Undergraduate instructors’ beliefs about students’ abilities relate to their course policies and student outcomes

• In Event: Course Grade Policies: What are the Consequences for Motivation, Achievement, and Equity?

Abstract

A growing body of research suggests that instructor beliefs shape student experiences and outcomes. When instructors believe students can improve (i.e., growth mindset), students are more motivated, earn higher grades, and grades are more equitable across racial and gender groups. Universality and brilliance are two more recently defined and less studied beliefs that have also been shown to influence student experiences and outcomes. Universality refers to beliefs about whether all people have equal potential for high ability (universal belief) or whether some individuals hold more potential than others (non-universal belief). Brilliance refers to beliefs about the extent to which high ability is required for success in a given field. While beliefs about abilities can shape student experiences, the mechanisms by which these beliefs impact students are still unknown. We hypothesize that instructors’ beliefs about their students’ abilities shape the policies they implement which, in turn, influence academic outcomes.

We surveyed 140 instructors at two Hispanic-Serving Institutions to assess their beliefs about student abilities, characterized course policies within the syllabi (n=540) using an Inclusive-Equity (IE) rubric, and collected data on academic outcomes from institutional records (n=587 courses). The IE rubric characterized how well the syllabus described (1) the expectations for the course, (2) policies about events that disrupt students’ learning, (3) resources for students to get help, and (4) specific support for unique student groups. We used policies described in the syllabi to distinguish between high- and low-structure courses based on the presence of graded preparatory and review assignments, and in-class activities, as well as the percentage of the grade dedicated to each assessment type. We tested our hypotheses using linear mixed effects models and simple slopes analysis.

STEM (n=77) and non-STEM (n=63) instructors did not differ in their beliefs, but STEM classes tended to have lower average grades and more inequitable outcomes between Pell-eligible and non-Pell-eligible students. We found that beliefs related to course structure; instructors with fixed mindsets were more likely to have low-structure courses (b = -1.1, p = 0.03) while instructors with universal beliefs were more likely to have high-structure courses (b = 1.5, p = 0.04). Across multiple models, we found significant interactions between instructors’ beliefs and course policies predicting student grades and grade inequity. Simple slopes analyses revealed that positive instructor beliefs were associated with higher average grades and less grade discrepancy across socioeconomic groups when the syllabus did not clearly describe course expectations or include resources for students to get help (Fig 1).

These findings align with prior work relating positive beliefs to improved student outcomes. Importantly, these findings also suggest that positive beliefs lead to more equity in grades and can compensate for the effects of poor course policies, where expectations are ill-defined and opportunities for help are infrequent. In this study, we make three important advancements by examining (1) a hypothesized mechanism relating instructors’ beliefs to student outcomes; (2) a greater variety of beliefs than past studies; (3) how these complex and important dynamics can support all students in a minority-serving institution.

Authors

• Lisa B Limeri, Texas Tech University

• Rosario Andrea Marroquin-Flores, James Madison University

• Mozhdeh Forghaniarani, James Madison University

• Katherine M. Muenks, University of Texas at Austin

• Madison Pakenham, Texas Tech University

• Chance Pavlock, Texas Tech University

• Ivana Raj, Texas Tech University

• Sarah Ronda, Texas Tech University

• Amy Rudick, Texas Tech University

• Amber Sena, Texas Tech University