Predicators of college student achievement.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the contributions of motivation, personality, learning strategies, and scholastic aptitude to academic achievement in college students. One hundred and eighty six undergraduate students completed measures that assessed academic achievement through grade point average (GPA). When partialled out with SAT score, only personality variables, explicitly Type T Personality and openness to experience remained significant predictors of academic achievement.

Introduction

One major goal of educational psychological research is to increase our understanding of the role of individual differences, motivation, and learning in academic achievement (Pintrich, 2003). Students with insight about their individual cognitive style and motivation levels tend to seek educational environments that will enhance their learning. Increasing the educators' awareness of students' individual differences could yield several benefits (Cervone & Mischel, 2002). First, educators could use this information to adjust the learning environment to meet students' individual needs including addressing any motivational problems that may be antecedents of college attrition rates (Hancock, Bray, & Nason, 2002). Moreover, educators could learn better about students' levels of cognitive engagement to facilitate their persevering through difficult work (Meyer & Turner, 2002). In addition, educators could improve the quality of college academic instruction, such as the implementation of a cooperative instructional environment. Finally, any insight about how students vary on given dimensions could hopefully facilitate self-regulation processes (Mischel & Shoda, 2000). Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the role of personality, motivation, the use of learning strategies, and scholastic aptitude in the academic achievement of college students.

Literature Review

Personality Factors

Two trait theories of personality were considered in this study, the Five Factor Model (FFM) (McCrae & Costa, 1999) and Type T Personality (Farley, 1991). The five tenets of FFM represent basic tendencies, characteristic adaptations, self-concept, objective biography, and external influences. The system's five personality factors are: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experiences, agreeableness, and conscientiousness and are postulated to develop during childhood, remain stable through adulthood, and influence patterns of thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.

The second perspective on personality is what Farley (1991) calls the Type T Personality, where thrill seeking (T) is a personality trait in people who are risk-takers, and are motivated by variety, novelty, intensity, and uncertainty. In addition, they are attracted to situations with high levels of stimulation, energy, and creativity and prefer internal/mental stimulation (T mental), external/physical stimulation (T physical), or both, with positive (T+) and negative (T-) expressions of the personality. T Types are postulated to thrive in an academic environment where there is a high level of stimulation (variety, novelty, uncertainty, etc.) when compared to their opposites who do not need as much stimulation (the Small t Personality) (Farley, 1991).

In conclusion, personality researchers have proposed that stable personality factors are a lens through which learners view their world. Learning strategies need to incorporate personality factors because the latter play a role in student engagement. Busato, Prins, Elshout, and Hamaker (2000) reported that the most educationally relevant of the Big Five were conscientiousness, openness to experience, and extraversion. Thus, these were the three variables from the Five Factor Model that were incorporated into the present study, along with the Type T Personality.

Motivational Processes

Motivation is a primary factor in biological, cognitive, and behavioral regulation. It influences intention, direction, and perseverance for production of a desired consequence (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Academic motivation reflects students' levels of academic effort, persistence, and interest (DiPema & Elliot, 1999). Four current theoretical perspectives on motivational processes will be considered. They are self-determination theory, the agentic perspective, goal setting theory, and attribution theory. Although they diverge in their foundations, they are more similar than different. Their main commonality is a general theme of autonomy.

First, the self-determination theory (SDT) of Ryan and Deci (2000), considers the interaction between internal development and behavioral self-regulation in order for individuals to meet their achievement needs through a continuum from amotivation, to extrinsic motivation, to intrinsic motivation. Amotivation is the lack of intention, desire, or willingness to take action (i.e., procrastination). Extrinsic motivation is the desire to achieve due to external or tangible rewards, such as money, grades, and recognition. Intrinsic motivation is the desire to achieve for the sake of pure satisfaction, sense of purpose, inherent interest, self-importance, or enjoyment in the absence of tangible and external rewards, like constructive feedback and the privilege to participate in activities that are supplemental and challenging.

Secondly, a person who is intrinsically motivated portrays an agent according to the agentic perspective (Bandura, 2001). This perspective states that achievement and motivation stem from agents, who are proactive individuals with a strong sense of self-efficacy who take charge of their own lives by setting their own goals, and choosing their behaviors.

Thirdly, goal setting theory states that individuals actively choose a course of action to meet a proficiency level, criterion standard, or both. Goals are known as objects or the aim of action that produces incentives. Extrinsically motivated goals would be the more performance oriented or tangible goals such as grades, whereas a learning goal to achieve content mastery could be considered an intrinsically motivated goal (Harackiewicz, Barron, Tauer, & Elliot, 2002; Locke & Latham, 2002; Pintrich, 2003).

Finally, attribution theory examines the impact that variables such as effort, ability, task, strategy, and luck, have on success or failure (Weiner, 2000). The level of motivation will influence both the process and result of the task. In sum, the fundamental message of the four theories above is that personal autonomy is more likely to motivate individuals to maximize their fullest potential, rather than control by others.

Learning Strategies

Dewey (1929) emphasized the need for educators to recognize, understand, and embrace students' individual educational interests. Learning strategies are the students' cognitive techniques applied in knowledge acquisition. Three broad applications of strategies are considered here.

First, the learner-centered educational model (McCombs, 1998) is based on the notion that learning is a shared experience between the educator and the learner, where the educator facilitates the students' learning process as opposed to controlling it. Its elements include classroom decision-making, encouraging students to set challenging learning goals, and integrating teaching strategies such as metacognition so that students may be intrinsically motivated to meet their intellectual needs.

Second, Brophy's (1999) concept of valuing the learning experience is similar to the learner-centered education model. Value occurs when students are engaged in activities without the pressure of performance; value is believed to be related to intrinsic motivation. Value might be enhanced through the choice of learning activities that meet students' cognitive level while elaborating prior knowledge to create meaning for the student.

Finally, concurrent with both models, McKeachie (1999) asserts the importance of students taking responsibility for their own learning experience. One of McKeachie's fundamental principles for effective pedagogy is for students to know how to learn and think; he emphasizes student note taking, which facilitates processes of elaboration and self-regulation, increasing meaningfulness and retention. In conclusion, effective learning strategies are currently a focal point in educational psychological research. The present study incorporated learning strategy variables of metacognitive self-regulation and effort regulation.

Scholastic Aptitude

Studies of scholastic aptitude and academic achievement in college often use the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). Thus, the SAT was employed in the present study (College Board, 2003).

Method

Participants

Through application of a power analysis, the sample consisted of 186 undergraduate students from a large Northeastern university. Participants were given measures while in their core undergraduate summer classes (e.g., Intellectual Heritage, History, Latin), most of whom were sophomore or junior status. All students who provided both GPA and SAT were retained in the study.

Research Design

The study used a non-experimental correlational design. Pearson correlations were computed with multiple regression analyses, and with GPA as the dependent variable.

Measures

Participants were administered an anonymous, self-report questionnaire. One section assessed motivation levels and the use of learning strategies with scales from the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & McKeachie, 1993) and the Academic Motivation Scale (AMS) (Vallerand, et al, 1992). Another section measured personality factors with questions adopted from the NEO Five Factor Inventory (FFI) (Costa & McCrae, 1991) and Farley's Type T Measure (Farley, 1991). For aptitude and academic achievement, self-reported SAT scores and overall university cumulative GPA, respectively, were obtained.

Procedure

Course instructors were contacted during the summer of 2003 to solicit volunteers for the study. Upon obtaining permission, arrangements for dates and times were made to administer the instruments. First, the purpose of the study was outlined to students with an emphasis that the items should be interpreted in terms of their overall college experience. They were also reminded that their specific responses would not be shared with their course instructors and would not affect their course grades. The students were asked to respond to the items honestly. Informed consent forms were obtained, and the self-report measures were distributed. It was explained that participation was voluntary, anonymous (no names or IDs), and confidential.

Results

The primary purpose of the statistical analysis was to evaluate the relationship of personality, motivation, learning strategies, and scholastic aptitude to academic achievement. The frequency distribution of gender in the sample was as follows: females N=110 (59%); males N=76% (41%). The age distribution showed 167 participants between ages 18-25 years (90%), 14 participants between the ages of 26-35 years (8%), and the remaining 2% over 35 years of age. Pearson correlations were conducted among GPA, and the other variables, which indicated that personality, motivation, and learning strategies significantly related to academic achievement (i.e., GPA) as follows: Type T (r=-.16, p<.05), extraversion (r=.17, p<.01), openness to experience (r=.32, p<.001), conscientiousness (r=.26, p<.05), intrinsic motivation (r=.21, p<.01), amotivation (r=-. 18, p<.001), self-efficacy (r=.23, p<.001), metacognitive self-regulation (r=.25, p<.001), effort regulation (r=.26, p<.001), and SAT (r=.35, p<.001).

One primary research question guided this study: how do personality factors, motivational processes, learning strategies, and scholastic aptitude (SAT) in combination, relate to academic achievement? To answer this, a standard multiple regression analysis, including all variables, was performed with GPA as the dependent variable.

When considered together, personality, motivation, learning strategies, and scholastic aptitude totaled to a multiple R of .542 (p<.001) and accounted for 25 percent of the total variance in academic achievement. Overall, these results indicated that only Type T Personality, openness to experience, and SAT were significant predictors of GPA. An additional multiple regression analysis was conducted on these three significant predictor variables (i.e., Type T Personality, openness to experience, and SAT score) and GPA, which amounted to a multiple R of .454 (p<.001) and accounted for 19 percent of the total variance in academic achievement. These data indicate that nearly one fifth of academic achievement can be predicted from these three variables. By themselves, the two personality variables accounted for 12 percent of academic achievement (multiple R=.355, p<.001), notable if only because these two measures together easily require less than five minutes to complete. The SAT separately correlated with GPA .35 (p<.001), also accounting for about 12 percent of the variance. These results suggest a role for specific personality characteristics of students in academic achievement along with the more traditional concept of scholastic aptitude.

Discussion and Conclusions

Based upon the results of this study, implications for educators are summarized as the following: 1) take into account students' individual differences which play a prominent role in academic achievement so that no student's educational needs are neglected; 2) encourage students to set and achieve their own learning goals and to engage in motivational processes such as self-efficacy for learning and performance, intrinsic motivation, and effort-oriented learning strategies; and 3) implement hands-on experiential projects to promote and evaluate learning.

Some of these suggestions are in accord with previous research on academic achievement as well as attrition reduction (Hancock, et al, 2002) and instructional design. Educators should adopt pedagogical approaches that are intellectually, motivationally, and personally challenging. In addition, these approaches will help give students personal ownership and independence so they will value their learning experiences and hopefully perform more effectively in college.

From the variables studied, this research provided evidence that a five minute assessment of personality was the strongest predictor of academic achievement, roughly equal to the traditional predictor, the SAT. Given that GPA's relationship to personality was more powerful than with learning strategies, which are explicitly designed to facilitate academic achievement, these personality factors are clearly worth taking into account for further research.

An important next step would be to consider differentiated instructional innovations and evaluations. Given that the goal of education is for students to learn, educators will want to create pedagogical processes that are meaningful and beneficial to students' intellectual, professional, and personal development. It is hoped that educators will use the present findings to explore ways to maximize the potential of the learning experiences for their students and for themselves.

References

Bandura, A., (2001). Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26.

Brophy, J., (1999). Toward a model of the value aspects of motivation in education developing appreciation for particular learning domains and activities. Educational Psychologist, 34(2), 75-85.

Busato, V., Prins, F., Elshout, J., & Hamaker, C., (2000). Ability, learning, style, personality, achievement motivation, and academic success of psychology students in higher education. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 1057-1068.

Cervone, D. & Mischel, W., (2002). Personality Science. In Cervone, D. & Mischel, W. Advances in Personality Science. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

College Board, (2003). The College Board: The New SAT. From the website: http://www, collegeboard.com/about/newstat/education.html.

Costa, P. & McCrae, R., (1991). NEO PI-R: Professional Manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

Dewey, J., (1929). My Pedagogical Creed. Washington, DC: The Progressive Education Association.

DiPerna, J. & Elliot, S., (1999). Development and validation of the Academic Competence Evaluation Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 17, 207-225.

Farley, F., (1991). The Type-T Personality. In Lipsett, L. & Mitnick, L. Self-Regulatory Behavior and Risk Taking: Causes and Consequences. Norwood, N J: Ablex Pub.

Hancock, D., Bray, M., & Nason, S., (2002). Influencing university students' achievement and motivation in a technology course. Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 365-372.

Harackiewicz, J., Barron, K., Tauer, J., & Elliot, A., (2002). Predicting success in college: a longitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors of interest and performance from freshman year through graduation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 562-575.

Locke, E. & Latham, G., (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35 year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.

McCombs, B., (1998). Integrating Metacognition, Affect, and Motivation in Improving Teacher Education. In Lambert, N. & McCombs, B., How Students Learn: Reforming Schools Through Learner-Centered Education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

McCrae, R. & Costa, P., (1999). A Five Factor Theory of Personality. In Pervin, L. & John, O., Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (2nd ed.) (139-153). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

McKeachie, W., (1999). Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for the College and University Teachers (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin 

Meyer, D. & Turner, J., (2002). Emotion in the Classroom. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 107-114.

Mischel, W. & Shoda, Y., (2000). A Cognitive-Affective System Theory of Personality: Reconceptualizatng Situations, Dispositions, Dynamics, and Invariance in Personality Structure. In Higgins, E. & Kruglanski, A. Motivational Science: Social and Personality Perspectives (150-176). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

Pintrich, P., (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.

Pintrich, P., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W., (1993). Reliablity and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801-813.

Ryan, R. & Deci, E., (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Vallerand, R., Pelletier, L., Blais, M., Briere, N., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E., (1992). The Academic Motivation Scale: a measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 1003-1017.

Weiner, B., (2000). Intrapersonal and Interpersonal theories of motivation from an attitributional perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 1-14.

Joanne Broder Sumerson, School District of Philadelphia, PA

Frank H. Farley, Temple University, PA

Broder Sumerson,, Ph.D. is a Research and Evaluation Specialist and part-time professor and Farley, Ph.D. is a Laura H. Carnell Professor at Temple University and former APA and AERA presidents.