자아개념의 多元性과 학업성취간 관계 = The Relationships between Multifaceted Nature of Self-Concept and Achievement
저자
발행기관
학술지명
권호사항
발행연도
2001
작성언어
Korean
KDC
378.000
자료형태
학술저널
수록면
3-17(15쪽)
제공처
소장기관
Wylie는 “성취와 능력이 성취와 능력자아개념들, 그리고 일반 존중감과도 강하게 관계될 것”이라고 가장했다(1979, 355). 본 절은 목적은 이러한 연구를 간략하게 논평하는 것이다. Shavelson과 동료들의 모형에서 학문적 자아개념은 일반 자아개념의 한 요소이며, 수학과 언어와 같은 특정내용 분야에의 자아개념으로 나뉘어진다. SDQ 해석에 대한 구인타당도와 Shavelson 등의 모형의 구인타당도에 대한 지지는 ① 학업성취가 비학문적 혹은 일반 자아개념보다는 보다 긍정적으로 학문적 자아개념과 상관된다. 그리고 ② 언어와 수학성취들은 자아개념의 다른 특성보다 그 분야의 자아개념과 더 높게 상관되어야 할 필요가 있다.
Educators have been critically concerned with the question of whether increasing self-concept changes achievement, or increasing achievement changes self-concept. Before the question of “which causes which” can be answered, however, it is necessary to fist establish covariation between these two variables. As Mill(1869) argued, covariation is the first important criterion for inferring cause. The other criteria are the temporal precedence of the cause, and that other explanations of the cause and effect relationship must be eliminated(see also Cook & Campbell, 1979; Kenny, 1979)
The Three Criteria
The meta-analysis just discussed indicated that, on average, only 2% to 4% covariation between self-concept and achievement can be expected. Thus, it is extremely difficult to go further and investigate causal claims. Kenny(1979 p.238) noted that variables with low correlations―he said less than .3―typically yield disappointing and confusing results with respect to causality. Thus any research assessing causality needs to pay careful attention to the first criteria; that is, the amount of covariation between the two variables.
Byrne(1986), for examples, in a very elaborate study using causal modeling, was not able to establish causal pre dominance of self-concept of achievement. This is not surprising, given that the average covariance in her study between general self-concept and academic achievement was 4%. Pottenbaum, Keit, & Ehly (1986) did not find either self-concept or achievement causally dominant, and their average covariation was 1%. Marayuma, Rubin & Kingsbury (1981) reported a similar conclusion. Their average covariance was 4%. Skaalvik & Hagtvet (1990) found that academic achievement seems to have causal predominance over self-concept of ability in one of their samples, and academic achievement have causal predominance over global self-concept in the other(but there were no relations between achievement and self-concept of ability). These seemingly conflicting findings are based on an average 3% to 10% covariation. Moyer(1979) argued that self-concept is causally dominant but noted that the correlations between self-concept and achievement are “generally quite weak”(r<.20) Wattenberg and Clifford (1964) were more definite: “Even as early as kindergarten, self-concept phenomena are antecedents and predictors of reading accomplishments”
(p.461). There conclusions are strong, but are actually based on finding that only 10 of 28 correlations were positive, none were significant, and overall the correlations between reading and changes in self-concept were “slightly inclined to be negative.” Such findings are hardly convincing. Given the low percentage of covariation, it is not surprising that there are just as many studies supporting the precedence of self-concept over achievement (Byrne, 1986, cited 8) as there are for the opposite case (Byrne cited 6).
Higher correlations are reported between academic achievement and self-concept of ability, and typically these studies report predominance of achievement over self-concept of ability. An alternative explanation to this causal predominance is that academic self-concept measures self-estimates of ability. As noted in chapter 5, the widely used Brookover test very much involves a self-estimates of ability, has no items relating to the saliency of achievement, and has only one item relation to satisfaction. It was, therefore, not surprising that achievement was a better predictor of self-estimates of achievement than vice versa. For example, Marsh(1990a) re-analyzed the Bachman(1970) and Bachman & O'Malley 1997, 1986) data based on 1,456 students retested at 10th, 11th, 12th, and one year after graduation. There was support for the effects of prior self-concept of ability on subsequent reported grade, and no significant relationships in the other direction.
The second criterion relates to the temporal issue. Before self-concept can be said to cause changes in achievement, programs to change self-concept must precede changes in achievement (or vice versa). In the social sciences these claims are difficult to test as the choice of the time interval is tricky. It may not be evident. If on the other hand, the time interval is too long than a premature measure of achievement may not detect the changes in achievement. Further, delayed cause are les likely to be solely attributable to the anticipated effect.
Of course, self-concept and achievement are not static, and there may be much feedback between the two variables. Thus, any model that claims that changes in self-concept lead to changes in academic achievement (or vice versa) must distinguish between recursive (self-concept causes achievement or achievement cause self-concept) and nonrecursive theories (self-concept and achievement affect each other). There may be a feedback look between the two variables so that changing one has “instantaneous” effects on the other, and so on. Given that the covariation is so small, it would be extremely difficult to design an experiment to test a recursive versus a non-recursive model.
The third criterion is that other explanations of the cause and effect relationship need to be eliminated. There can be many reasonable alternative rival hypotheses that could account for any changes in achievement following a self-concept program (or vice versa). O'Malley and Bachman(1976) concluded that much of the correlation between self-concept and achievement an best be explained “as reflecting a common set of prior cause background, ability and earlier scholastic success” (p.38). Marayuma, Rubin, and Kingsbury (1981) argued that self-concept and achievement are related “only insofar as they shared the background variables of social class and academic ability as common causes” (p.973). Moreover, self-concept may moderate self-efficacy or expectations about achievement. Alternatively, high achievement may lead to a more realistic understanding of expectation, which, when these expectations are met, may lead to an increased level of self-concept (see Ames, 1978; Sharp & Muller, 1978). A causal model that does not allow for such intervening variables would thus be flawed.
There may be many variables that similarly moderate the relationship between self-concept and achievement. Calsyn and Kenny (1977) found more support for a causal precedence of achievement over self-concept for females that for males. This, they argued, was possibly because females are more sensive to feedback (see also Bridgeman & Shipman, 1978; and for an opposite conclusion regarding sex differences and causal dominance see Midkiff, Burke, Hunt & Ellison, 1986). Song and Hattie (1984) also investigated the moderating effects of home environment (but also see Chapman, Lambourne, & Silva, 1990). Other moderators that have been suggested include race, age, and ability (Bachman & O'Malley, 1977).
Any research study that investigates the causal relationship between self-concept and achievement also may well consider multiple causes. Increasing self-concept and some other variables, such as increased teacher understanding of the mechanisms for change, may lead to increased achievement.
서지정보 내보내기(Export)
닫기소장기관 정보
닫기권호소장정보
닫기오류접수
닫기오류 접수 확인
닫기음성서비스 신청
닫기음성서비스 신청 확인
닫기이용약관
닫기학술연구정보서비스 이용약관 (2017년 1월 1일 ~ 현재 적용)
학술연구정보서비스(이하 RISS)는 정보주체의 자유와 권리 보호를 위해 「개인정보 보호법」 및 관계 법령이 정한 바를 준수하여, 적법하게 개인정보를 처리하고 안전하게 관리하고 있습니다. 이에 「개인정보 보호법」 제30조에 따라 정보주체에게 개인정보 처리에 관한 절차 및 기준을 안내하고, 이와 관련한 고충을 신속하고 원활하게 처리할 수 있도록 하기 위하여 다음과 같이 개인정보 처리방침을 수립·공개합니다.
주요 개인정보 처리 표시(라벨링)
목 차
3년
또는 회원탈퇴시까지5년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한3년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한2년
이상(개인정보보호위원회 : 개인정보의 안전성 확보조치 기준)개인정보파일의 명칭 | 운영근거 / 처리목적 | 개인정보파일에 기록되는 개인정보의 항목 | 보유기간 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
학술연구정보서비스 이용자 가입정보 파일 | 한국교육학술정보원법 | 필수 | ID, 비밀번호, 성명, 생년월일, 신분(직업구분), 이메일, 소속분야, 웹진메일 수신동의 여부 | 3년 또는 탈퇴시 |
선택 | 소속기관명, 소속도서관명, 학과/부서명, 학번/직원번호, 휴대전화, 주소 |
구분 | 담당자 | 연락처 |
---|---|---|
KERIS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 정보보호본부 김태우 | - 이메일 : lsy@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0439 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0195 |
KERIS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 개인정보보호부 이상엽 | |
RISS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 대학학술본부 장금연 | - 이메일 : giltizen@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0149 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0194 |
RISS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 학술진흥부 길원진 |
자동로그아웃 안내
닫기인증오류 안내
닫기귀하께서는 휴면계정 전환 후 1년동안 회원정보 수집 및 이용에 대한
재동의를 하지 않으신 관계로 개인정보가 삭제되었습니다.
(참조 : RISS 이용약관 및 개인정보처리방침)
신규회원으로 가입하여 이용 부탁 드리며, 추가 문의는 고객센터로 연락 바랍니다.
- 기존 아이디 재사용 불가
휴면계정 안내
RISS는 [표준개인정보 보호지침]에 따라 2년을 주기로 개인정보 수집·이용에 관하여 (재)동의를 받고 있으며, (재)동의를 하지 않을 경우, 휴면계정으로 전환됩니다.
(※ 휴면계정은 원문이용 및 복사/대출 서비스를 이용할 수 없습니다.)
휴면계정으로 전환된 후 1년간 회원정보 수집·이용에 대한 재동의를 하지 않을 경우, RISS에서 자동탈퇴 및 개인정보가 삭제처리 됩니다.
고객센터 1599-3122
ARS번호+1번(회원가입 및 정보수정)