research-article

Shifting Beliefs in Computer Science: Change in CS Student Mindsets

Authors:

Abraham E. Flanigan,

Markeya S. Peteranetz,

Duane F. Shell,

Leen-Kiat SohAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), Volume 22, Issue 2

Article No.: 20, Pages 1 - 24

https://doi.org/10.1145/3471574

Published: 09 February 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Two studies investigated change in computer science (CS) students’ implicit intelligence beliefs. Across both studies, we found that the strength of incremental and entity beliefs changed across time. In Study 1, we found that incremental beliefs decreased and entity beliefs increased across the semester. Change in implicit intelligence beliefs was similar for students taking introductory and upper-division courses. In Study 2, growth curve analysis revealed a small linear change in incremental beliefs across time but no change in entity beliefs—these trends were similar for students enrolled in introductory and upper-division CS courses. Across both studies, change in implicit intelligence beliefs was not associated with academic achievement in CS. Findings provide preliminary evidence that shifts in implicit intelligence beliefs occur as students progress through the CS curriculum. Finally, findings support that mindset interventions may be more effective if delivered at the beginning of the semester before shifts in beliefs occur.

References

[1]

Joshua Aronson, Carrie B. Fried, and Catherine Good. 2002. Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 38, 2 (2002), 113–125.

[2]

Lisa S. Blackwell, Kali H. Trzesniewski, and Carol S. Dweck. 2007. Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development 78, 1 (2007), 246–263.

[3]

Lisa Brougham and Susan Kashubeck-West. 2018. Impact of a growth mindset intervention on academic performance of students at two urban high schools. Professional School Counseling 21, 1 (2018), 1–9.

[4]

Jeni L. Burnette, Crystal L. Hoyt, Michelle Russell, Barry Lawson, Carol S. Dweck, and Eli Finkel. 2020. A growth mind-set intervention improves interest but not academic performance in the field of computer science. Social Psychological and Personality Science 11, 1 (2020), 107–116.

[5]

Jeni L. Burnette, Ernest H. O'Boyle, Eric M. VanEpps, Jeffrey M. Pollack, and Eli J. Finkel. 2013. Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological Bulletin 139, 3 (2013), 655–701.

[6]

Elizabeth A. Canning, Katherine Muenks, Dorainne J. Green, and Mary C. Murphy. 2019. STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes. Science Advances 5, 2 (2019), 1–7.

[7]

Martin V. Covington. 2004. Self-worth theory goes to college or do our motivation theories motivate. In Big Theories Revisited. Dennis M. McInerney and Shawn Van Etten (Eds.). Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC, 91–114.

[8]

Martin V. Covington. 2009. Self-worth theory: Reflections and prospects. In Handbook of Motivation at School. Kathryn R. Wentzel, Allan Wigfield, and David Miele (Eds.). Taylor & Francis, Milton Park, UK, 141–169.

[9]

Gloria Crisp, Amaury Nora, and Amanda Taggart. 2009. Student characteristics, pre-college, college, and environmental factors as predictors of majoring in and earning a STEM degree: An analysis of students attending a Hispanic serving institution. American Educational Research Journal 46, 4 (2009), 924–942.

[10]

Jennifer G. Cromley, Tony Perez, and Avi Kaplan. 2016. Undergraduate STEM achievement and retention: Cognitive, motivational, and institutional factors and solutions. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3, 1 (2016), 4–11.

[11]

Quintin Cutts, Emily Cutts, Stephen Draper, Patrick O'Donnell, and Peter Saffrey. 2010. Manipulating mindset to positively influence introductory programming performance. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. 431–435.

Digital Library

[12]

Ting Dai and Jennifer G. Cromley. 2014. Changes in implicit theories of ability in biology and dropout from STEM majors: A latent growth curve approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology 39, 3 (2014), 233–247.

[13]

Jody L. Davis, Jeni L. Burnette, Scott T. Allison, and Heather Stone. 2011. Against the odds: Academic underdogs benefit from incremental theories. Social Psychology of Education 14, 3 (2011), 331–346.

[14]

Teresa K. DeBacker, Benjamin C. Heddy, Julianna Lopez Kershen, H. Michael Crowson, Kristyna Looney, and Jacqueline A. Goldman. 2018. Effects of a one-shot growth mindset intervention on beliefs about intelligence and achievement goals. Educational Psychology 38, 6 (2018), 711–733.

[15]

Felix C. Dinger, Oliver Dickhäuser, Birgit Spinath, and Ricarda Steinmayr. 2013. Antecedents and consequences of students’ achievement goals: A mediation analysis. Learning and Individual Differences 28 (2013), 90–101.

[16]

Felix C. Dinger and Oliver Dickhäuser. 2013. Does implicit theory of intelligence cause achievement goals? Evidence from an experimental study. International Journal of Educational Research 61 (2013), 38–47.

[17]

Caroline Dupeyrat and Claudette Mariné. 2005. Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement: A test of Dweck's model with returning to school adults. Contemporary Educational Psychology 30, 1 (2005), 43–59.

[18]

Carol S. Dweck. 2000. Self-Theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development. Psychology Press, London, UK.

[19]

Carol S. Dweck. 2006. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House Publishing Group, New York, NY.

[20]

Carol S. Dweck and Ellen L. Leggett. 1988. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review 95, 2 (1988), 256–273.

[21]

Carol S. Dweck and Daniel C. Molden. 2005. Self-theories: Their impact on competence motivation and acquisition. In Handbook of Competence and Motivation. Andrew J. Elliot and Carol S. Dweck (Eds.). Guilford Press, New York, NY, 122–140.

[22]

Carol S. Dweck and David S. Yeager. 2019. Mindsets: A view from two eras. Perspectives on Psychological Science 14, 3 (2019), 481–496.

[23]

Carol S. Dweck, Chi-Yue Chiu, and Ying-Yi Hong. (1995). Implicit theories: Elaboration and extension of the model. Psychological Inquiry 6, 4 (1995), 322–333.

[24]

Christopher I. Eckhardt, Howard Kassinove, and Lawrence Edwards. 1992. Religious beliefs and scientific ideology in psychologists: Conflicting or coexisting systems? Psychological Reports 71, 1 (1992), 131–145.

[25]

Leon Festinger. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press, Redwood City, CA.

[26]

Abraham E. Flanigan, Markeya S. Peteranetz, Duane F. Shell, and Leen-Kiat Soh. 2015. Exploring changes in computer science students’ implicit theories of intelligence across the semester. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM International Computing Education Research Conference (ICER’15). ACM, New York, NY, 161–168.

Digital Library

[27]

Abraham E. Flanigan, Markeya S. Peteranetz, Duane F. Shell, and Leen-Kiat Soh. 2017. Implicit intelligence beliefs of computer science students: Exploring change across the semester. Contemporary Educational Psychology 48 (2017), 179–196.

[28]

Eleftheria Gonida, Grigoris Kiosseoglou, and Angeliki Leondari. 2006. Implicit theories of intelligence, perceived academic competence, and school achievement: Testing alternative models. American Journal of Psychology 119, 2 (2006), 223–238.

[29]

Catherine Good, Joshua Aronson, and Michael Inzlicht. 2003. Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 24, 6 (2003), 645–662.

[30]

Steve Graham. 2015. Inaugural editorial for the Journal of Educational Psychology. Journal of Educational Psychology 107, 1 (2015), 1–2.

[31]

Heidi Grant and Carol S. Dweck. 2003. Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85, 3 (2003), 541–553.

[32]

Jeffrey A. Greene, Lara-Jeane Costa, Jane Robertson, Yi Pan, and Victor M. Deekens. 2010. Exploring relations among college students’ prior knowledge, implicit theories of intelligence, and self-regulated learning in a hypermedia environment. Computers & Education 55, 3 (2010), 1027–1043.

Digital Library

[33]

Amanda L. Griffith. 2010. Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters? Economics of Education Review 29, 6 (2010), 911–922.

[34]

John T. Guthrie, Cassandra S. Coddington, and Allan Wigfield. 2009. Profiles of reading motivation among African American and Caucasian students. Journal of Literacy Research 41, 3 (2009), 317–353.

[35]

Melissa Patterson Hazley, Duane F. Shell, Leen-Kiat Soh, L. Dee Miller, Vlad Chiriacescu, and Elizabeth Ingraham. 2014. Changes in student goal orientation across the semester in undergraduate computer science courses. In Proceedings of the 44th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 2278–2285.

[36]

Ying-Yi Hong, Chi-Yue Chi, Carol S. Dweck, Derrick M. Lin, and Wendy Wan. 1999. Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77, 3 (1999), 588–599.

[37]

Andrew J. Howell and Karen Buro. 2009. Implicit beliefs, achievement goals, and procrastination: A mediational analysis. Learning and Individual Differences 19, 1 (2009), 151–154.

[38]

Li-Tze Hu and Peter M. Bentler. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6, 1 (1999), 1–55.

[39]

You-Kyung Lee and Eunjin Seo. 2019. Trajectories of implicit theories and their relations to scholastic aptitude: A mediational role of achievement goals. Contemporary Educational Psychology 59 (2019), Article 101800.

[40]

Sarah-Jane Leslie, Andrei Cimpian, Meredith Meyer, and Edward Freeland. 2015. Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science 347 (2015), 262–265.

[41]

Clayton Lewis. 2007. Attitudes and beliefs about computer science among students and faculty. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 39, 2 (2007), 37–41.

Digital Library

[42]

Carlo Mango. 2012. Implicit theories of intelligence, achievement goal orientation, and academic achievement of engineering students. International Journal of Research and Review 9 (2012), 32–43.

[43]

Andrew J. Martin. 2015. Implicit theories about intelligence and growth (personal best) goals: Exploring reciprocal relationships. British Journal of Educational Psychology 85 (2015), 207–223.

[44]

Andrew J. Martin, Keiko Bostwick, Rebecca J. Collie, and Ana L. Tarbetsky. 2017. Implicit theories of intelligence. In Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Virgil Zeigler-Hill and Todd K. Shackelford (Eds.). Springer, New York, NY, 1–16.

[45]

Matthew Meyer and Sherry Marx. 2014. Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why undergraduates leave engineering. Journal of Engineering Education 103, 4 (2014), 525–548.

[46]

Enrico Nardelli. 2019. Do we really need computational thinking? Communications of the ACM 62, 2 (2019), 32–35.

Digital Library

[47]

Katherine G. Nelson, Duane F. Shell, Jenefer Husman, Evan J. Fishman, and Leen-Kiat Soh. 2015. Motivational and self-regulated learning profiles of students taking a foundational engineering course. Journal of Engineering Education 104, 1 (2015), 74–100.

[48]

David Paunesku, Gregory M. Walton, Carissa Romero, Eric N. Smith, David S. Yeager, and Carol S. Dweck. 2015. Mind-set interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science 26, 6 (2015), 784–793.

[49]

Markeya S. Peteranetz and Anthony D. Albano. 2020. Development and evaluation of the Nebraska Assessment of Computing Knowledge. Frontiers in Computer Science 2, 12 (2020), Article 11.

[50]

Markeya S. Peteranetz, Abraham E. Flanigan, Duane F. Shell, and Leen-Kiat Soh. 2018. Career aspirations, perceived instrumentality, and achievement in undergraduate computer science courses. Contemporary Educational Psychology 53 (2018), 27–44.

[51]

Aneeta Rattan, Catherine Good, and Carol S. Dweck. 2012. “It's ok—Not everyone can be good at math”: Instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48, 3 (2012), 731–737.

[52]

Kenneth J. Reid and Daniel M. Ferguson. 2014. Assessing changes in mindset of freshman engineers. In Proceedings of the 2014 ASEE North Central Section Conference (NCS’14).

[53]

Richard W. Robins and Jennifer L. Pals. 2002. Implicit self-theories in the academic domain: Implications for goal orientation, attributions, affect, and self-esteem change. Self and Identity 78, 1 (2002), 246–263.

[54]

Elaine Seymour and Nancy M. Hewitt. 1997. Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences. Westview Press, Nashville, TN.

[55]

Duane F. Shell, Melissa P. Hazley, Leen-Kiat Soh, Elizabeth Ingraham, and Stephen Ramsay. 2013. Associations of students’ creativity, motivation, and self-regulation with learning and achievement in college computer science courses. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1637–1643.

[56]

Duane F. Shell and Leen-Kiat Soh. 2013. Profiles of motivated self-regulation in college computer science courses: Differences in major versus required non-major courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology 22, 6 (2013), 899–913.

[57]

Duane F. Shell, Leen-Kiat Soh, Abraham E. Flanigan, and Markeya S. Peteranetz. 2016. Students’ initial course motivation and their achievement and retention in college CS1 courses. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’16). ACM, New York, NY, 639–644.

Digital Library

[58]

Rebecca L. Shively and Carey S. Ryan. 2013. Longitudinal changes in college math students’ implicit theories of intelligence. Social Psychology of Education 16, 2 (2013), 241–256.

[59]

Beth Simon, Brian Hanks, Laurie Murphy, Sue Fitzgerald, Renee McCauley, Lynda Thomas, and Carol Zander. 2008. Saying isn't necessarily believing: Influencing self-theories in computing. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Computing Education Research Conference (ICER’08). ACM, New York, NY, 173–184.

Digital Library

[60]

Victoria F. Sisk, Alexander P. Burgoyne, Jingze Sun, Jennifer L. Butler, and Brooke N. Macnamara. 2018. To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two meta-analyses. Psychological Science 4 (2018), 549–571.

[61]

Ana L. Tarbetsky, Rebecca J. Collie, and Andrew J. Martin. 2016. The role of implicit theories of intelligence and ability in predicting achievement for indigenous (Aboriginal) Australian students. Contemporary Educational Psychology 47 (2016), 61–71.

[62]

Ioana Todor. 2014. Investigating “the old stereotype” about boys/girls and mathematics: Gender differences in implicit theory of intelligence and mathematics self-efficacy beliefs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 159 (2014), 319–323.

[63]

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2019. Occupational Outlook Handbook. Available at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/.

[64]

Jessica Watkins and Eric Mazur. 2013. Retaining students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors. Journal of College Science Teaching 42, 5 (2013), 36–41.

[65]

David S. Yeager and Carol S. Dweck. 2012. Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist 47, 4 (2012), 302–314.

Cited By

Altoe FMoreira CPinto HJorge J(2024)Online Fake News Opinion Spread and Belief Change: A Systematic ReviewHuman Behavior and Emerging Technologies10.1155/2024/10696702024(1-20)Online publication date: 30-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1069670
Arn LHuang E(2024)“Robots Can Do Disgusting Things, but Also Good Things”: Fostering Children’s Understanding of AI through StorytellingACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/367761324:3(1-55)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3677613
Morales-Navarro LFields DKafai Y(2024)Understanding growth mindset practices in an introductory physical computing classroom: high school students’ engagement with debugging by design activitiesComputer Science Education10.1080/08993408.2024.2317080(1-31)Online publication date: 13-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2024.2317080
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Shifting Beliefs in Computer Science: Change in CS Student Mindsets
1. Social and professional topics
  1. User characteristics

Recommendations

Relationship Between Implicit Intelligence Beliefs and Maladaptive Self-Regulation of Learning
Objectives. Although prior research has uncovered shifts in computer science (CS) students’ implicit beliefs about the nature of their intelligence across time, little research has investigated the factors contributing to these changes. To address this ...
Computer science at school/CS teacher education: Koli working-group report on CS at school
Koli Calling '12: Proceedings of the 12th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research

In an international study, experts reflected on their national state of computer science education in school, and the associated situation and education of computer science teachers. While these situations are shaped by local circumstances, they are ...
Exploring the Participation of CS Undergraduate Students in Industry Internships
SIGCSE '20: Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Industry internships offer CS students an opportunity to gain authentic disciplinary experiences, evaluate self-interests, and secure future employment. However, little is empirically known about CS students' participation in industry internships and ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computing Education

ACM Transactions on Computing Education Volume 22, Issue 2

June 2022

312 pages

EISSN:1946-6226

DOI:10.1145/3494072

Editor:
Amy J. Ko
University of Washington, USA

Issue’s Table of Contents

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 09 February 2022

Accepted: 01 October 2021

Revised: 01 July 2021

Received: 01 March 2021

Published in TOCE Volume 22, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Refereed

Funding Sources

National Science Foundation

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
464
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)109
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)17

Reflects downloads up to 16 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Altoe FMoreira CPinto HJorge J(2024)Online Fake News Opinion Spread and Belief Change: A Systematic ReviewHuman Behavior and Emerging Technologies10.1155/2024/10696702024(1-20)Online publication date: 30-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1069670
Arn LHuang E(2024)“Robots Can Do Disgusting Things, but Also Good Things”: Fostering Children’s Understanding of AI through StorytellingACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/367761324:3(1-55)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3677613
Morales-Navarro LFields DKafai Y(2024)Understanding growth mindset practices in an introductory physical computing classroom: high school students’ engagement with debugging by design activitiesComputer Science Education10.1080/08993408.2024.2317080(1-31)Online publication date: 13-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2024.2317080
Flanigan APeteranetz MShell DSoh L(2023)Relationship Between Implicit Intelligence Beliefs and Maladaptive Self-Regulation of LearningACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/359518723:3(1-23)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3595187
Batten MRoss M(2023)(Work in Progress) Mindset in the Computing Classroom and Broadening Participation: A Pilot Study2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343380(1-5)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343380
Morales-Navarro LGiang MFields DKafai Y(2023)Connecting beliefs, mindsets, anxiety and self-efficacy in computer science learning: an instrument for capturing secondary school students’ self-beliefsComputer Science Education10.1080/08993408.2023.220154834:3(387-413)Online publication date: 11-Apr-2023
https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2023.2201548
Kaur AChahal K(2023)A Review on the Impact of Cognitive Factors in Introductory ProgrammingProceedings of Fourth International Conference on Communication, Computing and Electronics Systems10.1007/978-981-19-7753-4_77(1019-1032)Online publication date: 15-Mar-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7753-4_77

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Full Text

View this article in Full Text.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View full text|Download PDF

View Issue’s Table of Contents