Engineering Students' Intelligence Beliefs and Learning
Background Students' beliefs about their intellectual ability influence their use of learning strategies, learning effort, and response to failure or setbacks. Students with incremental views of intelligence believe that learning is possible with sufficient effort, whereas those with entity vie...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 2014-07, Vol.103 (3), p.369-387 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 387 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 369 |
container_title | Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.) |
container_volume | 103 |
creator | Stump, Glenda S. Husman, Jenefer Corby, Marcia |
description | Background
Students' beliefs about their intellectual ability influence their use of learning strategies, learning effort, and response to failure or setbacks. Students with incremental views of intelligence believe that learning is possible with sufficient effort, whereas those with entity views believe that intelligence is a fixed quality and expenditure of effort reflects an insufficient amount of that quality.
Purpose
This study examined the relationship between engineering students' beliefs about intelligence and their perceived use of active learning strategies such as collaboration and knowledge‐building behaviors, self‐efficacy for learning and performance, and course grade. The study also examined the extent of entity and incremental beliefs in a sample of engineering students.
Design/Method
The correlational study analyzed data from 377 engineering students recruited from required engineering courses at a large public university. We used bivariate correlations to examine relationships between study variables and multiple regression analyses to examine predictive ability of the variables on learning strategies and course grade.
Results
Our results showed that students' intelligence beliefs were correlated with active learning strategies. Self‐efficacy, reported use of collaboration, and incremental beliefs about intelligence were predictive of students' reported use of knowledge‐building behaviors. Intelligence beliefs were not predictive of course grade.
Conclusions
Our results demonstrate the utility of these motivational beliefs for understanding university engineering students' learning efforts. Our results also suggest a need for instructors to support incremental views of intelligence among engineering students. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jee.20051 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1636192772</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1255750</ericid><sourcerecordid>3526036991</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4271-8e5a6ced0c28827de6e93bc3e77b34bfeb4687c6c1f8d044ad151251a1e6e50a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtPwzAQhC0EEuVx4AcgReKAOATWdmwnR0DhUaoi8RDcLNfZVCnBLXYq6L_HEODGaQ_zzYx2CNmjcEwB2MkM8ZgBCLpGBozKPC1yDutkQEEWaaY4bJKtEGYAUIBUA6JKN20com_cNLnvlhW6Lhwm167Dtm2m6CwmZ9g2WIfEuCoZofEusjtkozZtwN2fu00eL8qH86t0dHt5fX46Sm3GFE1zFEZarMCyPGeqQokFn1iOSk14NqlxkslcWWlpnVeQZaaigjJBDY2kAMO3yUGfu_DztyWGTs_mS-9ipaaSS1owpVikjnrK-nkIHmu98M2r8StNQX_touMu-nuXyO73bPzZ_nHlMNYKJSDqJ73-3rS4-j9ID8vyNzHtHU3o8OPPYfyLlooroZ_Gl3r4PJYgbqi-45_Y_Xs7</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1636192772</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Engineering Students' Intelligence Beliefs and Learning</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Journals</source><source>Education Source (EBSCOhost)</source><creator>Stump, Glenda S. ; Husman, Jenefer ; Corby, Marcia</creator><creatorcontrib>Stump, Glenda S. ; Husman, Jenefer ; Corby, Marcia</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Students' beliefs about their intellectual ability influence their use of learning strategies, learning effort, and response to failure or setbacks. Students with incremental views of intelligence believe that learning is possible with sufficient effort, whereas those with entity views believe that intelligence is a fixed quality and expenditure of effort reflects an insufficient amount of that quality.
Purpose
This study examined the relationship between engineering students' beliefs about intelligence and their perceived use of active learning strategies such as collaboration and knowledge‐building behaviors, self‐efficacy for learning and performance, and course grade. The study also examined the extent of entity and incremental beliefs in a sample of engineering students.
Design/Method
The correlational study analyzed data from 377 engineering students recruited from required engineering courses at a large public university. We used bivariate correlations to examine relationships between study variables and multiple regression analyses to examine predictive ability of the variables on learning strategies and course grade.
Results
Our results showed that students' intelligence beliefs were correlated with active learning strategies. Self‐efficacy, reported use of collaboration, and incremental beliefs about intelligence were predictive of students' reported use of knowledge‐building behaviors. Intelligence beliefs were not predictive of course grade.
Conclusions
Our results demonstrate the utility of these motivational beliefs for understanding university engineering students' learning efforts. Our results also suggest a need for instructors to support incremental views of intelligence among engineering students.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1069-4730</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2168-9830</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jee.20051</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEEDEQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Academic Achievement ; Beliefs ; Cognitive Ability ; collaboration ; College Students ; Cooperative Learning ; Correlational studies ; Educational Attitudes ; Engineering Education ; Grades (Scholastic) ; Intelligence ; intelligence beliefs ; knowledge-building behaviors ; Learning Motivation ; Learning Strategies ; Multiple Regression Analysis ; Self Efficacy ; Student Attitudes ; Studies ; Teaching methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.), 2014-07, Vol.103 (3), p.369-387</ispartof><rights>2014 ASEE</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Jul 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4271-8e5a6ced0c28827de6e93bc3e77b34bfeb4687c6c1f8d044ad151251a1e6e50a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4271-8e5a6ced0c28827de6e93bc3e77b34bfeb4687c6c1f8d044ad151251a1e6e50a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjee.20051$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjee.20051$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1255750$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stump, Glenda S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Husman, Jenefer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corby, Marcia</creatorcontrib><title>Engineering Students' Intelligence Beliefs and Learning</title><title>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.)</title><addtitle>J. Eng. Educ</addtitle><description>Background
Students' beliefs about their intellectual ability influence their use of learning strategies, learning effort, and response to failure or setbacks. Students with incremental views of intelligence believe that learning is possible with sufficient effort, whereas those with entity views believe that intelligence is a fixed quality and expenditure of effort reflects an insufficient amount of that quality.
Purpose
This study examined the relationship between engineering students' beliefs about intelligence and their perceived use of active learning strategies such as collaboration and knowledge‐building behaviors, self‐efficacy for learning and performance, and course grade. The study also examined the extent of entity and incremental beliefs in a sample of engineering students.
Design/Method
The correlational study analyzed data from 377 engineering students recruited from required engineering courses at a large public university. We used bivariate correlations to examine relationships between study variables and multiple regression analyses to examine predictive ability of the variables on learning strategies and course grade.
Results
Our results showed that students' intelligence beliefs were correlated with active learning strategies. Self‐efficacy, reported use of collaboration, and incremental beliefs about intelligence were predictive of students' reported use of knowledge‐building behaviors. Intelligence beliefs were not predictive of course grade.
Conclusions
Our results demonstrate the utility of these motivational beliefs for understanding university engineering students' learning efforts. Our results also suggest a need for instructors to support incremental views of intelligence among engineering students.</description><subject>Academic Achievement</subject><subject>Beliefs</subject><subject>Cognitive Ability</subject><subject>collaboration</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Cooperative Learning</subject><subject>Correlational studies</subject><subject>Educational Attitudes</subject><subject>Engineering Education</subject><subject>Grades (Scholastic)</subject><subject>Intelligence</subject><subject>intelligence beliefs</subject><subject>knowledge-building behaviors</subject><subject>Learning Motivation</subject><subject>Learning Strategies</subject><subject>Multiple Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Self Efficacy</subject><subject>Student Attitudes</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Teaching methods</subject><issn>1069-4730</issn><issn>2168-9830</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEtPwzAQhC0EEuVx4AcgReKAOATWdmwnR0DhUaoi8RDcLNfZVCnBLXYq6L_HEODGaQ_zzYx2CNmjcEwB2MkM8ZgBCLpGBozKPC1yDutkQEEWaaY4bJKtEGYAUIBUA6JKN20com_cNLnvlhW6Lhwm167Dtm2m6CwmZ9g2WIfEuCoZofEusjtkozZtwN2fu00eL8qH86t0dHt5fX46Sm3GFE1zFEZarMCyPGeqQokFn1iOSk14NqlxkslcWWlpnVeQZaaigjJBDY2kAMO3yUGfu_DztyWGTs_mS-9ipaaSS1owpVikjnrK-nkIHmu98M2r8StNQX_touMu-nuXyO73bPzZ_nHlMNYKJSDqJ73-3rS4-j9ID8vyNzHtHU3o8OPPYfyLlooroZ_Gl3r4PJYgbqi-45_Y_Xs7</recordid><startdate>201407</startdate><enddate>201407</enddate><creator>Stump, Glenda S.</creator><creator>Husman, Jenefer</creator><creator>Corby, Marcia</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0W</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201407</creationdate><title>Engineering Students' Intelligence Beliefs and Learning</title><author>Stump, Glenda S. ; Husman, Jenefer ; Corby, Marcia</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4271-8e5a6ced0c28827de6e93bc3e77b34bfeb4687c6c1f8d044ad151251a1e6e50a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Academic Achievement</topic><topic>Beliefs</topic><topic>Cognitive Ability</topic><topic>collaboration</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Cooperative Learning</topic><topic>Correlational studies</topic><topic>Educational Attitudes</topic><topic>Engineering Education</topic><topic>Grades (Scholastic)</topic><topic>Intelligence</topic><topic>intelligence beliefs</topic><topic>knowledge-building behaviors</topic><topic>Learning Motivation</topic><topic>Learning Strategies</topic><topic>Multiple Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Self Efficacy</topic><topic>Student Attitudes</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Teaching methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stump, Glenda S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Husman, Jenefer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Corby, Marcia</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>DELNET Engineering & Technology Collection</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stump, Glenda S.</au><au>Husman, Jenefer</au><au>Corby, Marcia</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1255750</ericid><atitle>Engineering Students' Intelligence Beliefs and Learning</atitle><jtitle>Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle><addtitle>J. Eng. Educ</addtitle><date>2014-07</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>103</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>369</spage><epage>387</epage><pages>369-387</pages><issn>1069-4730</issn><eissn>2168-9830</eissn><coden>JEEDEQ</coden><abstract>Background
Students' beliefs about their intellectual ability influence their use of learning strategies, learning effort, and response to failure or setbacks. Students with incremental views of intelligence believe that learning is possible with sufficient effort, whereas those with entity views believe that intelligence is a fixed quality and expenditure of effort reflects an insufficient amount of that quality.
Purpose
This study examined the relationship between engineering students' beliefs about intelligence and their perceived use of active learning strategies such as collaboration and knowledge‐building behaviors, self‐efficacy for learning and performance, and course grade. The study also examined the extent of entity and incremental beliefs in a sample of engineering students.
Design/Method
The correlational study analyzed data from 377 engineering students recruited from required engineering courses at a large public university. We used bivariate correlations to examine relationships between study variables and multiple regression analyses to examine predictive ability of the variables on learning strategies and course grade.
Results
Our results showed that students' intelligence beliefs were correlated with active learning strategies. Self‐efficacy, reported use of collaboration, and incremental beliefs about intelligence were predictive of students' reported use of knowledge‐building behaviors. Intelligence beliefs were not predictive of course grade.
Conclusions
Our results demonstrate the utility of these motivational beliefs for understanding university engineering students' learning efforts. Our results also suggest a need for instructors to support incremental views of intelligence among engineering students.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/jee.20051</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1069-4730 |
ispartof | Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.), 2014-07, Vol.103 (3), p.369-387 |
issn | 1069-4730 2168-9830 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1636192772 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Journals; Education Source (EBSCOhost) |
subjects | Academic Achievement Beliefs Cognitive Ability collaboration College Students Cooperative Learning Correlational studies Educational Attitudes Engineering Education Grades (Scholastic) Intelligence intelligence beliefs knowledge-building behaviors Learning Motivation Learning Strategies Multiple Regression Analysis Self Efficacy Student Attitudes Studies Teaching methods |
title | Engineering Students' Intelligence Beliefs and Learning |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T17%3A18%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Engineering%20Students'%20Intelligence%20Beliefs%20and%20Learning&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20engineering%20education%20(Washington,%20D.C.)&rft.au=Stump,%20Glenda%20S.&rft.date=2014-07&rft.volume=103&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=369&rft.epage=387&rft.pages=369-387&rft.issn=1069-4730&rft.eissn=2168-9830&rft.coden=JEEDEQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jee.20051&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3526036991%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1636192772&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1255750&rfr_iscdi=true |