaction.…”

“…For example, when students learn the growth mindset, they are willing to attempt intellectually challenging advanced-level math courses (Rege et al, 2020). Likewise, teachers who believe that their professional ability is malleable tend to display emotional-motivational regulation behaviors, such as self-learning, goal setting, and monitoring when a new school improvement project is implemented in their schools (Rechsteiner et al, 2021).…”

Ortaokul Öğretmenlerinin Zihniyetleri: Örtük Teoriler Bağlamında Zekâya Bir Bakış

“…Mevcut araştırmalar incelendiğinde, örtük zekâ teorilerine ilişkin kanıtların çoğunun esasen okul çağındaki çocuklarla veya öğrencilerle yapılan araştırmalar sonucunda elde edildiği görülmektedir (Burnette ve diğerleri, 2013;Costa ve Faria, 2018). Diğer taraftan, birtakım araştırmalar ebeveynlerin ve özellikle öğretmenlerin zekâ, öğrenme veya bilişsel yetenekler hakkında örtük inançlar geliştirdiklerini göstermektedir (Butler, 2000;Dweck, 2006;Bruning ve diğerleri, 2011;Ferrare, 2019;Gutshall, 2016;Matthes ve Stoeger, 2018;Rechsteiner, 2021;Ronkainen ve diğerleri, 2019). Bu açıdan, öğretmenlerin zekânın sabit olduğuna veya geliştirilebileceğine dair örtük inançları, öğrencilerin akademik potansiyelleri üzerinde bir etkendir (Boaler, 2019;Dweck ve Leggett, 1988;Dweck, 2006;Rissanen ve diğerleri, 2016).…”