Applying Dynamic Systems Theory to Underachievement Research: A Theoretical Model of Development

• In Event: Current Theoretical Perspectives and Methodological Approaches in Underachievement Research

Abstract

In the past decade, there have been several calls to focus on both talent development and underachievement as growth trajectories (Dai, Moon, Feldhusen, 1998; Dai & Renzulli, 2008; Simonton, 2001). We integrate modern motivational theories with dynamic systems theory and prior research on underachievement to propose two primary developmental pathways in underachievement. Utilizing a multiple pathways approach, we describe how individual factors can interact with contextual factors to result in a variety of individual trajectories. We also explain how changes on smaller timescales interact with contextual factors to drive chronic underachievement.

In dynamic systems theory (Thelen, 1989; van Geert, 1994) variability is considered to be an essential, informative aspect of development, which makes it particularly useful for studying gifted students. We consider both between-individual variability (e.g., two mathematically gifted students, but only one achieves) and within-individual variability across different contexts, (e.g., a gifted student who underachieves in one mathematics course but excels in another). Stability of behaviors is another important focus of dynamic systems theory. Through periods of instability, the system reorganizes and produces change. During stability, a student’s system is at equilibrium, even as other factors in the system change. However, if growth in one factor (e.g., growing perceptions of the costs associated with academic engagement) moves beyond an optimum threshold, the system is pushed to instability and the system must reorganize. For instance, the student may withdraw from academics entirely in order to restore stability to the system.

Dynamic systems theory also explores how stable, chronic patterns (like underachievement) can be traced to early origins. Changes on a small scale (such as a gifted student encountering difficulty with one assignment or feeling unchallenged in one class period) are explored as determinants of large-scale change (later underachievement) in a cascade effect (McClelland, 1979; Thelen, 2005). Each change builds on previous changes until one small effect triggers a large effect, much like an avalanche. Further, changes in an individual’s behavior are influenced by immediate proximal causes in the environment, causes within the individual (e.g., prior behavior, genetically-inherited intelligence), distal causes (e.g., parent expectations), and very distal causes (e.g., state gifted education policies). Development is iterative; each individual change builds upon previous changes and drives future changes.

Accordingly, our theoretical model posits that there are multiple dynamic trajectories in underachievement. The Maladaptive Competence Beliefs Pathway describes how competence beliefs and coping strategies interact with the educational context leading to underachievement. The Value Beliefs Pathway details how value-related beliefs interact with educational context resulting in underachievement. Individual students within each pathway will experience the interplay among constructs in unique ways. For both pathways, ensuring that there is an appropriate match between the student’s ability and level of academic challenge provided may help to prevent both the formation of maladaptive motivational beliefs and declines in perceived value for academics, and thus help to prevent underachievement. This model builds on important prior research by giving focused attention toward heterogeneity in developmental trajectories that students take to underachievement.

Authors

• Kate E. Snyder, University of Louisville

• Lisa Linnenbrink-Garcia, Duke University