Activity 7.5

Paul Tough, author of the book How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character, was a guest on the “Back to School” edition of the radio show “This American Life.”  The discussion centered on the concept of what kids should be learning in school.  Schools focus on cognitive development and Tough suggested that learning is more than cognitive development and recommends that schools teach non-cognitive skills. 

What are non-cognitive skills and how are they beneficial in helping people succeed in life?  Tough defines non-cognitive skills as soft skills, social skills, or personality (character) traits.  Through various research studies, non-cognitive skills have proven to assist people in a variety of ways that result in success.  The skills of self-control, self-regulation, conscientiousness, delayed gratification, and controlling temper are necessary for a learner to be able to experience cognitive development.  The good news is non-cognitive skills can be taught and shaped even after the formative childhood years. 

When children grow up in an environment with adverse conditions, this effects the way the brain develops due to the continuous stress that is experienced by the individual.  If the parent and child develop an attachment relationship, this may modify and combat the negative effects of the stressful environment.  The research suggest several methods and interventions that have proven to be successful in assisting with non-cognitive development.  The skills of the parents play a key role and by the parent(s) and child developing attachment, confidence, and connection this will assist in combating how the negative effects of the child’s environment affects the developing brain. Another intervention is for adolescents to receive training (coaching) in how to develop non-cognitive skills.

Tough’s view of the development of non-cognitive skills fits directly into the social cognitive theoretical framework.  I think James and Pajares would support Tough’s view of the need to develop non-cognitive skills. Pajares (2005) explains, “in school, teachers work to improve the competence and confidence of the students in their charge.  They can accomplish this by working to improve their students’ emotional states and to correct their faulty self-beliefs and habits of thinking (personal factors), improve students’ academic skills and self-regulatory practices (behavior), and alter the school and classroom structures that may work to undermine student success (environmental factors)” (pp. 340-341).   This idea of teaching the learner non-cognitive skills is supported by James (1899/2001), “you should regard your professional task as if it consisted chiefly and essentially in training the pupil to behavior; taking behavior, not in the narrow sense of his manners, but in the very widest possible sense, as including every possible sort of fit reaction to the circumstances into which he may find himself brought by the vicissitudes of life” (pp. 13-14). 

Vygotsky’s social constructivism theory and Bandura’ social cognitive theory have complementary components.  They both agree on the social nature of learning, and the effects that people (who serve as models) in the environment have on the learner and the process of learning.  I think Bandura’s social cognitive theory is the closest theory that aligns with the views of Tough.  “In addition to promoting cognitive and behavioral competencies, modeling influences were shown to alter motivation, create and modify emotional proclivities, serve as social prompts that activate, channel, and support given styles of behavior, and shape images of reality” (Bandura, 2011, p. 2). 

According to Tough, failure in learning occurs when teachers and parents do not actively teach non-cognitive skills.  Social skills, soft skills, and personality traits are necessary skills that affect the success level of an individual.  “The ‘nature,’ the ‘character,’ of an individual means really nothing but the habitual form of his associations.  To break up bad associations or wrong ones, to build others in, to guide the associative tendencies into the most fruitful channels, is the educator’s principal task” (James, 1899/2001, p. 42).  I think James and Tough would agree that success is dependent on the character development of the individual, and that is part of the learning process that is necessary for someone to reach their fullest potential.  Skinner (1984) would advocate that the failure of American education is due to unclear learning goals, expectations for students to learn at the same rate, lack of utilization of “teaching machines,” and schools of education failure to teach what teachers need to know.

Tough would promote that the ingredients for success are teaching the non-cognitive skills (social skills, soft skills, personality/character traits).  These skills can be taught and thus reduce inequality by making individuals more equipped for success.  Pajares (2005) supports the teaching of non-cognitive skills by stating, “in this social cognitive perspective, individuals are viewed as self-organizing, proactive, self-reflecting, and self-regulating rather than as reactive organisms shaped by environmental forces or driven by concealed inner impulses” (p. 340).   

Questions:

How is success defined?  Is the definition different for each person based on their background, experiences, culture, and society?

Cognitive skills are measured using standardized test.  How are non-cognitive skills measured?

What role does social class play in determining an individual’s self-efficacy skills?  Is this an issue that should concern teachers?

Are there differences when applying the social cognitive theory to the adult learner versus the adolescent learner? 

Activity 7.4

Activity 7.3

“Life in the cyberworld is enhancing the primacy and reach of symbolic modeling” (Bandura, 2011, p. 4).  Thinking about this quote, are there any cautions or problems associated with the symbolic modeling that transpires on the Internet?

Bandura’s social cognitive theory identifies social modeling through observational learning as a key foundation of the theory.  One of the misconceptions cited is that modeling does not facilitate learning and only allows one to mimic the example.  In addition, the myths stated that modeling does not develop cognitive skills or creative ability.   

The importance of the behavior of modeling and the influence it has on self-efficacy is illustrated in Unequal Childhoods written by Annette Lareau.  In her longitudinal ethnographic study on race, class, and family life, Lareau’s study involved eighty-eight children ages nine to ten years old with twelve of the children highlighted in the book.  The participants selected represented middle-class, working-class, and poor families.  The study shows how social class alters the organization of daily life, interactions between families and institutions, language use, and parenting styles.  Lareau identifies how social class shaped the way parents raised their children.  The results showed that children were influenced by parenting, modeling, and environment, and these were keys in determining the future direction (success) of the children.  The children in middle-class families predominately went to college, graduated, and pursued successful careers.  On the other hand, the children in working-class and poor families rarely went to college and reported struggles in their pursuit of successful lives.  According to Lareau (2011), “in America, social class backgrounds frame and transform individuals” (p. 343).  

The study by Lareau was conducted under the theoretical understanding of Pierre Bourdieu who studied the socialization process in relation to habitus, capital, and fields (Lareau, 2011).  In looking at this study from the theoretical lens of social cognitive theory, it demonstrate how an individual’s success may be determined by the observational learning that transpires in the family structure and the influence that has on an individual’s self-efficacy.  Bandura (2011) states, “modeling is a universalized human capacity.  But what is modeled, how modeling influences are structured, and the purposes it serves varies in different cultural milieus” (p. 6). 

Environments and social systems influence human behavior through psychological mechanisms of the self system.  Hence, social cognitive theory posits that factors such as economic conditions, socioeconomic status, and educational and familial structures do not affect human behavior directly.  Instead, they affect it to the degree that they influence people’s aspirations, self-efficacy beliefs, personal standards, emotional states, and other self-regulatory influences. (Pajares, 2002, para. 7)

Laureau’s research also connects with Paul Tough and his strategies on how to assist learners who have adverse childhood experiences.  Tough advocates that teaching non-cognitive skills (social skills, soft skills, personality and character traits) will assist learners in their pursuit of success. 

“Modeling involves abstracting the information conveyed by specific exemplars about the structure and the underlying principles governing the behavior rather than simply mimicking the specific exemplars” (Bandura, 2011, p. 2).  Four years ago I was asked to take over an area at the college that was struggling and needed a different leadership approach.  When I discussed this opportunity with my mentor, I asked what I would need to do to facilitate change in this area.  The advice was simple, “model the behavior you expect.”  Of course, that was not the only thing that needed to transpire, but it is a good example of the power of modeling.  I embraced the advice and the role of serving as a model.  “Observational learning is governed by the process of attention, retention, production, and motivation” (Pajares, 2002, para. 11).  I invested an enormous amount of effort into serving as a coping model, concentrated on verbal messages and social persuasions, awareness of vicarious experiences of observing, and the power of social modeling.  The result was a dramatic change in the department. 

References:

Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life. Berkeley and Los Angeles,

CA: University of California Press.

Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy.  Retrieved from

http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/eff.html

Activity 7.2

This summer I started a new exercise class (boot camp/circuit training).  I was excited about joining this class, and since I go to the gym daily I had high self-efficacy that this would be a positive rewarding experience.  Based on a self-evaluation I concluded that I am in relatively good shape, have a moderate level of endurance and strength, and enjoy the experience of group exercise classes.

I showed up the first day, and I was the oldest person in the class (at least by 20 years).  My self-efficacy changed from strong to weak in a matter of seconds.  This was due to my interpretation of this situation and my perceived failure to perform against this much younger group.  My self-judgment produced thought patterns that I was old, not physically capable, and lacked the ability to perform in this environment.

The class started, and I reluctantly participated with a little anxiety and a lack of self-esteem.  The instructor created a positive environment for the class and challenged the students based on their ability. We were prompted to perform at a level a little higher than we thought we could perform, but not greater than our ability to accomplish.  This technique is illustrated through the following statement related to academics by Pajares (2005), “academic work should be hard enough that it energizes, not so hard that it paralyzes” (p. 344). 

Throughout the class, whenever I felt that I was not able to keep going, the instructor offered words of encouragement and praise for my effort.  Pajares (2005) stated, “whether at home or at school, rather than praising for ability, make it a habit to praise the genuine effort and persistence the young person puts forth” (p. 350).  The instructor’s praise of my effort always gave me renewed strength and determination to push a little harder and exert more energy and effort in the activities.

When the instructor presented new exercises and activities, she provided instrumental help that afforded me enough direction to succeed on my own.  She also provided options for advanced, intermediate, and low intensity work outs.  This allowed me to achieve success at my level and enhance my feelings of confidence.  “Students’ self-efficacy beliefs develop primarily through actual success on challenging academic tasks” (Pajares, 2005, p. 344). 

The class is small, and I learned the names of all the other participants.  After a few weeks, I noticed an environment of collective efficacy developing as we all encouraged and cheered each other on to reach our personal goals.  The differences in ability levels were not a factor.  The goals were individual, and everyone was supportive.  My self-efficacy began to reach the level it was prior to starting the class. 

After the first day of this new class, I had thoughts about not coming back.  My confidence, self-belief, and motivation had suffered due to this perceived adversity.  I think Pajares would agree with James (1899/2001), “when all is said and done, and your best efforts are made, it will probably remain true that the result will depend more on a certain native tone or temper in the pupil’s psychological constitution than on anything else” (p. 89).  Pajares stated, “personal agency is about will, drive, and self-determination” (p. 361).  Of course, the end of the story is that I remained in the class.  I have thoroughly enjoyed this new exercise class and my behaviors, cognitive (personal) factors, and the environment were all instrumental in my self-efficacy.

My personal story can be compared to many college freshmen who lack self-efficacy when they enter college. Without a supportive classroom environment, they may end up not completing their freshman year.  As noted by Vincent Tinto (1993), the majority of students depart from an institution during their first year.  “The character of one’s experience in that year does much to shape subsequent persistence” (Tinto, 1993, p. 14).  It is critical that instructors who work with first year college students understand the basic principles of social cognitive theory.  Behavior, cognitive factors, and environment play an important role in persistence.  

Reference:

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago,

IL: The University of Chicago Press. 

Activity 7.1

Triadic Reciprocality

                

Graphic Source: https://sites.google.com/a/nau.edu/educationallearningtheories/home/social-learning-thoery 

BEHAVIORAL FACTORS	COGNITIVE (PERSONAL) FACTORS	ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
-Confidence -Competence -Effort -Attention -Retention -Creativity -Imitation -Modeling -Resilience -Persistence -Motivation -Interest -Academic Skills (goal setting, time management, organization, etc.) -Self-regulatory practices -Empowerment -Procrastination -Self-directed -Optimism/pessimism -Confidence /lack of confidence	-Values -Forethought -Pride -Satisfaction -Sense of Accomplishment -Feelings -Emotions (anxiety, stress, depression, and despair) -Habits of thinking -Verbal messages -Self-reflection -Self-esteem -Self-evaluation -Self-judgment -Self-efficacy -Self-beliefs	-Classroom structure -School structure -Family structure -Electronics (TV, videos, music, social media, Internet) -Neighborhood -Community -Friends, peers, teachers, parents, siblings, relatives, neighbors, child care providers, and  adults

According to social cognitive theory, human functioning is the result of the reciprocal interactive relationship among behavior, thinking, and the environment.

Activity 6.5

The accessibility of multiple electronic devices provides unlimited opportunities for interactions and access to information.  Carr (2011) explained how the overuse of technology has trained the brain to be distracted and thus affecting the ability to process information (learn) due to the inability to concentrate our attention.  Powers (2010) pointed out that the depth of our existence is suffering due to the failure (lack of self-regulation) to slow down and focus our thoughts.  I agree with Carr and Powers that the computer encourages busyness, information overload, dependence on other sources for thought, outsourcing memory, and constant interactions/connections.  James (1899/2001) explained education as, “…the organization of acquired habits of conduct and tendencies to behavior” (p. 15).  Technology is changing the habits of behavior.  The long-term results may affect the brain’s ability to concentrate, make connections, and think. 

What is the cost or sacrifice that one pays when continually engaging in the multimedia rich world?  How do we self-regulate our attention in a way that will allow us to get back to engaging in the depth of experiences while balancing the multimedia technology?

Activity 6.4

The self-regulatory strategies discussed by Zimmerman (2002) such as goal-setting, self-confidence, learning strategies, time management, personal insight, and motivation are necessary applications for students to be successful lifelong problem solvers (learners).  James would agree that teaching self-regulatory strategies creates habits that facilitate learning.  “See to it now, I beg you, that you make freeman of your pupils by habituating them to act, whenever possible, under the notion of good” (James, 1899/2001, pp. 94-95).

Self-regulatory behaviors are critical for academic success in all students, but specifically for the first-year college students who are in a transitional stage of their education.  The first-year college student is moving from a highly controlled environment (work or school) to one that is highly independent.  One effective way to enhance student learning is through a first-year experience course that is designed to assist students in developing self-regulatory skills.  The course focuses on expectations of higher education, academic skill development (learning strategies), academic support services (seeking help from others), goal setting (personal and professional), and self-management skills (time and stress management, self-discipline, self-motivation).  Cueso (2003) stated, “research suggests that the cognitive and behavioral habits students develop during their first year of college may become their modus operandi for the entire college experience” (p. 272). Cuseo and James would agree that creating self-regulatory habits are vital to success in education.  “The more of the details of our daily life we can hand over to the effortless custody of automatism, the more our higher powers of mind will be set free for their own proper work” (James, 1899/2001, p. 34).

Reference:

Cueso, J. (2003). Comprehensive academic support for students during the first year of college.

In Kramer, G. L. & Associates (Eds.), Student academic services (pp. 271-309). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.