Effort-Instruction Versus Intelligence-Instruction Effects on Performance
Effort-Instruction Versus Intelligence-Instruction Effects on Performance
Franz Martin Baltazar
Human Development Program
University of California, San Diego
Abstract
Previous research studies have revealed conclusions regarding the effects of praise and criticism on people’s performance, yet none has answered which instructional method, effort-instruction or praise-instruction, yields better performance in students. In this study, 53 undergraduates students, 47 female and 6 males, ages 19-27 were randomly divided into two groups before being administered a 12-question test. One group, the Effort Instruction Group, was given explicit instructions to put forth their best effort while the other group, the Intelligence Instruction Group, was praised for their intelligence. The results supported the hypothesis that the mean EIG test score would be significantly better than IIG. These results may help educational institutions decide which instructional methods maximize students learning and performance. Keywords: Effort instruction, intelligence instruction, instructional methods
Effort-Instruction Versus Intelligence-Instruction Effects on Performance Do people perform a task better when they are praised for their intelligence beforehand or do they perform better when they are explicitly asked to put forth their best effort? Questions regarding contrasting instructional methods are of interest to educational institutions, teachers, and students alike because they may very well hold the keys to maximizing performance and the potential for learning. Conventional wisdom suggests that praising a person’s ability is an acceptable method for promoting self-confidence, but previous research has challenged this notion. Conclusions from previous studies maintain that students who are directed towards judging their ability while performing a task are likely to demonstrate low expectations for future success when met with setbacks (Kamins & Dweck, 1999). In
Franz Martin Baltazar
Human Development Program
University of California, San Diego
Abstract
Previous research studies have revealed conclusions regarding the effects of praise and criticism on people’s performance, yet none has answered which instructional method, effort-instruction or praise-instruction, yields better performance in students. In this study, 53 undergraduates students, 47 female and 6 males, ages 19-27 were randomly divided into two groups before being administered a 12-question test. One group, the Effort Instruction Group, was given explicit instructions to put forth their best effort while the other group, the Intelligence Instruction Group, was praised for their intelligence. The results supported the hypothesis that the mean EIG test score would be significantly better than IIG. These results may help educational institutions decide which instructional methods maximize students learning and performance. Keywords: Effort instruction, intelligence instruction, instructional methods
Effort-Instruction Versus Intelligence-Instruction Effects on Performance Do people perform a task better when they are praised for their intelligence beforehand or do they perform better when they are explicitly asked to put forth their best effort? Questions regarding contrasting instructional methods are of interest to educational institutions, teachers, and students alike because they may very well hold the keys to maximizing performance and the potential for learning. Conventional wisdom suggests that praising a person’s ability is an acceptable method for promoting self-confidence, but previous research has challenged this notion. Conclusions from previous studies maintain that students who are directed towards judging their ability while performing a task are likely to demonstrate low expectations for future success when met with setbacks (Kamins & Dweck, 1999). In
References: Kamins, M. L., Dweck, C. S., (1999). Person versus process praise and criticism: Implications for cotingent self-worth and coping, Developmental Psychology, 35, 835-847.