Tag: Student

  • Validity

    Validity

    What is Validity?

    The most crucial issue in test construction is validity. Whereas reliability addresses issues of consistency, validity assesses what the test is to be accurate about. A test that is valid for clinical assessment should measure what it is intended to measure and should also produce information useful to clinicians. A psychological test cannot be said to be valid in any abstract or absolute sense, but more practically, it must be valid in a particular context and for a specific group of people (Messick, 1995). Although a test can be reliable without being valid, the opposite is not true; a necessary prerequisite for validity is that the test must have achieved an adequate level of reliability. Thus, a valid test is one that accurately measures the variable it is intended to measure. For example, a test comprising questions about a person’s musical preference might erroneously state that it is a test of creativity. The test might be reliable in the sense that if it is given to the same person on different occasions, it produces similar results each time. However, it would not be reliable in that an investigation might indicate it does not correlate with other more valid measurements of creativity.

    Establishing the validity of a test can be extremely difficult, primarily because psychological variables are usually abstract concepts such as intelligence, anxiety, and personality. These concepts have no tangible reality, so their existence must be inferred through indirect means. In addition, conceptualization and research on constructs undergo change over time requiring that test validation go through continual refinement (G. Smith & McCarthy, 1995). In constructing a test, a test designer must follow two necessary, initial steps. First, the construct must be theoretically evaluated and described; second, specific operations (test questions) must be developed to measure it (S. Haynes et al., 1995). Even when the designer has followed these steps closely and conscientiously, it is sometimes difficult to determine what the test really measures. For example, IQ tests are good predictors of academic success, but many researchers question whether they adequately measure the concept of intelligence as it is theoretically described. Another hypothetical test that, based on its item content, might seem to measure what is described as musical aptitude may in reality be highly correlated with verbal abilities. Thus, it may be more a measure of verbal abilities than of musical aptitude.

    Any estimate of validity is concerned with relationships between the test and some external independently observed event. The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, American Educational Research Association [AERA], American Psychological Association [APA], & National Council for Measurement in Education [NCME], 1999; G. Morgan, Gliner, & Harmon, 2001) list the three main methods of establishing validity as content-related, criterion-related, and construct-related.

    Content Validity

    During the initial construction phase of any test, the developers must first be concerned with its content validity. This refers to the representativeness and relevance of the assessment instrument to the construct being measured. During the initial item selection, the constructors must carefully consider the skills or knowledge area of the variable they would like to measure. The items are then generated based on this conceptualization of the variable. At some point, it might be decided that the item content over-represents, under-represents, or excludes specific areas, and alterations in the items might be made accordingly. If experts on subject matter are used to determine the items, the number of these experts and their qualifications should be included in the test manual. The instructions they received and the extent of agreement between judges should also be provided. A good test covers not only the subject matter being measured, but also additional variables. For example, factual knowledge may be one criterion, but the application of that knowledge and the ability to analyze data are also important. Thus, a test with high content validity must cover all major aspects of the content area and must do so in the correct proportion.

    A concept somewhat related to content validity is face validity. These terms are not synonymous, however, because content validity pertains to judgments made by experts, whereas face validity concerns judgments made by the test users. The central issue in face validity is test rapport. Thus, a group of potential mechanics who are being tested for basic skills in arithmetic should have word problems that relate to machines rather than to business transactions. Face validity, then, is present if the test looks good to the persons taking it, to policymakers who decide to include it in their programs, and to other untrained personnel. Despite the potential importance of face validity in regard to test-taking attitudes, disappointingly few formal studies on face validity are performed and/or reported in test manuals.

    In the past, content validity has been conceptualized and operationalized as being based on the subjective judgment of the test developers. As a result, it has been regarded as the least preferred form of test validation, albeit necessary in the initial stages of test development. In addition, its usefulness has been primarily focused at achievement tests (how well has this student learned the content of the course?) and personnel selection (does this applicant know the information relevant to the potential job?). More recently, it has become used more extensively in personality and clinical assessment (Butcher, Graham, Williams, & Ben-Porath, 1990; Millon, 1994). This has paralleled more rigorous and empirically based approaches to content validity along with a closer integration to criterion and construct validation.

    Criterion Validity

    A second major approach to determining validity is criterion validity, which has also been called empirical or predictive validity. Criterion validity is determined by comparing test scores with some sort of performance on an outside measure. The outside measure should have a theoretical relation to the variable that the test is supposed to measure. For example, an intelligence test might be correlated with grade point average; an aptitude test, with independent job ratings or general maladjustment scores, with other tests measuring similar dimensions. The relation between the two measurements is usually expressed as a correlation coefficient.

    Criterion-related validity is most frequently divided into either concurrent or predictive validity. Concurrent validity refers to measurements taken at the same, or approximately the same, time as the test. For example, an intelligence test might be administered at the same time as assessments of a group’s level of academic achievement. Predictive validity refers to outside measurements that were taken some time after the test scores were derived. Thus, predictive validity might be evaluated by correlating the intelligence test scores with measures of academic achievement a year after the initial testing. Concurrent validation is often used as a substitute for predictive validation because it is simpler, less expensive, and not as time consuming. However, the main consideration in deciding whether concurrent or predictive validation is preferable depends on the test’s purpose. Predictive validity is most appropriate for tests used for selection and classification of personnel. This may include hiring job applicants, placing military personnel in specific occupational training programs, screening out individuals who are likely to develop emotional disorders, or identifying which category of psychiatric populations would be most likely to benefit from specific treatment approaches. These situations all require that the measurement device provide a prediction of some future outcome. In contrast, concurrent validation is preferable if an assessment of the client’s current status is required, rather than a prediction of what might occur to the client at some future time. The distinction can be summarized by asking “Is Mr. Jones maladjusted?” (concurrent validity) rather than “Is Mr. Jones likely to become maladjusted at some future time?” (predictive validity).

    An important consideration is the degree to which a specific test can be applied to a unique work-related environment (see Hogan, Hogan, & Roberts, 1996). This relates more to the social value and consequences of the assessment than the formal validity as reported in the test manual (Messick, 1995). In other words, can the test under consideration provide accurate assessments and predictions for the environment in which the examinee is working? To answer this question adequately, the examiner must refer to the manual and assess the similarity between the criteria used to establish the test’s validity and the situation to which he or she would like to apply the test. For example, can an aptitude test that has adequate criterion validity in the prediction of high school grade point average also be used to predict academic achievement for a population of college students? If the examiner has questions regarding the relative applicability of the test, he or she may need to undertake a series of specific tasks. The first is to identify the required skills for adequate performance in the situation involved. For example, the criteria for a successful teacher may include such attributes as verbal fluency, flexibility, and good public speaking skills. The examiner then must determine the degree to which each skill contributes to the quality of a teacher’s performance. Next, the examiner has to assess the extent to which the test under consideration measures each of these skills. The final step is to evaluate the extent to which the attribute that the test measures are relevant to the skills the examiner needs to predict. Based on these evaluations, the examiner can estimate the confidence that he or she places in the predictions developed from the test. This approach is sometimes referred to as synthetic validity because examiners must integrate or synthesize the criteria reported in the test manual with the variables they encounter in their clinical or organizational settings.

    The strength of criterion validity depends in part on the type of variable being measured. Usually, intellectual or aptitude tests give relatively higher validity coefficients than personality tests because there are generally a greater number of variables influencing personality than intelligence. As the number of variables that influences the trait being measured increases, it becomes progressively more difficult to account for them. When a large number of variables are not accounted for, the trait can be affected in unpredictable ways. This can create a much wider degree of fluctuation in the test scores, thereby lowering the validity coefficient. Thus, when evaluating a personality test, the examiner should not expect as high a validity coefficient as for intellectual or aptitude tests. A helpful guide is to look at the validities found in similar tests and compare them with the test being considered. For example, if an examiner wants to estimate the range of validity to be expected for the extra-version scale on the Myers Briggs Type Indicator, he or she might compare it with the validities for similar scales found in the California Personality Inventory and Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. The relative level of validity, then, depends both on the quality of the construction of the test and on the variable being studied.

    An important consideration is the extent to which the test accounts for the trait being measured or the behavior being predicted. For example, the typical correlation between intelligence tests and academic performance is about .50 (Neisser et al., 1996). Because no one would say that grade point average is entirely the result of intelligence, the relative extent to which intelligence determines grade point average has to be estimated. This can be calculated by squaring the correlation coefficient and changing it into a percentage. Thus, if the correlation of .50 is squared, it comes out to 25%, indicating that 25% of academic achievement can be accounted for by IQ as measured by the intelligence test. The remaining 75% may include factors such as motivation, quality of instruction, and past educational experience. The problem facing the examiner is to determine whether 25% of the variance is sufficiently useful for the intended purposes of the test. This ultimately depends on the personal judgment of the examiner.

    The main problem confronting criterion validity is finding an agreed-on, definable, acceptable, and feasible outside criterion. Whereas for an intelligence test the grade point average might be an acceptable criterion, it is far more difficult to identify adequate criteria for most personality tests. Even with so-called intelligence tests, many researchers argue that it is more appropriate to consider them tests of scholastic aptitude rather than of intelligence. Yet another difficulty with criterion validity is the possibility that the criterion measure will be inadvertently biased. This is referred to as criterion contamination and occurs when knowledge of the test results influences an individual’s later performance. For example, a supervisor in an organization who receives such information about subordinates may act differently toward a worker placed in a certain category after being tested. This situation may set up negative or positive expectations for the worker, which could influence his or her level of performance. The result is likely to artificially alter the level of the validity coefficients. To work around these difficulties, especially in regard to personality tests, a third major method must be used to determine validity. 

    Construct Validity

    The method of construct validity was developed in part to correct the inadequacies and difficulties encountered with content and criterion approaches. Early forms of content validity relied too much on subjective judgment, while criterion validity was too restrictive in working with the domains or structure of the constructs being measured. Criterion validity had the further difficulty in that there was often a lack of agreement in deciding on adequate outside criteria. The basic approach of construct validity is to assess the extent to which the test measures a theoretical construct or trait. This assessment involves three general steps. Initially, the test constructor must make a careful analysis of the trait. This is followed by a consideration of the ways in which the trait should relate to other variables. Finally, the test designer needs to test whether these hypothesized relationships actually exist (Foster & Cone, 1995). For example, a test measuring dominance should have a high correlation with the individual accepting leadership roles and a low or negative correlation with measures of submissiveness. Likewise, a test measuring anxiety should have a high positive correlation with individuals who are measured during an anxiety-provoking situation, such as an experiment involving some sort of physical pain. As these hypothesized relationships are verified by research studies, the degree of confidence that can be placed in a test increases.

    There is no single, best approach for determining construct validity; rather, a variety of different possibilities exist. For example, if some abilities are expected to increase with age, correlations can be made between a population’s test scores and age. This may be appropriate for variables such as intelligence or motor coordination, but it would not be applicable for most personality measurements. Even in the measurement of intelligence or motor coordination, this approach may not be appropriate beyond the age of maturity. Another method for determining construct validity is to measure the effects of experimental or treatment interventions. Thus, a posttest measurement may be taken following a period of instruction to see if the intervention affected the test scores in relation to a previous pretest measure. For example, after an examinee completes a course in arithmetic, it would be predicted that scores on a test of arithmetical ability would increase. Often, correlations can be made with other tests that supposedly measure a similar variable. However, a new test that correlates too highly with existing tests may represent needless duplication unless it incorporates some additional advantage such as a shortened format, ease of administration, or superior predictive validity. Factor analysis is of particular relevance to construct validation because it can be used to identify and assess the relative strength of different psychological traits. Factor analysis can also be used in the design of a test to identify the primary factor or factors measured by a series of different tests. Thus, it can be used to simplify one or more tests by reducing the number of categories to a few common factors or traits. The factorial validity of a test is the relative weight or loading that a factor has on the test. For example, if a factor analysis of a measure of psychopathology determined that the test was composed of two clear factors that seemed to be measuring anxiety and depression, the test could be considered to have factorial validity. This would be especially true if the two factors seemed to be accounting for a clear and large portion of what the test was measuring.

    Another method used in construct validity is to estimate the degree of internal consistency by correlating specific subtests with the test’s total score. For example, if a subtest on an intelligence test does not correlate adequately with the overall or Full Scale IQ, it should be either eliminated or altered in a way that increases the correlation. A final method for obtaining construct validity is for a test to converge or correlate highly with variables that are theoretically similar to it. The test should not only show this convergent validity but also have discriminate validity, in which it would demonstrate low or negative correlations with variables that are dissimilar to it. Thus, scores on reading comprehension should show high positive correlations with performance in a literature class and low correlations with performance in a class involving mathematical computation.

    Related to discriminant and convergent validity is the degree of sensitivity and specificity an assessment device demonstrates in identifying different categories. Sensitivity refers to the percentage of true positives that the instrument has identified, whereas specificity is the relative percentage of true negatives. A structured clinical interview might be quite sensitive in that it would accurately identify 90% of schizophrenics in an admitting ward of a hospital. However, it may not be sufficiently specific in that 30% of schizophrenics would be incorrectly classified as either normal or having some other diagnosis. The difficulty in determining sensitivity and specificity lies in developing agreed-on, objectively accurate outside criteria for categories such as psychiatric diagnosis, intelligence, or personality traits.

    As indicated by the variety of approaches discussed, no single, quick, efficient method exists for determining construct validity. It is similar to testing a series of hypotheses in which the results of the studies determine the meanings that can be attached to later test scores (Foster & Cone, 1995; Messick, 1995). Almost any data can be used, including material from the content and criterion approaches. The greater the amount of supporting data, the greater is the level of confidence with which the test can be used. In many ways, construct validity represents the strongest and most sophisticated approach to test construction. In many ways, all types of validity can be considered as subcategories of construct validity. It involves theoretical knowledge of the trait or ability being measured, knowledge of other related variables, hypothesis testing, and statements regarding the relationship of the test variable to a network of other variables that have been investigated. Thus, construct validation is a never-ending process in which new relationships always can be verified and investigated.

  • Goal Commitment: Meaning and Definition

    Goal Commitment: Meaning and Definition

    Goal Commitment? What affects the strength of commitment to goals? How does this affect goal attainment? Goal commitment is our determination to pursue a course of action that will lead to the goal we aspire to achieve (Bandura, 1986). The strength of goal commitment will affect how hard one will try to attain the goal. Goal commitment affects by the properties described thus far: difficulty and specificity. For example, when goals are too difficult, commitment declines, followed by a drop-off in performance (Locke & Latham, 1990).

    What is Goal Commitment?

    “Degree to which a person determine in achieving a desired (or required) goal.”

    Goals are central to current treatments of work motivation, and goal commitment is a critical construct in understanding the relationship between goals and task performance. Despite this importance, there is confusion about the role of goal commitment, and only recently has this key construct received the empirical attention it warrants. This meta-analysis, based on 83 independent samples, updates the goal commitment literature by summarizing the accumulated evidence on the antecedents and consequences of goal commitment. Using this aggregate empirical evidence, the role of goal commitment in the goal-setting process is clarified and key areas for future research identifies.

    Commitment also affect by goal intensity, goal participation, and peer influence.

    Goal Intensity:

    Commitment is related to goal intensity, or the amount of thought or mental effort that goes into formulating a goal and how it will be attained (Locke & Latham, 1990). This is similar to goal clarification because when we clarify a goal; we involve in a conscious process of collecting information about the goal and task and our ability to attain it (Schutz, 1989).

    In a study of fifth graders, Henderson (cited in Locke & Latham, 1990) found that students who formulated a greater number of reading purposes with more detail and elaboration attained their goals to a greater extent than did students with superficial purposes. Although there was no difference in IQ scores of the groups; the students who set more goals with elaboration were better readers. It stands to reason that the more thought that gives to developing a goal; the more likely one will commit to the goal.

    Goal Participation:

    How important, motivationally, is it for people to participate in goal setting? This is an important question because goals are often assigned by others at home, school, and work. The state imparts curriculum standards or goals to teachers, who in turn impose them on students. A sales manager may assign quotas to individual salespersons. Letting individuals participate in setting goals can lead to greater satisfaction. Nevertheless, telling people to achieve a goal can influence self-efficacy; because it suggests they are capable of achieving the goal (Locke & Latham, 1990).

    To investigate the effects of assigned and self-set goals; Schunk (1985) conducted a study of sixth-grade students with LD who were learning subtraction. One group was assigned goals (e.g., “Why don’t you try to do seven pages today”). A second group set goals themselves (e.g., “Decide how many pages you can do today”). A third group worked without goals. Students who self-set goals had the highest self-efficacy and math scores. Both goal groups demonstrated higher levels of self-regulation than the control group without any goals.

    Nevertheless, Locke and Latham (1990) concluded that self-set goals are not consistently more effective than assigned goals in increasing performance. The crucial factor in assigned goals is acceptance. Once individuals become involved in a goal, the goal itself becomes more important than how it was set or whether it was imposed. Because, at work and in schools, goals are often assigned by others; the assigned goals must accept by participants. Joint participation in goal setting by teachers and students may increase the acceptance of goals.

    Peer Influence:

    One factor where teachers might be influential in promoting goal acceptance and commitment is peer influence. Strong group pressures are likely to increase commitment to goals (Locke & Latham, 1990). This group cohesiveness is more often found on athletic teams. Obviously, the coach wants a strong commitment to the team goals. In the classroom, group goals may aid the commitment of students working in cooperative learning groups and thus lead to a higher quality of work.

    An Entrepreneur will need to do if you want to commit towards achievement:

    The following achievement below are;

    Make sure that your business goals are achievable.

    The biggest enemy of achieving business goals is setting up unrealistic goals. For example, if you set the goal to increase sales by 500%; although the growth of the industry is lower than 10%, surely, 500% would be unrealistic.

    If you notice that some goal cannot be achieved, simply adjust it in the line with reality. For example, use a 15% increasing in sales instead of 500%. The goal of 15% would be much more realistic, and certainly; it will be as imperative for you and your business to achieve it because it is above-average in the industry.

    Use specific sentences in your business goals.

    Imagine the goal from our example above: increasing sales in the future. For how much we will need to increase the sales? At which time we will need to increase the sales? This is a really confusing and undetermined goal. If you don’t know what to achieve and when to achieve it, you will probably not even try to achieve it.

    Write your business goals on the paper.

    Different scientific researches prove that if you put something on a paper; your commitment to that something is will be higher. In his book Influence; The Psychology of Persuasion, Dr. Robert Cialdini gives an example from the Korean war in which the Chinese soldiers in the camps where he held prisoners (soldiers) were looking for written statements that communism is better than the US system to write on the paper. Thus a long time they were committed to his own statement in which basically they did not believe. If your business goal writes on paper they will be in a group with a higher commitment than the goals that remain only in our head.

    Determine the activities that must accomplish.

    Knowing the activities that must implement to achieve your business goals in advance will increase the level of commitment to the goal. Therefore, once you have the goal of the paper, list the activities.

    Assign responsible for each activity.

    At the end of each activity assign responsibility for implementations. In such a way, the commitment will transfer to the employees or your team members; and, at the same time will assure achievement.

    Goal Commitment
    Goal Commitment: Meaning and Definition
  • Components of a Strategy Statement

    Components of a Strategy Statement

    What are Components of a Strategy Statement?

    The strategy statement of a firm sets the firm’s long-term strategic direction and broad policy directions. It gives the firm a clear sense of direction and a blueprint for the firm’s activities for the upcoming years. The main constituents of a strategic statement are as follows:

    Strategic Intent

    An organization’s strategic intent is the purpose that it exists and why it will continue to exist, providing it maintains a competitive advantage. Strategic intent gives a picture of what an organization must get into immediately in order to achieve the company’s vision. It motivates the people. It clarifies the vision of the vision of the company.

    Strategic intent helps management to emphasize and concentrate on the priorities. Strategic intent is, nothing but, the influencing of an organization’s resource potential and core competencies to achieve what at first may seem to be unachievable goals in the competitive environment. A well expressed strategic intent should guide/steer the development of strategic intent or the setting of goals and objectives that require that all of the organization’s competencies be controlled to a maximum value.

    Strategic intent includes directing organization’s attention on the need of winning; inspiring people by telling them that the targets are valuable; encouraging individual and team participation as well as the contribution, and utilizing intent to direct allocation of resources.

    Strategic intent differs from strategic fit in a way that while strategic fit deals with harmonizing available resources and potentials to the external environment, strategic intent emphasizes on building new resources and potentials so as to create and exploit future opportunities.

    Vision Statement

    A vision statement identifies where the organization wants or intends to be in future or where it should be to best meet the needs of the stakeholders. It describes dreams and aspirations for future. For instance, Microsoft’s vision is “to empower people through great software, any time, any place, or any device.” Wal-Mart’s vision is to become the worldwide leader in retailing.

    A vision is the potential to view things ahead of themselves. It answers the question “where we want to be”. It gives us a reminder about what we attempt to develop. A vision statement is for the organization and its members, unlike the mission statement which is for the customers/clients. It contributes to effective decision-making as well as effective business planning. It incorporates a shared understanding about the nature and aim of the organization and utilizes this understanding to direct and guide the organization towards a better purpose. It describes that on achieving the mission, how the organizational future would appear to be.

    Mission Statement

    The mission statement is the statement of the role by which an organization intends to serve its stakeholders. It describes why an organization is operating and thus provides a framework within which strategies are formulated. It describes what the organization does (i.e., present capabilities), who all it serves (i.e., stakeholders) and what makes an organization unique (i.e., the reason for existence).

    A mission statement differentiates an organization from others by explaining its broad scope of activities, its products, and technologies it uses to achieve its goals and objectives. It talks about an organization’s present (i.e., “about where we are”). For instance, Microsoft’s mission is to help people and businesses throughout the world to realize their full potential. Wal-Mart’s mission is “To give ordinary folk the chance to buy the same thing as rich people.” Mission statements always exist at the top level of an organization, but may also be made at various organizational levels. Chief executive plays a significant role in the formulation of a mission statement. Once the mission statement is formulated, it serves the organization in long run, but it may become ambiguous with organizational growth and innovations.

    In today’s dynamic and competitive environment, the mission may need to be redefined. However, care must be taken that the redefined mission statement should have original fundamentals/components. The mission statement has three main components a statement of mission or vision of the company, a statement of the core values that shape the acts and behavior of the employees, and a statement of the goals and objectives.

    Goals and Objectives

    A goal is a desired future state or objective that an organization tries to achieve. Goals specify in particular what must be done if an organization is to attain mission or vision. Goals make the mission more prominent and concrete. They coordinate and integrate various functional and departmental areas in an organization.

    Objectives: Objective, in general, indicates a place where you want to reach. In organizational literature, it means the aim which an organization tries to achieve. Objectives are generally in plural form. Objectives are predetermined; they provide clear direction to the activities and results to be obtained from the planning process. Objectives must be SMART (Specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timely). Objectives must be clearly defined so that the works become goal-oriented and the unproductive and unsystematic tasks can be avoided.

    Goals: A Goal is simply something that somebody wants to achieve. The synonyms of goal are aim, ambition, purpose, target and objective. Simply speaking, goal refers to the purpose towards which the efforts are made or endeavors are directed. A goal has a time-frame which is generally long term. So, it’s a long term plan.

    At this stage, it is important to differentiate between the terms objective and goal, because the words, objective and goals seem to be synonymous, but, in fact, they are not. It does not matter much which word you call goal and which word you call objective if you are consistent in your own use and understand its relevance or applicability. However, if there are words in English that are confusing, especially to the students, objective and goal are the ones among them. It’s, therefore, important to understand them so as to avoid the confusion.

    When you have something you want to accomplish, it is important to set both goals and objectives. Once you learn the difference between goals and objectives, you will realize that how important it is that you have both of them. Goals without objectives can never be accomplished while objectives without goals will never get you to where you want to be. The two concepts are separate but related and will help you to be who you want to be.

  • Strategy

    Strategy

    What is Strategy?

    A method or plan has chosen to bring about the desired future, such as achievement of a goal or solution to a problem.

    The art and science of planning and marshaling resources for their most efficient and effective use. The term is derived from the Greek word for generalship or leading an army. See also tactics.

    A strategy is a high-level plan to achieve one or more goals under conditions of uncertainty. In the sense of the “art of the general”, which included several subsets of skills including “tactics”, siege craft, logistics etc., the term came into use in the 6th century C.E. in East Roman terminology and was translated into Western vernacular languages only in the 18th century. From then until the 20th century, the word “strategy” came to denote “a comprehensive way to try to pursue political ends, including the threat or actual use of force, in a dialectic of wills” in a military conflict, in which both adversaries interact.

    Companies now face increasingly turbulent, complex and threatening environments. In the past, they could succeed by focusing virtually all management efforts on running their day to day affairs as efficiently as possible. Although such focusing is still important, adapting the firms to changing environmental conditions have become an essential gradient for success.

    The strategic management perspective highlights the significance of devoting more attention to analyzing environments and formulating strategies that relate directly to environmental changes. The ultimate purpose of strategic management is to help the organization increase its performance through increased effectiveness, efficiency, and flexibility.

    A strategy is a way of doing something. It usually includes the formulation of an objective and a set of action plans for the accomplishment of the objective.

    Strategic management may be understood as the process of formulating, implementing and evaluating business strategies to achieve organizational objectives. It is a set of managerial decisions and actions that determine the long-term performance of a corporation. It involves environmental scanning, strategy formulation, strategy implementation, evaluation, and control.

    The study of strategic management emphasizes on monitoring and evaluating environmental opportunities and threats in the light of corporation’s strengths and weaknesses.

    Step 01: Analyze opportunities and threats or constraints that exist in the external environment.

    Step 02: Formulate strategies that will match the organization’s strengths and weaknesses with opportunities and threats or constraints that exist in the external environment.

    Step 03: Implement the strategies.

    Step 04: Evaluate and control activities to ensure that organizations objectives are achieved.

    It is important because the resources available to achieve these goals are usually limited. Generally involves setting goals, determining actions to achieve the goals, and mobilizing resources to execute the actions. A strategy describes how the ends (goals) will be achieved by the means (resources). This is generally tasked with determining strategy. The strategy can be intended or can emerge as a pattern of activity as the organization adapts to its environment or competes. It involves activities such as strategic planning and strategic thinking.

    Henry Mintzberg from McGill University defined strategy as a pattern in a stream of decisions to contrast with a view of strategy as planning, while Max McKeown (2011) argues that “strategy is about shaping the future” and is the human attempt to get to “desirable ends with available means.” Dr. Vladimir Kvint defines strategy as “a system of finding, formulating, and developing a doctrine that will ensure long-term success if followed faithfully.”

    Many Definitions of Strategy

    In 1988, Henry Mintzberg described the many different definitions and perspectives on strategy reflected in both academic research and in practice. He examined the strategic process and concluded it was much more fluid and unpredictable than people had thought. Because of this, he could not point to one process that could be called strategic planning. Instead, Mintzberg concludes that there are five types of strategies:

    As plan: A directed course of action to achieve an intended set of goals; similar to the strategic planning concept.

    As pattern: A consistent pattern of past behavior, with a strategy realized over time rather than planned or intended. Where the realized pattern was different from the intent, he referred to the strategy as emergent.

    As position: Locating brands, products, or companies within the market, based on the conceptual framework of consumers or other stakeholders; a strategy determined primarily by factors outside the firm.

    As ploy: A specific maneuver intended to outwit a competitor; and

    As perspective: Executing strategy based on a “theory of the business” or natural extension of the mindset or ideological perspective of the organization.

    In 1998, Mintzberg developed these five types of management strategy into 10 “schools of thought” and grouped them into three categories. The first group is normative. It consists of the schools of informal design and conception, the formal planning, and analytical positioning. The second group, consisting of six schools, is more concerned with how strategic management is actually done, rather than prescribing optimal plans or positions. The six schools are entrepreneurial, visionary, cognitive, learning/adaptive/emergent, negotiation, corporate culture and business environment. The third and final group consists of one school, the configuration or transformation school, a hybrid of the other schools organized into stages, organizational life cycles, or “episodes”.

    Michael Porter defined strategy in 1980 as the “Broad formula for how a business is going to compete, what its goals should be, and what policies will be needed to carry out those goals” and the “Combination of the ends (goals) for which the firm is striving and the means (policies) by which it is seeking to get there.” He continued that: “The essence of formulating the competitive strategy is relating a company to its environment.”

  • Mission Statement

    Mission Statement

    What is Mission Statement?

    A mission statement is a short statement of an organization’s purpose, identifying the scope of its operations: what kind of product or service it provides, its primary customers or market, and its geographical region of operation. It may include a short statement of such fundamental matters as the organization’s values or philosophies, a business’s main competitive advantages, or a desired future state the “vision”.

    A mission statement is not simply a description of an organization by an external party, but an expression, made by its leaders, of their desires and intent for the organization. The purpose of a mission statement is to focus and direct the organization itself. It communicates primarily to the people who make up the organization its members or employees giving them a shared understanding of the organization’s intended direction. Organizations normally do not change their mission statements over time, since they define their continuous, ongoing purpose and focus.

    According to Chris Bart, professor of strategy and governance at McMaster University, a commercial mission statement consists of three essential components:

    Key Market: Who is your target client or customer (generalize if needed)?

    Contribution: What product or service do you provide to that client?

    Distinction: What makes your product or service unique, so that the client would choose you?

    Bart estimates that in practice, only about ten percent of mission statements say something meaningful. For this reason, they are widely regarded with contempt.

    The next step is to prepare mission statements. If the vision is “WHAT” of life, then the mission is “WHY” and “HOW”. It identifies the roles and activities to which an individual is committed and provides the overall direction for achieving the vision. Mission focuses on what you want to be and what you want to do- contributions and achievements. Mission focuses on the values and principles upon which being and doing are based. A personal vision needs to be clearly developed so that the mission statement can be based on it.

    I. These statements should clearly indicate the important roles and methodologies followed for fulfilling the vision.

    II. Techniques and tools such as affinity diagram, brainstorming, fish-bone diagram, and surveys should be used.

    III. Mission statements should realize the vision in action. Conduct a mind map to check whether it is really fulfilled.

    IV. These statements will carry the information which needs to be fulfilled in the near future.

    V. Time factor may be brought in to make it more systematic.

    Mission statements are prepared to make the employees understand in clear terms “HOW” to achieve the vision and “WHY” all this has to be done. It is a ROAD MAP for achieving the vision. The mission statements act as a guiding force encouraging the individuals to work towards reaching the vision.

    What is Purpose of Mission statement?

    The sole purpose of a mission statement is to serve as your company’s goal/agenda, it outlines clearly what the goal of the company is. Some generic examples of mission statements would be, “To provide the best service possible within the banking sector for our customers.” or “To provide the best experience for all of our customers.” The reason why businesses make use of mission statements is to make it clear what they look to achieve as an organization, not only for themselves and their employees but to the customers and other people who are a part of the business, such as shareholders. As a company evolves, so will their mission statement, this is to make sure that the company remains on track and to ensure that the mission statement does not lose its touch and become boring or stale.

    North American magazine and website that carries news stories about entrepreneurship, small business management, and business, Entrepreneur explains the purpose of a mission statement as the following:

    “The mission statement reflects every facet of your business: the range and nature of the products you offer, pricing, quality, service, marketplace position, growth potential, use of technology, and your relationships with your customers, employees, suppliers, competitors and the community.”

    It is important that a mission statement is not confused with a vision statement. As discussed earlier, the main purpose of a mission statement is to get across the ambitions of an organization in a short and simple fashion, it is not necessary to go into detail for the mission statement which is evident in examples given. The reason why it is important that a mission statement and vision statement are not confused is because they both serve different purposes. Vision statements tend to be more related to strategic planning and lean more towards discussing where a company aims to be in the future.

    Here are what business leaders say a mission statement should do for a company:

    “A good vision or mission statement will fill a few roles: It will be toothy enough to engage the media, analysts and other industry watchers. It will be aspirational enough to give employees something to reach for and bind them together in their day-to-day work. And it will be clear and specific enough to build the brand and affect public perception of the company. In an ideal world, it will even give your customers a sense that they’re buying into your vision when they purchase one of your products.” by Kyle Monson, a partner at Knock Twice hybrid creative agency.

    “A company’s mission statement is the cornerstone on which it is built. Its strategic plan and its culture are directly tied to the vision the mission statement puts forth. It is important that a mission statement supports the overarching goals and purpose of the company and explain why you exist as a business in a way that can be understood internally within the company and externally to consumers.” by Gerry David, president, and CEO of healthy lifestyle company Celsius Holdings.

    “Creating a mission statement takes time and a lot of decision making. It lays down expectations for how your customers and employees will interact with one another, so take your time with it. Clearly, write down your vision of the company and ask yourself, ‘What am I trying to accomplish?’ Think about how you want others to perceive your company, what’s important to you and your organization, and then prioritize it. Most importantly, make sure it’s clear, concise and easy for anyone to understand.” by Bobby Harris, president, and CEO of Blue Grace Logistics.

  • What are Effects of Goal Orientation on Student Achievement?

    What are Effects of Goal Orientation on Student Achievement?

    The extent to which students have a learning or performance goal orientation is associated with a variety of student behaviors and beliefs. These have been divided into cognitive strategies and engagement and motivational beliefs and actions.

    Cognitive Strategies and Engagement

    Learning goals foster cognitive engagement and effort (Meece, Blumenfeld, & Hoyle, 1988). Fifth- and sixth-grade science students who placed greater emphasis on learning goals also reported more active cognitive engagement. Students with performance goals (pleasing the teacher or seeking social recognition) had a lower level of cognitive engagement. Wolters, Yu, and Pintrich (1996) found that task value and interest were related to learning goals. The use of cognitive strategies and information processing is related to goal orientations of students at different levels of schooling. Learning that is potentially more meaningful or complex, requiring deep-level processing, appears to be the most vulnerable to the negative effects of performance goals (Graham & Golan, 1991). When the emphasis was on ability, as in the performance goal situation, there was interference with memory for tasks that required a great deal of cognitive effort. Performance goals also undermined the problem-solving strategies of children (Elliott & Dweck, 1988). In contrast, learning goals were the strongest predictor of seventh- and eighth-grade students’ cognitive strategy use (Wolters et al., 1996). These goals were also predictive of deep processing, persistence, effort, and exam performance of college students (Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999).

    Motivational Beliefs and Actions

    The particular goal orientation affects motivation beliefs such as the role of effort in learning, self-efficacy beliefs, the tendency to use self-handicapping strategies, help seeking, and helpless patterns.

    Self-Efficacy: A learning goal orientation was generally found to be associated with higher self-efficacy. Wolters et al. (1996) reported that seventh- and eighth-grade students who reported greater endorsement of a learning goal also tended to report higher levels of self-efficacy. Learning goals were also positively related to self-efficacy in the subjects of writing and science (Pajares, Britner, & Valiante, 2000). In contrast, performance goals were related to low self-efficacy (Pintrich, Zusho, Schiefele, & Pekrun, 2001).

    Self-Handicapping: Self-handicapping strategies, such as low effort, are associated with performance goals (Midgley & Urden, 2001). Elliott and Dweck (1988) found that children with performance goals were more likely to avoid challenge and exhibit low persistence. These strategies undermine student achievement. Another type of self-handicapping strategy associated with performance goals is cheating (Anderman, Griesinger, & Westerfield, 1998). The authors explained that, by cheating, not only do students protect themselves against perceptions of low ability, they improve their grades.

    Help Seeking: The particular goal orientation was also found to influence help-seeking behaviors (Butler & Neuman, 1995). Second- and sixth-grade students were more likely to seek help when the task was presented to them as an opportunity to develop competence. When tasks were presented to students as a measure of their ability, they were less likely to seek help. Students were more likely to seek help in classrooms with a learning goal focus and to avoid help seeking in a performance goal structure (Butler & Neuman, 1995; Ryan, Gheen, & Midgley, 1998).

    Helpless Patterns: Finally, one of the most debilitating effects of performance goals is the vulnerability to helpless patterns (Dweck, 1986). Goals that focus students on using performances to judge their ability can make them vulnerable to a helpless pattern in the face of failure (Dweck & Sorich, 1999; Heyman & Dweck, 1992; Midgley et al., 2001).

    In conclusion, performance goal beliefs are generally seen as the most maladaptive pattern as students are more extrinsically motivated, focused on outcome and not on learning (C. Ames, 1992), and focused on being superior to others (Nicholls, 1990). At the same time, there is continued agreement that the learning goal pattern is the more adaptive one, fostering long-term achievement that reflects intrinsic motivation (C. Ames, 1992; Heyman & Dweck, 1992; Kaplan & Middleton, 2002; Meece, 1991; Midgley et al., 2001). As Kaplan and Middleton asked, “Should childhood be a journey or a race?”

  • Learning Development and Exercise of Self-Efficacy Over the Lifespan!

    Learning Development and Exercise of Self-Efficacy Over the Lifespan!

    Different periods of life present certain types of competency demands for successful functioning. These normative changes in required competencies with age do not represent lock-step stages through which everyone must inevitably pass. There are many pathways through life and, at any given period, people vary substantially in how efficaciously they manage their lives. The sections that follow provide a brief analysis of the characteristic developmental changes in the nature and scope of perceived self-efficacy over the course of the lifespan.

    Origins of a Sense of Personal Agency

    The newborn comes without any sense of self. Infants exploratory experiences in which they see themselves produce effects by their actions provide the initial basis for developing a sense of efficacy. Shaking a rattle produces predictable sounds, energetic kicks shake their cribs, and screams bring adults. By repeatedly observing that environmental events occur with action, but not in its absence, infants learn that actions produce effects. Infants who experience success in controlling environmental events become more attentive to their own behavior and more competent in learning new efficacious responses, than are infants for whom the same environmental events occur regardless of how they behave.

    Development of a sense of personal efficacy requires more than simply producing effects by actions. Those actions must be perceived as part of oneself. The self becomes differentiated from others through dissimilar experience. If feeding oneself brings comfort, whereas seeing others feed themselves has no similar effect, one’s own activity becomes distinct from all other persons. As infants begin to mature those around them refer to them and treat them as distinct persons. Based on growing personal and social experiences they eventually form a symbolic representation of themselves as a distinct self.

    Familial Sources of Self-Efficacy

    Young children must gain self-knowledge of their capabilities in broadening areas of functioning. They have to develop, appraise and test their physical capabilities, their social competencies, their linguistic skills, and their cognitive skills for comprehending and managing the many situations they encounter daily. Development of sensorimotor capabilities greatly expands the infants’ exploratory environment and the means for acting upon it. These early exploratory and play activities, which occupy much of children’s waking hours, provide opportunities for enlarging their repertoire of basic skills and sense of efficacy.

    Successful experiences in the exercise of personal control are central to the early development of social and cognitive competence. Parents who are responsive to their infants’ behavior, and who create opportunities for efficacious actions by providing an enriched physical environment and permitting freedom of movement for exploration, have infants who are accelerated in their social and cognitive development. Parental responsiveness increases cognitive competence, and infants’ expanded capabilities elicit greater parental responsiveness in a two-way influence. Development of language provides children with the symbolic means to reflect on their experiences and what others tell them about their capabilities and, thus, to expand their self-knowledge of what they can and cannot do.

    The initial efficacy experiences are centered in the family. But as the growing child’s social world rapidly expands, peers become increasingly important in children’s developing self-knowledge of their capabilities. It is in the context of peer relations that social comparison comes strongly into play. At first, the closest comparative age-mates are siblings. Families differ in number of siblings, how far apart in age they are, and in their sex distribution. Different family structures, as reflected in family size, birth order, and sibling constellation patterns, create different social comparisons for judging one’s personal efficacy. Younger siblings find themselves in the unfavorable position of judging their capabilities in relation to older siblings who may be several years advanced in their development.

    Broadening of Self-Efficacy Through Peer Influences

    Children’s efficacy-testing experiences change substantially as they move increasingly into the larger community. It is in peer relationships that they broaden self-knowledge of their capabilities. Peers serve several important efficacy functions. Those who are most experienced and competent provide models of efficacious styles of thinking and behavior. A vast amount of social learning occurs among peers. In addition, age-mates provide highly informative comparisons for judging and verifying one’s self-efficacy. Children are, therefore, especially sensitive to their relative standing among the peers in activities that determine prestige and popularity.

    Peers are neither homogeneous nor selected indiscriminately. Children tend to choose peers who share similar interests and values. Selective peer association will promote self-efficacy in directions of mutual interest, leaving other potentialities underdeveloped. Because peers serve as a major influence in the development and validation of self-efficacy, disrupted or impoverished peer relationships can adversely affect the growth of personal efficacy. A low sense of social efficacy can, in turn, create internal obstacles to favorable peer relationships. Thus, children who regard themselves as socially inefficacious withdraw socially, perceive low acceptance by their peers and have a low sense of self-worth. There are some forms of behavior where a high sense of efficacy may be socially alienating rather than socially affiliating. For example, children who readily resort to aggression perceive themselves as highly efficacious in getting things they want by aggressive means.

    School as an Agency for Cultivating Cognitive Self-Efficacy

    During the crucial formative period of children’s lives, the school functions as the primary setting for the cultivation and social validation of cognitive competencies. School is the place where children develop the cognitive competencies and acquire the knowledge and problem-solving skills essential for participating effectively in the larger society. Here their knowledge and thinking skills are continually tested, evaluated, and socially compared. As children master cognitive skills, they develop a growing sense of their intellectual efficacy. Many social factors, apart from the formal instruction, such as peer modeling of cognitive skills, social comparison with the performances of other students, motivational enhancement through goals and positive incentives, and teachers interpretations of children’s successes and failures in ways that reflect favorably or unfavorably on their ability also affect children’s judgments of their intellectual efficacy.

    The task of creating learning environments conducive to development of cognitive skills rests heavily on the talents and self-efficacy of teachers. Those who are have a high sense of efficacy about their teaching capabilities can motivate their students and enhance their cognitive development. Teachers who have a low sense of instructional efficacy favor a custodial orientation that relies heavily on negative sanctions to get students to study.

    Teachers operate collectively within an interactive social system rather than as isolates. The belief systems of staffs create school cultures that can have vitalizing or demoralizing effects on how well schools function as a social system. Schools in which the staff collectively judge themselves as powerless to get students to achieve academic success convey a group sense of academic futility that can pervade the entire life of the school. Schools in which staff members collectively judge themselves capable of promoting academic success imbue their schools with a positive atmosphere for development that promotes academic attainments regardless of whether they serve predominantly advantaged or disadvantaged students.

    Students’ belief in their capabilities to master academic activities affects their aspirations, their level of interest in academic activities, and their academic accomplishments. There are a number of school practices that, for the less talented or ill prepared, tend to convert instructional experiences into education in inefficacy. These include lock-step sequences of instruction, which lose many children along the way; ability groupings which further diminish the perceived self-efficacy of those cast in the lower ranks; and competitive practices where many are doomed to failure for the success of a relative few.

    Classroom structures affect the development of intellectual self-efficacy, in large part, by the relative emphasis they place on social comparison versus self-comparison appraisal. Self- appraisals of less able students suffer most when the whole group studies the same material and teachers make frequent comparative evaluations. Under such a monolithic structure students rank themselves according to capability with high consensus. Once established, reputations are not easily changed. In a personalized classroom structure, individualized instruction tailored to students’ knowledge and skills enables all of them to expand their competencies and provides less basis for demoralizing social comparison. As a result, students are more likely to compare their rate of progress to their personal standards than to the performance of others. Self-comparison of improvement in a personalized classroom structure raises perceived capability. Cooperative learning structures, in which students work together and help one another also tend to promote more positive self-evaluations of capability and higher academic attainments than do individualistic or competitive ones.

    Growth of Self-Efficacy Through Transitional Experiences of Adolescence

    Each period of development brings with it new challenges for coping efficacy. As adolescents approach the demands of adulthood, they must learn to assume full responsibility for themselves in almost every dimension of life. This requires mastering many new skills and the ways of adult society. Learning how to deal with pubertal changes, emotionally invested partnerships and sexuality becomes a matter of considerable importance. The task of choosing what lifework to pursue also looms large during this period. These are but a few of the areas in which new competencies and self-beliefs of efficacy have to be developed.

    With growing independence during adolescence some experimentation with risky behavior is not all that uncommon. Adolescents expand and strengthen their sense of efficacy by learning how to deal successfully with potentially troublesome matters in which they are unpracticed as well as with advantageous life events. Insulation from problematic situations leaves one ill-prepared to cope with potential difficulties. Whether adolescents foresake risky activities or become chronically enmeshed in them is determined by the interplay of personal competencies, self- management efficacy and the prevailing influences in their lives.

    Impoverished hazardous environments present especially harsh realities with minimal resources and social supports for culturally-valued pursuits, but extensive modeling, incentives and social supports for transgressive styles of behavior. Such environments severely tax the coping efficacy of youth enmeshed in them to make it through adolescence in ways that do not irreversibly foreclose many beneficial life paths.

    Adolescence has often been characterized as a period of psychosocial turmoil. While no period of life is ever free of problems, contrary to the stereotype of “storm and stress,” most adolescents negotiate the important transitions of this period without undue disturbance or discord. However, youngsters who enter adolescence beset by a disabling sense of inefficacy transport their vulnerability to distress and debility to the new environmental demands. The ease with which the transition from childhood to the demands of adulthood is made similarly depends on the strength of personal efficacy built up through prior mastery experiences.

    Self-Efficacy Concerns of Adulthood

    Young adulthood is a period when people have to learn to cope with many new demands arising from lasting partnerships, marital relationships, parenthood, and occupational careers. As in earlier mastery tasks, a firm sense of self-efficacy is an important contributor to the attainment of further competencies and success. Those who enter adulthood poorly equipped with skills and plagued by self-doubts find many aspects of their adult life stressful and depressing.

    Beginning a productive vocational career poses a major transitional challenge in early adulthood. There are a number of ways in which self-efficacy beliefs contribute to career development and success in vocational pursuits. In preparatory phases, people’s perceived self-efficacy partly determines how well they develop the basic cognitive, self-management and interpersonal skills on which occupational careers are founded. As noted earlier, beliefs concerning one’s capabilities are influential determinants of the vocational life paths that are chosen.

    It is one thing to get started in an occupational pursuit, it is another thing to do well and advance in it. Psychosocial skills contribute more heavily to career success than do occupational technical skills. Development of coping capabilities and skills in managing one’s motivation, emotional states and thought processes increases perceived self-regulatory efficacy. The higher the sense of self-regulatory efficacy the better the occupational functioning. Rapid technological changes in the modern workplace are placing an increasing premium on higher problem-solving skills and resilient self-efficacy to cope effectively with job displacements and restructuring of vocational activities.

    The transition to parenthood suddenly thrusts young adults into the expanded role of both parent and spouse. They now not only have to deal with the ever-changing challenges of raising children but to manage interdependent relationships within a family system and social links to many extrafamilial social systems including educational, recreational, medical, and caregiving facilities. Parents who are secure in their parenting efficacy shepherd their children adequately through the various phases of development without serious problems or severe strain on the marital relationship. But it can be a trying period for those who lack a sense of efficacy to manage the expanded familial demands. They are highly vulnerable to stress and depression.

    Increasing numbers of mothers are joining the work force either by economic necessity or personal preference. Combining family and career has now become the normative pattern. This requires management of the demands of both familial and occupational roles. Because of the cultural lag between societal practices and the changing status of women, they continue to bear the major share of the homemaking responsibility. Women who have a strong sense of efficacy to manage the multiple demands of family and work and to enlist their husbands’ aid with childcare experience a positive sense of well-being. But those who are beset by self-doubts in their ability to combine the dual roles suffer physical and emotional strain.

    By the middle years, people settle into established routines that stabilize their sense of personal efficacy in the major areas of functioning. However, the stability is a shaky one because life does not remain static. Rapid technological and social changes constantly require adaptations calling for self-reappraisals of capabilities. In their occupations, the middle-aged find themselves pressured by younger challengers. Situations in which people must compete for promotions, status, and even work itself, force constant self-appraisals of capabilities by means of social comparison with younger competitors.

    Reappraisals of Self-Efficacy With Advancing Age

    The self-efficacy issues of the elderly center on reappraisals and mis-appraisals of their capabilities. Biological conceptions of aging focus extensively on declining abilities. Many physical capacities do decrease as people grow older, thus, requiring reappraisals of self-efficacy for activities in which the biological functions have been significantly affected. However, gains in knowledge, skills, and expertise compensate some loss in physical reserve capacity. When the elderly is taught to use their intellectual capabilities, their improvement in cognitive functioning more than offsets the average decrement in performance over two decades. Because people rarely exploit their full potential, elderly persons who invest the necessary effort can function at the higher levels of younger adults. By affecting level of involvement in activities, perceived self- efficacy can contribute to the maintenance of social, physical and intellectual functioning over the adult life span.

    Older people tend to judge changes in their intellectual capabilities largely in terms of their memory performance. Lapses and difficulties in memory that young adults dismiss are inclined to be interpreted by older adults as indicators of declining cognitive capabilities. Those who regard memory as a biologically shrinking capacity with aging have low faith in their memory capabilities and enlist little effort to remember things. Older adults who have a stronger sense of memory efficacy exert greater cognitive effort to aid their recall and, as a result, achieve better memory.

    Much variability exists across behavioral domains and educational and socioeconomic levels, and there is no uniform decline in beliefs in personal efficacy in old age. The persons against whom the elderly compare themselves contribute much to the variability in perceived self-efficacy. Those who measure their capabilities against people their age are less likely to view themselves as declining in capabilities than if younger cohorts are used in comparative self-appraisal. Perceived cognitive inefficacy is accompanied by lowered intellectual performances. A declining sense of self-efficacy, which often may stem more from disuse and negative cultural expectations than from biological aging, can thus set in motion self-perpetuating processes that result in declining cognitive and behavioral functioning. People who are beset with uncertainties about their personal efficacy not only curtail the range of their activities but undermine their efforts in those they undertake. The result is a progressive loss of interest and skill.

    Major life changes in later years are brought about by retirement, relocation, and loss of friends or spouses. Such changes place demands on interpersonal skills to cultivate new social relationships that can contribute to positive functioning and personal well-being. Perceived social inefficacy increases older person’s vulnerability to stress and depression both directly and indirectly by impeding development of social supports which serve as a buffer against life stressors.

    The roles into which older adults are cast impose sociocultural constraints on the cultivation and maintenance of perceived self-efficacy. As people move to older-age phases most suffer losses of resources, productive roles, access to opportunities and challenging activities. Monotonous environments that require little thought or independent judgment diminish the quality of functioning, intellectually challenging ones enhance it. Some of the declines in functioning with age result from sociocultural dispossession of the environmental support for it. It requires a strong sense of personal efficacy to reshape and maintain a productive life in cultures that cast their elderly in powerless roles devoid of purpose. In societies that emphasize the potential for self-development throughout the lifespan, rather than psychophysical decline with aging, the elderly tend to lead productive and purposeful lives.

  • What is Efficacy of Activated Processes?

    What is Efficacy of Activated Processes?

    Much research has been conducted on the four major psychological processes through which self-beliefs of efficacy affect human functioning.

    Cognitive Processes

    The effects of self-efficacy beliefs on cognitive processes take a variety of forms. Much human behavior, being purposive, is regulated by forethought embodying valued goals. Personal goal setting is influenced by self-appraisal of capabilities. The stronger the perceived self-efficacy, the higher the goal challenges people set for themselves and the firmer is their commitment to them.

    Most courses of action are initially organized in thought. People’s beliefs in their efficacy shape the types of anticipatory scenarios they construct and rehearse. Those who have a high sense of efficacy, visualize success scenarios that provide positive guides and supports for performance. Those who doubt their efficacy, visualize failure scenarios and dwell on the many things that can go wrong. It is difficult to achieve much while fighting self-doubt. A major function of thought is to enable people to predict events and to develop ways to control those that affect their lives. Such skills require effective cognitive processing of information that contains many ambiguities and uncertainties. In learning predictive and regulative rules people must draw on their knowledge to construct options, to weight and integrate predictive factors, to test and revise their judgments against the immediate and distal results of their actions, and to remember which factors they had tested and how well they had worked.

    It requires a strong sense of efficacy to remain task oriented in the face of pressing situational demands, failures and setbacks that have significant repercussions. Indeed, when people are faced with the tasks of managing difficult environmental demands under taxing circumstances, those who are beset by self-doubts about their efficacy become more and more erratic in their analytic thinking, lower their aspirations and the quality of their performance deteriorates. In contrast, those who maintain a resilient sense of efficacy set themselves challenging goals and use good analytic thinking which pays off in performance accomplishments.

    Motivational Processes

    Self-beliefs of efficacy play a key role in the self-regulation of motivation. Most human motivation is cognitively generated. People motivate themselves and guide their actions anticipatorily by the exercise of forethought. They form beliefs about what they can do. They anticipate likely outcomes of prospective actions. They set goals for themselves and plan courses of action designed to realize valued futures.

    There are three different forms of cognitive motivators around which different theories have been built. They include causal attributions, outcome expectancies, and cognized goals. The corresponding theories are attribution theory, expectancy-value theory and goal theory, respectively. Self-efficacy beliefs operate in each of these types of cognitive motivation. Self-efficacy beliefs influence causal attributions. People who regard themselves as highly efficacious attribute their failures to insufficient effort, those who regard themselves as inefficacious attribute their failures to low ability. Causal attributions affect motivation, performance and affective reactions mainly through beliefs of self-efficacy.

    In expectancy-value theory, motivation is regulated by the expectation that a given course of behavior will produce certain outcomes and the value of those outcomes. But people act on their beliefs about what they can do, as well as on their beliefs about the likely outcomes of performance. The motivating influence of outcome expectancies is thus partly governed by self-beliefs of efficacy. There are countless attractive options people do not pursue because they judge they lack the capabilities for them. The predictiveness of expectancy-value theory is enhanced by including the influence of perceived self- efficacy.

    The capacity to exercise self-influence by goal challenges and evaluative reaction to one’s own attainments provides a major cognitive mechanism of motivation. A large body of evidence shows that explicit, challenging goals enhance and sustain motivation. Goals operate largely through self-influence processes rather than regulate motivation and action directly. Motivation based on goal setting involves a cognitive comparison process. By making self-satisfaction conditional on matching adopted goals, people give direction to their behavior and create incentives to persist in their efforts until they fulfill their goals. They seek self-satisfaction from fulfilling valued goals and are prompted to intensify their efforts by discontent with substandard performances.

    Motivation based on goals or personal standards is governed by three types of self-influences. They include self-satisfying and self-dissatisfying reactions to one’s performance, perceived self-efficacy for goal attainment, and readjustment of personal goals based on one’s progress. Self-efficacy beliefs contribute to motivation in several ways: They determine the goals people set for themselves; how much effort they expend; how long they persevere in the face of difficulties; and their resilience to failures. When faced with obstacles and failures people who harbor self-doubts about their capabilities slacken their efforts or give up quickly. Those who have a strong belief in their capabilities exert greater effort when they fail to master the challenge. Strong perseverance contributes to performance accomplishments.

    Affective Processes

    People’s beliefs in their coping capabilities affect how much stress and depression they experience in threatening or difficult situations, as well as their level of motivation. Perceived self-efficacy to exercise control over stressors plays a central role in anxiety arousal. People who believe they can exercise control over threats do not conjure up disturbing thought patterns. But those who believe they cannot manage threats experience high anxiety arousal. They dwell on their coping deficiencies. They view many aspects of their environment as fraught with danger. They magnify the severity of possible threats and worry about things that rarely happen. Through such inefficacious thinking they distress themselves and impair their level of functioning. Perceived coping self-efficacy regulates avoidance behavior as well as anxiety arousal. The stronger the sense of self-efficacy the bolder people are in taking on taxing and threatening activities.

    Anxiety arousal is affected not only by perceived coping efficacy but by perceived efficacy to control disturbing thoughts. The exercise of control over one’s own consciousness is summed up well in the proverb: “You cannot prevent the birds of worry and care from flying over your head. But you can stop them from building a nest in your head.” Perceived self-efficacy to control thought processes is a key factor in regulating thought produced stress and depression. It is not the sheer frequency of disturbing thoughts but the perceived inability to turn them off that is the major source of distress. Both perceived coping self-efficacy and thought control efficacy operate jointly to reduce anxiety and avoidant behavior.

    Social cognitive theory prescribes mastery experiences as the principal means of personality change. Guided mastery is a powerful vehicle for instilling a robust sense of coping efficacy in people whose functioning is seriously impaired by intense apprehension and phobic self-protective reactions. Mastery experiences are structured in ways to build coping skills and instill beliefs that one can exercise control over potential threats. Intractable phobics, of course, are not about to do what they dread. One must, therefore, create an environment so that incapacitated phobics can perform successfully despite themselves. This is achieved by enlisting a variety of performance mastery aids. Feared activities are first modeled to show people how to cope with threats and to disconfirm their worst fears. Coping tasks are broken down into subtasks of easily mastered steps. Performing feared activities together with the therapist further enables phobics to do things they would resist doing by themselves. Another way of overcoming resistance is to use graduated time. Phobics will refuse threatening tasks if they will have to endure stress for a long time. But they will risk them for a short period. As their coping efficacy increases the time they perform the activity is extended. Protective aids and dosing the severity of threats also help to restore and develop a sense of coping efficacy.

    After functioning is fully restored, the mastery aids are withdrawn to verify that coping successes stem from personal efficacy rather than from mastery aids. Self-directed mastery experiences, designed to provide varied confirmatory tests of coping capabilities, are then arranged to strengthen and generalize the sense of coping efficacy. Once people develop a resilient sense of efficacy they can withstand difficulties and adversities without adverse effects.

    Guided mastery treatment achieves widespread psychological changes in a relatively short time. It eliminates phobic behavior and anxiety and biological stress reactions, creates positive attitudes and eradicates phobic ruminations and nightmares. Evidence that achievement of coping efficacy profoundly affects dream activity is a particularly striking generalized impact.

    A low sense of efficacy to exercise control produces depression as well as anxiety. It does so in several different ways. One route to depression is through unfulfilled aspiration. People who impose on themselves standards of self-worth they judge they cannot attain drive themselves to bouts of depression. A second efficacy route to depression is through a low sense of social efficacy. People who judge themselves to be socially efficacious seek out and cultivate social relationships that provide models on how to manage difficult situations, cushion the adverse effects of chronic stressors and bring satisfaction to people’s lives. Perceived social inefficacy to develop satisfying and supportive relationships increases vulnerability to depression through social isolation. Much human depression is cognitively generated by dejecting ruminative thought. A low sense of efficacy to exercise control over ruminative thought also contributes to the occurrence, duration and recurrence of depressive episodes.

    Other efficacy-activated processes in the affective domain concern the impact of perceived coping self-efficacy on biological systems that affect health functioning. Stress has been implicated as an important contributing factor to many physical dysfunctions. Controllability appears to be a key organizing principle regarding the nature of these stress effects. It is not stressful life conditions per se, but the perceived inability to manage them that is debilitating. Thus, exposure to stressors with ability to control them has no adverse biological effects. But exposure to the same stressors without the ability to control them impairs the immune system. The impairment of immune function increases susceptibility to infection, contributes to the development of physical disorders and accelerates the progression of disease.

    Biological systems are highly interdependent. A weak sense of efficacy to exercise control over stressors activates autonomic reactions, catecholamine secretion and release of endogenous opioids. These biological systems are involved in the regulation of the immune system. Stress activated in the process of acquiring coping capabilities may have different effects than stress experienced in aversive situations with no prospect in sight of ever gaining any self-protective efficacy. There are substantial evolutionary benefits to experiencing enhanced immune function during development of coping capabilities vital for effective adaptation. It would not be evolutionarily advantageous if acute stressors invariably impaired immune function, because of their prevalence in everyday life. If this were the case, people would experience high vulnerability to infective agents that would quickly do them in. There is some evidence that providing people with effective means for managing stressors may have a positive effect on immune function. Moreover, stress aroused while gaining coping mastery over stressors can enhance different components of the immune system.

    There are other ways in which perceived self-efficacy serves to promote health. Lifestyle habits can enhance or impair health. This enables people to exert behavioral influence over their vitality and quality of health. Perceived self-efficacy affects every phase of personal change–whether people even consider changing their health habits; whether they enlist the motivation and perseverance needed to succeed should they choose to do so; and how well they maintain the habit changes they have achieved. The stronger the perceived self-regulatory efficacy the more successful people are in reducing health-impairing habits and adopting and integrating health-promoting habits into their regular lifestyle. Comprehensive community programs designed to prevent cardiovascular disease by altering risk-related habits reduce the rate of morbidity and mortality.

    Selection Processes

    The discussion so far has centered on efficacy-activated processes that enable people to create beneficial environments and to exercise some control over those they encounter day in and day out. People are partly the product of their environment. Therefore, beliefs of personal efficacy can shape the course lives take by influencing they types of activities and environments people choose. People avoid activities and situations they believe exceed their coping capabilities. But they readily undertake challenging activities and select situations they judge themselves capable of handling. By the choices they make, people cultivate different competencies, interests and social networks that determine life courses. Any factor that influences choice behavior can profoundly affect the direction of personal development. This is because the social influences operating in selected environments continue to promote certain competencies, values, and interests long after the efficacy decisional determinant has rendered its inaugurating effect.

    Career choice and development is but one example of the power of self-efficacy beliefs to affect the course of life paths through choice-related processes. The higher the level of people’s perceived self-efficacy the wider the range of career options they seriously consider, the greater their interest in them, and the better they prepare themselves educationally for the occupational pursuits they choose and the greater is their success. Occupations structure a good part of people’s lives and provide them with a major source of personal growth.

  • Help Seeking

    What do you understand by Help Seeking?

    Help seeking theory postulates that people follow a series of predictable steps to seek help for their inadequacies, it is a series of well-ordered and purposeful cognitive and behavioral steps, each leading to specific types of solutions.

    Help seeking theory falls into two categories where some consider similarity in the process’ (e.g. Cepeda-Benito & Short, 1998) while others consider it as dependent upon the problem (e.g. Di Fabio & Bernaud, 2008). In general help seeking behaviors are dependent upon three categories, attitudes (beliefs and willingness) towards help-seeking, intention to seek help, and actual help-seeking behavior.

    Helped A Dog Named Cheeseburger

    Do you ask for help when you need it or do you have the view, “I have to do it myself, no one can do it except me?” From a motivational perspective, help seeking is an adaptive cognitive strategy that indicates a striving for mastery and achievement (R. Ames, 1983; Karabenick, 1998; Newman, 1998) and a general problem-solving strategy (Nelson-Le Gall, 1985). If help seeking is an adaptive strategy, why do teachers observe that students

    who are most in need of help are often the most reluctant to seek help? We have learned from research that seeking help from others can have negative connotations (Newman, 1990, 1991).

    Help Seeking 00

    Help seeking may be seen as threatening if the student thinks it is a sign of low ability. In this case, there is a personal cost to seeking help: Students may feel incompetent. Help seeking is positive when students seek assistance in order to make a change in their learning. The attributional process is an important factor in whether help seeking is seen as positive or negative and consequently whether students attend academic help sessions. R. Ames and Lau (1982) identified factors that affected the extent that college students attend help sessions:

    • Low-performing students were more likely to attend help sessions if they were given specific positive information about the effects of the sessions (e.g., “students who attended improved their performance”).
    • Students who attributed success to effort were more likely to attend.
    • Students who did not seek help used more external attributions for failure, such as “tricky test questions,” and used these external reasons as excuses.

    Newman’s (1990, 1991) investigations of help seeking among children in Grades 3, 5, and 7 provided a fuller understanding of help seeking. For example, who seeks help, individuals with high or low self-esteem? For all grades, the higher the perceived competence of the children, the less they felt there were personal costs to help seeking (e.g., being thought of as low ability). Students with low self-esteem were especially unlikely to seek help, whereas those with high self-esteem were more likely to seek help. Similar results were obtained by Nelson-Le Gall and Jones (1990) for average-achieving African-American children. Newman (1991) also found differences between younger and older students in views about help seeking. Seventh graders were more aware than younger children that negative fallout might result from help seeking (e.g., embarrassment). However, older children were also more likely than younger ones to believe that smart classmates rather than “dumb” ones ask questions of the teacher. Help seeking by college students showed a pattern similar to that of children. Karabenick and Knapp (1991) found that students with low self-esteem were more threatened by seeking help.

    Help Seeking 01

    One important and perhaps surprising finding was that students who use more learning strategies are more likely to seek help when needed, whereas students who use fewer strategies are less likely to seek help when needed. This attitude presents a double bind for those needing help. Not only do they lack the necessary strategies for success, but they do not seek the needed study assistance. The authors concluded that students need to learn to judge when they need help and that help seeking should be included in learning strategy and motivation programs. These findings on help seeking are important for teachers and counselors so that they can plan ways to get students to attend help sessions or seek help in counseling when needed. Nelson-Le Gall (1985) emphasized the need to think of help seeking as an adaptive coping strategy rather than as a self-threatening activity. Some ways to accomplish this are listed in Strategy.

    Types of Help Seeking

    Help seeking behavior is divided into two types, adaptive behavior and non-adaptive behavior. It is adaptive when exercised to overcome a difficulty and it depends upon the person’s recognition, insight and dimension of the problem and resources for solving the same, this is valued as an active strategy. It is non-adaptive when the behavior persists even after understanding and experiencing the problem solving mechanism and when used for avoidance. Dynamic barriers in seeking help can also affect active process (e.g.: culture, ego, classism, etc.). Nelson-Le Gall (1981) distinguished between instrumental help-seeking, which she regarded as being essential for learning, and passive dependency.

    Strategy of Help Seeking

    • The overriding task is to have students view help seeking, when needed, as a smart move instead of a dumb one.
    • Establish a classroom climate where students are encouraged to ask questions.
    • Document attendance and improved performance as a result of the help sessions and show this to students.
    • Be sure students who have improved after attending help sessions attribute the improvement to the help sessions.
    • Teach students a self-talk script to practice asking teachers for help in classes where they were having problems, as one middle school teacher did.

  • Helpless

    What is a meaning of Helpless?

    Meaning of helpless: “Unable to defend oneself or to act without help.” A student who has a history of failure and does not expect this to change will attribute failure to ability an internal and stable factor. This pattern is characteristic of students classified as having learned helplessness. These individuals expect that their actions will be futile in affecting future outcomes. Consequently, they give up. Learned helplessness was first investigated in young animals who had been presented with inescapable electric shocks in one situation; when placed in a different situation, they failed to try to escape or avoid the shock (Seligman & Maier, 1967). Animals that demonstrated no connection between their activity and avoiding the shock had learned to be helpless. It was further hypothesized that humans responded the same way: they were passive in situations where they believed their actions would have no effect on what happens to them. In this original explanation, helplessness was viewed as global affecting all domains of one’s life. Later research found that people may experience helplessness in one situation and not in others (Alloy, Abramson, Peterson, & Seligman, 1984). This means that a student may feel helpless in learning math but not in learning history.

    Helplessness exists in achievement situations when students do not see a connection between their actions and their performance and grades. The important aspect of learned helplessness is how it affects the motivational behavior of students in the face of failure. The attributions a student makes for failure act as a bridge between a student’s willingness to try again and the student’s tendency to give up.

    Helpless and Mastery Orientation

    Helpless 02

    In a now-classic study, Diener and Dweck (1978) identified two patterns of responses to failure following success in problem-solving tasks: a maladaptive-helpless orientation and an adaptive-mastery orientation. Children showed different response patterns to failure in their thinking, self-talk, affect, and actions. Keep in mind that the students in the study had the same failure experience while performing the tasks, but there were two different patterns of response to the failure outcome. The thinking, self-talk, and actions of the helpless-oriented children formed a self-defeating pattern. When failure is attributed to lack of ability, there is a decline in performance. Attribution to lack of effort does not show this decline (Dweck & Goetz, 1978).

    Are there ability differences in learned helplessness? Butkowsky and Willows (1980) compared good, average, and poor readers. They found that poor readers had lower expectancies of success on a reading task. Poor readers overwhelmingly attributed their failures to lack of ability (68% compared with 13% for average readers and 12% for good readers). They took less responsibility for success, attributing success more to task ease an external cause than did the good and average readers. In the face of difficulty, poor readers became less persistent a self-defeating behavior. Helplessness was also found when children studied new material that required them to read passages with confusing concepts.

    In a study by Licht and Dweck (1984), half the children received material with a clear passage, and the other half received a confusing passage. There were no differences between mastery orientation and helpless orientation when the passage was clearly written. In contrast, when the passage was not clear, most of the mastery children reached the learning criterion, whereas only one third of the helpless children did. This investigation is important because some academic subjects, like math, are characterized by constant new learning, which may be initially confusing to students. Mastery students will not be discouraged by the initial difficulty, whereas helpless students immediately lose confidence although they may be equally competent. When teaching new material, teachers can be especially alert for this pattern of helplessness in the face of initial difficulty.

    Learned Helplessness and Students with Learning Disabilities

    Helpless 01

    Are some students more prone to experience a sense of helplessness? Students particularly susceptible to the pattern of learned helplessness are those students who are identified as having learning disabilities (LD) (Licht, 1983). Children with LD experience much failure over a long period of time on a variety of school tasks. As a result, these children come to doubt their academic abilities, with the accompanying belief that nothing they can do will help them be successful. This is followed by the self-defeating response of decreasing effort. Children with LD have been found to exhibit the following characteristics of the learned helplessness pattern (Licht, 1983):

    • Score lower than non-LD children on measures of self-esteem and perceptions of ability,
    • Are more likely to attribute difficulty with tasks to lack of ability,
    • Are less likely to attribute failure to insufficient effort, and
    • Lower their expectations for future success and display greater decline in expectation following failure.

    It is important for teachers to be aware of the characteristics of helplessness because learned helplessness may explain the students’ apparent lack of motivation. How can a teacher identify a helpless pattern? What can a teacher do to lessen the likelihood of helplessness and help students who have this tendency? Butkowsky and Willows (1980) suggested that educators must begin to rethink failure as a necessary component of the learning process and not as a damaging experience to be avoided.

    Does the pattern of learned helplessness show up in young children? Dweck and Sorich (1999) concluded that there is clear evidence of a helplessness pattern in children younger than age 8. After experiencing failure or criticism, they show signs of helplessness like self-blame, lowered persistence, and lack of constructive strategies. Mastery-oriented children, in contrast, assumed they were still good even when their work had errors, and believed they could improve through effort. An important implication for parents and teachers, according to the authors, is to be very cautious when giving feedback to children. Extremely positive or negative feedback can be detrimental to children’s beliefs about their competence.