beyond cognitive abilities: an integrative model of learning-related personal competencies and...
TRANSCRIPT
Dr. Kevin S. McGrew
Institute for Applied Psychometrics & University of Minnesota
Beyond Cognitive Abilities: An Integrative Model of Learning-related Personal
Competences and Aptitude Trait Complexes
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Going “beyond cognitive abilities” has been an area of study in education and psychology for decades
Spearman on “conative” abilities (1927)
“The process of cognition cannot possibly be treated apart
from those of conation and affection, seeing that all these are but inseparable aspects in the instincts and behavior of a single individual, who himself,
as the vary name implies, is essentially indivisible” (p. 2)
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Conation: the proactive (as
opposed to habitual) part of motivation
that connects knowledge, affect, drives, desires, and
instincts to behavior
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
“The tendency to take and maintain a definite direction; the capacity to make adaptations for the purpose of attaining a desired end; and the power of auto-criticism” (translation by Terman, 1916, p.
45). All three of these phrases refer at least as much to conative processes and attitudes as to
reasoning powers.
Binet's concept of intelligence was much like Snow's concept of aptitudes (p. 5).
Alfred Binet’s definition of Intelligence (Corno et al., 2002 translation by Terman, 1916)
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
“When our scales measure the non-intellective as well as the intellectual factors
in intelligence, they will more nearly measure what in actual life corresponds to
intelligent behavior” (p. 103)
Important distinction: Intelligence vs. intelligent performance
David Wechsler (1944) on “non-intellective factors”
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Messick (1979) on “non-cognitive factors”
It is important to not target “feel good” faddish variables that have good face or consumer
validity— and that have little empirical validity
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Back to the Future: Non-cognitive factors are again being revisited with different terminology
• Social-emotional learning• Cognitive engagement
• Self-determination• Growth mindset• Habits of Mind
• Self-beliefs• Grit• …..
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
“Students' engagement with school, the belief that they can achieve at high levels, and their ability and willingness to do what it takes to reach their goals not only play a central role shaping students' ability to master academic
subjects, they are also valuable attributes that will enable students to lead full lives, meeting challenges and making the most of available
opportunities along the way (Schunk and Mullen, 2013). In order to effectively meet the
economic, political and social demands for competencies, much more is required of students and adults than just cognitive
proficiency (Levin, 2012).”
Cognitive engagement
literature
A “big picture” model (taxonomy; working heuristic model), even if provisional, is needed to
guide research and development regarding the assessment of student competencies and learning
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
We have an embarrassment of riches in search of order
• Social-emotional learning• Cognitive & student engagement• Self-determination• Habits of Mind• Growth mindset• Self-beliefs• Grit• …..
• Need for Achievement Theory• Intrinsic Motivation Theory• Goal Setting Theory• Attribution Theory• Achievement Goal Theory• Interest Theory• Self-efficacy Theory• Self-worth Theory• Self-regulation Theory• Self-determination theory• ……
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Physical Competence
Social-Emotional
IntelligenceConceptualIntelligence
Practical Intelligence
Personal Competence
Greenspan’s Model(s) of Personal Competence
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Physical Cognitive Conative Affective
Personality
Adapted Snow (Corno et al., 2002) model of aptitude
Intellect
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
• Aptitude – “a predisposition to respond in a way that fits, or does not fit, a particular situation or class of situations. The common thread is potentiality” (Corno et al., 2002, p. 3)
• “Aspects of personality—achievement motivation, freedom from anxiety, appropriately positive self-concept, control of impulses, and others—are aptitudes as well, contributing importantly to copy with some challenges” (Snow, et al., 1996, p. 4)
Aptitude intelligence
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
A proposed “big picture” heuristic conceptual framework (a meta-taxonomy model): Integrate these two broad stroke models*
* Plus information fromrecent related research
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Despite the explosion of discussions regarding social-emotional learning (SEL) by policy-makers and educators, well validated
models of social and emotional competencies are not available. The conceptual research in these areas is in the formative stages.
• Lots of conceptual clutter• The jingle-jangle jungle fallacy
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Physical
Physical abilities
Psycho-motor
abilities
Sensory-perceptual
abilities
Cognitive
Cognitive processes
Acquired knowledge
systems
Conative
Motivations
Volitional controls
Affective
Temper-ament traits
Character-istic moods
Intellect
Personality
The big picture: An adapted Snow (Corno et al., 2002) model of aptitude (MACM revised; 10-13-16)
Knowing FeelingWilling
Cool intelligences Hot intelligences
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr.
Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Cool intelligences
Abilities involving perceptual
processing and logical reasoning
Hot intelligences:
Abilities involving emotionally-salient
information
(Note. The cognitive aspects of social intelligence [Gei]
have provisionally been added to the CHC taxonomy)
Note. Cognitive processes are similar to procedural knowledge or “intelligence-as-
process” (Ackerman PPIK model)
Acquired knowledge systems can also be labeled as declarative knowledge or
“intelligence as knowledge” (Ackerman PPIK)
Personal competence domain
Cognitive
Cognitive processes
Acquired knowledge
systems
Cognitive taxonomy: Best evidence-based consensus model:Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of cognitive abilities
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Gc Gkn Grw Gq Gf Gwm Gv Ga Gl Gr Gs Gt
g
The Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) taxonomy of human abilities (v 2.4) A higher-order conceptualization based on MDS of the WJ IV norm data (McGrew & Schneider, 06-20-16)
(The tentative broad abilities of Gh, Gk, Go, Gk, Gp, Gps & Gei and all broad domain level I narrow abilities omitted for
readability purposes.)
Intelligence-as-Knowledge (Ackerman)
Acquired knowledge systems
gc Cattell
Intelligence-as-Process (Ackerman)
System 2 (controlled deliberate cognitive operations/processes)
(Kahneman)
gf Cattell
Intelligence-as-Process: Speed/fluency (Ackerman)
System 1 (automatic rapid cognitive processes)
(Kahneman)
gs – General speed factor
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Trait-complexes (combinations, mixtures, compounds, etc.)
Ackerman PPIK model
“Intelligence-as-Process“Personality”
“Interests”“Intelligence-as-Knowledge”
Affective
Temper-ament traits
Character-istic moods
AffectiveConative
Motivations
Volitional controls
Temper-ament traits
Character-istic moods
Personality
Personal competence domain
E C AES OE
Personality taxonomy: Best evidence-based consensus model: The Big Five
E = ExtraversionC = ConscientiousnessES = Emotional stability (aka, neuroticism)A = AgreeablenessOE = Openness to experience
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Factor analysis of 209 items in
very large samples
The SENNA 1.0 SEMS (social
emotional skills) empirically
based model
The SENNA 1.0 SEMS dimensions correspond (subsume and go
beyond) the Big Five +
E = ExtraversionC = ConscientiousnessES = Emotional stability (aka, neuroticism)A = AgreeablenessOE = Openness to experienceLC = Locus of control
E C AES OE LC
Conscientiousness (C): Working Hard and Persevering at Tasks at School
Emotional Stability (ES): Managing Negative Emotions Versus Experiencing
Negative Affect
Agreeableness (A): Prosocial Skills in Peer Relationships
Open-Mindedness (OE): Curiosity, Imagination, and Invention
External Locus of Control/Negative Valence (LC): Ineffective Coping and
Hopeless Beliefs
Extraversion (E): Energetic Approach to the Social World
The SENNA 1.0 SEMS empirically based model
The SENNA 2.0 SEMS empirically based model
The SENNA 2.0 SEMS dimensions correspond
(subsume and go beyond) the Big Five +
E A CN O
Engaging with Others (vs Withdrawal and Avoidance) - E
Conscientious Task Performance (or Goal Orientation) - C
Negative-Emotion Regulation (or Emotional Resilience = ER) - N
Amity (vs Enmity): “Tending and Befriending” Others - A
Open-Mindedness: Interest and devotion to matters of the mind - O
The SENNA 2.0 SEMS empirically based model
The SENNA 2.0 SEMS dimensions correspond to dimensions, or combinations of dimensions, from these
domains from the adapted Snow model
E A CN O
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Conative
Motivations
Volitional controls
Personal competence
domain
Conative taxonomy: A “working” heuristic framework:The Model of Academic Competence and Motivation
(MACM; Revised 09-26-16; K. McGrew)*
Self-Regulation
Cognitive styles & lrng approaches
Volitional controls
Motivational orientation
Interests & Attitudes Self-beliefs
Motivations
(Note: Self-regulation is most likely closely tied to the concept of executive
functions
* The MACM domains are very similar to cognitive engagement action
patterns and dispositions and drivers of engagement
• “Do I want to do this activity and why?”
• “Is this activity of interest to me…is it worth the effort?”
• “Can I do this activity?
• “Am I capable?”• “What do I need to do to succeed?”
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
The background information and white paper that
outlines the Model of Academic
Competence and Motivation
(MACM) is available online.
http://tinyurl.com/cf7uj2
Dispositions concern not what abilities people have, but how people are disposed to use and invest their abilities and capabilities — what they are disposed to do.
Passions, motivations, sensitivities, and values all seem likely to play a role in intelligence. To define intelligence as a matter of ability without also honoring the other elements that enliven it is to fail to capture its human spark.
Thinking dispositions & drivers of cognitive engagement. The human spark
of learning and intelligence
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr.
Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
More information available at the MindHub™ web portal
Commitment to action
“Crossing the Rubicon”
Reciprocalinteractions & feedback
Orientations Towards Self (Motivations)
Phrases used to describe this stage
-Arena of planning and decision-making-Contemplating and deliberating over options-Processes involved in decision to pursue goals-WishWantIntentions
Self-Beliefs
Motivationalorientations
Interests &Attitudes
• Can I do this task?• Do I want to do this task & why?
Volitional Controls(Cognitive Styles & Lrng.
Approaches)
Phrases used to describe this stage
-Arena of Implementation and management-Carrying out plans and intentions-Action orientation (state or action oriented)-Mindfulness (mindful effort investment)-Self-regulation of cognition and emotions
Self-RegulatedLearning
Strategies
Conativestyles
• What do I need to do to succeed?
OutcomesCOMMITMENT PATHWAY TO ENGAGED LEARNINGContemplate & plan Decide & Commit Implement & monitor
Cognitive engagement
Feedback loop© Institute for Applied
Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
• Academic motivation• Intrinsic motivation• Academic goal orientation• ….
• Academic interests, attitudes & values• ….
• Locus of control• Academic self-efficacy• Academic self-concept• Academic ability conception• ….
• Planning & activation• Monitoring• Control & regulation• Reaction & reflection• ….
• Cognitive styles• Approaches to learning• Defensive styles• ….
Motivational orientation
Interests & Attitudes
Self-RegulationSelf-beliefs
Cognitive styles & lrng. approaches
Motivations Volitional controls
Conative© Institute for Applied
Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
Many current educational initiatives are emphasizing abilities such as creative thinking, creativity,
and complex problem solving.
How can one conceptualize these type of valued educational
outcomes?
CHCMACM
Proposal
The CHC, MACM,& SENNA SEMS
taxonomies can be used to understand
important constructs and can be used as
blueprints for evaluating and
developing instruments SENNA SEMS (Big 5+)
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Constructs such as critical thinking, creativity, and complex problem solving might be conceptualized as combinations (amalgams) of cognitive, conative and affective characteristics
Other models of “intelligence” (Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences) might be considered as a model that combines characteristics across cognitive, physical, conative and affective domains
Think about these constructs as trait-complexes (combinations, mixtures, compounds, amalgams, etc.)
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Think about these constructs as trait-complexes (combinations, compounds, etc.; see Ackerman’s PPIK model as illustrative example)
Intellectual or cognitive“performance”
A hypothesized model forunderstanding various
cognitive constructs
Intended to help minimize the jingle-jangle fallacy and
amount of conceptual clutter
Exampletrait complexes
Relative strengthRelative weakness © Institute for Applied
Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
A hypothesized model forunderstanding various
cognitive constructs
Intended to help minimize the jingle-jangle fallacy and
amount of conceptual clutter
• Expertise/ach in math• Critical thinking in math• Creativity in math• Gardner’s logical- mathematical intelligence
• Expertise/ach in science• Critical thinking in science• Creativity in science
© Institute for Applied
Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew
10-13-16
A hypothesized model forunderstanding various
cognitive constructs
Intended to help minimize the jingle-jangle fallacy and
amount of conceptual clutter
• Expertise/ach in dance• Critical thinking in dance• Creativity in dance• Gardner’s bodily-kinesthetic intelligence
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Cognitive(Knowing)
Conative (Willing)
Affecting (Feeling)
Or, think of these constructs in the following manner
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Cognitive(Knowing)
Conative (Willing)
Affective(Feeling)
The constructs of critical thinking, complex problem solving, creativity, etc.can be thought of as trait complexes (mixtures, compounds, amalgams, constellations)
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Cognitive(Knowing)
Conative (Willing)
Conative (Feeling)
Critical thinking ???
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Affective (Feeling)
Conative (Willing)
Cognitive(Knowing)
Critical thinking ???
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Cognitive(Knowing)
Conative (Willing)
Conative (Feeling)
Complex problem solving ???
© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16
Conative (Feeling)
Cognitive(Knowing)
Conative (Willing)
Complex problem solving ???
Cognitive(Knowing)
Conative (Willing)
Affective (Feeling)
Social intelligence?????
Cognitive(Knowing)
Conative (Willing)
Affective (Feeling)
Social intelligence?????
Critical thinking Complex problem solving Social intelligence
Think of these constructs (and others) as different combinations of personal characteristics (complexes,
amalgams, combinations, constellations, etc.)© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin McGrew 10-13-16
CHCMACM
Proposal
The CHC, MACM,& SENNA SEMS
taxonomies can be used to
understand important
constructs and to be used as
blueprints for evaluating and
developing instruments
SENNA SEMS (Big 5+)© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr. Kevin
McGrew 10-13-16