University Instructors’ Implicit Theories of Intelligence, Achievement Goals for Teaching, and Teaching Quality

Abstract

University instructors’ goals for teaching are important for teaching quality. However, studies examining factors that shape instructors’ goal adoption are lacking. Using data from 785 instructors, we investigated whether implicit theories (ITs) about the malleability of intelligence constitute one such factor. Following achievement goal theory and Dweck’s (1999) achievement motivation framework, we analyzed whether differences in teaching goals are attributable to differences in ITs, and whether goals mediate the relation between ITs and instructional quality. Structural equation modeling yielded the expected relations between goals and instructional quality (positive for mastery and performance approach goals; negative for performance avoidance and work avoidance goals). As hypothesized, stronger endorsement of incremental ITs was positively related to mastery, and negatively to work avoidance goals. However, ITs were unrelated to performance goals. Indirect effects of ITs on teaching quality via goals were significant but rather weak. Implications for research and fostering teaching motivation are discussed.

Associations between children's school wellbeing, mindset and academic attainment in standardised tests of achievement

“…Domain-general mindset beliefs significantly predict domain-specific attainment (Blackwell et al, 2007). Dweck's original scale was intended for use with pupils aged 10 but yields satisfactory reliability with children aged eight (Hellmich & Hoya, 2017; Ziegler et al, 2005) and even younger children have been found to hold theories of intelligence (Park et al, 2016) or ‘theories of badness’ (Dweck, 1998). Minor modifications made to item wordings for age-appropriacy in consultation with teachers were checked in piloting (see Supplemental Materials).…”