The Role of Noncognitive Constructs and Other Background Variables in Graduate Education

Abstract

This report reviews the literature on noncognitive and other background predictors (e.g., personality, attitudes, and interests) as it pertains to graduate education. The first section reviews measures typically used in studies of graduate school outcomes, such as attrition and time to degree. A review of qualities faculty members and administrators say they desire and cultivate in graduate programs is conducted. There appears to be a divergence between the qualities faculty members say are important and the measures researchers typically use in validity studies.The second section reviews three categories of noncognitive variables that might predict outcomes (general personality factors, quasi-cognitive factors, and attitudinal factors) and the definitions, measures, correlates, and the validity of those measures. The role of background factors, both environmental and group, is part of this review.Key words: noncognitive, personality, admissions, GRE ® , selection, assessment, new constructs ii Executive SummaryMany GRE ® studies conducted in the past several years have asked faculty members about the qualities that are important to success in graduate school. A consistent finding is that graduate faculty members believe that noncognitive factors, such as motivation, creativity, personality, interests, and attitude, ought to be considered in graduate admissions (e.g., Briel et al., 2000). Many faculty members believe that including such factors would increase both fairness and the validity of the current admissions process. At the same time there is a lack of knowledge about what the scientific literature says on what the noncognitive factors are, how important they are, how they could best be measured, and on whether it might be practical to use them in admissions decisions. The purpose of this review is to address these questions. This report reviews various noncognitive factors and definitions, measures, correlates, and the validity of those measures. Graduate School Outcomes and Their DeterminantsA notional path model illustrates the relationships between noncognitive predictor factors and graduate school outcome factors. Graduate school outcome factors are divided into traditional measures of convenience and performance factors. Traditional measures are attrition, time-to-degree, and grade point average. Performance factors are domain proficiency, general proficiency, communication, effort, discipline, teamwork, leadership, and management. The noncognitive predictor factors are divided into three main categories: personality (e.g., extroversion), quasi-cognitive (e.g., metacognition), and motivation factors (e.g., self-efficacy).In addition, there are two background categories assumed to affect the noncognitive factors:environmental (e.g., mentor support) and group factors (gender and ethnicity). The review is organized according to this model. Personality FactorsA consensus has emerged within the field that there are five major personality factors: extroversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, ...

Scientific production on psychological evaluation in educational settings: Focus on socio-emotional variables

“…Contudo, Personalidade aparece apenas com cinco ocorrências. Esse resultado é surpreendente uma vez que, no contexto internacional, as competências socioemocionais são relacionadas principalmente ao modelo Big Five da personalidade, com destaque para a Conscienciosidade e Extroversão como importantes preditores de desempenho acadêmico e profissional (Kyllonen et al, 2008;Kyllonen et al, 2011;Poropat, 2009).…”

“…Portanto, este estudo tem o objetivo de realizar o mapeamento da produção científica sobre a avaliação psicológica no contexto educacional no período de 2005 a 2013, numa intenção clara de dar continuidade ao estudo realizado por Oliveira et al (2007). O exame da literatura atual sobre o assunto conduziu os pesquisadores a fazer um recorte para a presente análise, privilegiando os estudos que abordassem competências socioemocionais no contexto educacional, considerando que essa temática tem sido alvo de iniciativas globais por parte de importantes organizações, tais como OCDE, UNESCO e Instituto Ayrton Senna, com base em robustas evidências da capacidade preditiva dessas características em relação ao desempenho e sucesso acadêmico e, posteriormente, laboral (Heckman & Kautz, 2012;Kyllonen, Lipnevich, Burrus, & Roberts, 2008;Kyllonen, Walters, & Kaufman, 2011;Poropat, 2009).…”

Relação entre inteligência e competências socioemocionais em crianças e adolescentes

“…As competências socioemocionais têm sido definidas como um conjunto de elementos que incluem (a) variáveis tais como atitude, valores, interesse e curiosidade; (b) variáveis de personalidade ou temperamento, como consciência e extroversão; (c) variáveis de relações sociais, incluindo a liderança, sensibilidade social e a capacidade de trabalhar com outras pessoas; (d) auto-construtos como a auto-eficácia e identidade pessoal; (e) os hábitos de trabalho, como o esforço, disciplina, persistência e gestão do tempo; e (f ) emoções em relação a uma tarefa específica, como o entusiasmo e ansiedade (Lee & Shute, 2009). Elas englobariam tanto fatores de personalidade, mais comumente aqueles definidos no modelo dos cinco grandes fatores da personalidade, também chamado de Big Five, a saber: extroversão, estabilidade emocional, amabilidade, conscienciosidade e abertura a experiências (McCrae & John, 1992), bem como fatores atitudinais (autoconceito, autoeficácia, motivação, interesses, valores) e elementos quasi-cognitivos (criatividade, inteligência emocional, estilo cognitivo e metacognição), competências como motivação, perseverança, capacidade de trabalhar em equipe, resiliência, controle emocional e organização para realizar tarefas como os elementos que compõem as habilidades socioemocionais (Kyllonen, Walters & Kaufman, 2011).…”

Personality traits of pharmacy and medical students throughout their course of studies

“…They could also be used by educational institutions to understand their student population and to analyse and evaluate their programmes and the impact these courses have on students’ development. 11 …”