Academic Self-concept and Academic Achievement: Relations and Causal Ordering. Herbert W. Marsh, Oxford University, UK

Transcription

1 This MS is the final prepublication (open access) version of the published article: Academic Self-concept 1 Marsh, H. W. & Martin, A. J. (2011). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, DOI: / X This article may not exactly replicate the final published version in the journal. It is not the copy of record and readers are encouraged to obtain the copy of record through their university or local library using the article s DOI (digital object identifier). Running Head: Academic Self-concept Academic Self-concept and Academic Achievement: Relations and Causal Ordering Herbert W. Marsh, Oxford University, UK Andrew J. Martin, University of Sydney, Australia 12 November 2009 Revised: 20 February, 2010 Revised: 16 March 2010 Keywords: Academic self-concept; structural equation models; reciprocal effects model; big-five personality factors; multidimensional perspectives Word count: 6659 words Author note This research was supported in part by a grant to the first author from the UK Economic and Social Research Council. Requests for further information about this investigation should be sent to Professor Herbert W. Marsh, Department of Educational Studies, University of Oxford; E- mail: herb.marsh@education.ox.ac.uk. 1

2 Academic Self-concept 2 Academic Self-concept and Academic Achievement: Relations and Causal Ordering Abstract Background: A positive self-concept is valued as a desirable outcome in many disciplines of psychology as well as an important mediator to other outcomes. Aims: The present review examines support of the Reciprocal Effects Model (REM) that posits academic self-concept (ASC) and achievement are mutually reinforcing, each leading to gains in the other and its extension to other achievement domains. Method: We review theoretical, methodological, and empirical support for the REM. Critical features in this research are a theoretical emphasis on multidimensional perspectives that focus on specific components of self-concept and a methodological focus on a construct validity approach to evaluating the REM. Results: Consistent with these distinctions, REM research and a comprehensive metaanalysis show that prior ASC has direct and indirect effects on subsequent achievement, whilst the effects of self-esteem and other non-academic components of self-concept are negligible. We then provide an overview of subsequent support for the generality of the REM for: young children, cross-cultural, health (physical activity), and non-elite (gymnastics) and elite (international swimming championships) sport. Conclusion: This research is important in demonstrating that increases in ASC lead to increases in subsequent academic achievement and other desirable educational outcomes. Findings confirm that not only is self-concept an important outcome variable in itself, it also plays a central role in affecting other desirable educational outcomes. Implications for educational practice are discussed. 2

3 Academic Self-concept 3 There is a revolution sweeping psychology, one that emphasises a positive psychology and focuses on how healthy, normal and exceptional individuals can get the most from life (e.g., Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Marsh & Craven, 2006; Vallerand et al., 2003). Consistent with this emphasis, a positive self-concept is valued as a desirable outcome in many disciplines of psychology such as educational, developmental, sport/exercise, health, social, and personality psychology, as well as in a broad array of other social science disciplines. Self-concept is regarded as a highly important and influential factor in that it is closely associated with people s behaviours and various emotional and cognitive outcomes such as anxiety, academic achievement, happiness, suicide, deficient self-esteem, etc (Branden, 1995). Self-concept enhancement is seen as a central goal of education and an important vehicle for addressing social inequities experienced by disadvantaged groups (see Marsh & Craven, 2006). In their model of effective schools, Brookover and Lezotte (1979) emphasised that maximising academic selfconcept (ASC), self-reliance, and academic achievement should be the major outcome goals of schooling. Recognising this role of self-concept, the OECD noted that self-concepts are closely tied to students economic success and long-term health and wellbeing (OECD, 2003, p. 9) and play a critical part in students interest in and satisfaction at school, underpin their academic achievement, and constitute a very influential platform for pathways beyond school (Ackerman, 2003; Marsh, 2007; Marsh Hau, Artelt, Baumert & Peschar, 2006), leading Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham (2006) to postulate that ASCs both mediate and moderate the effects of aptitudes on learning and academic performance. The present review addresses the role of self-concept in academic achievement and its extension to other achievement domains. We examine theoretical, methodological, and empirical support for the reciprocal effects model (REM) that posits ASC and achievement are mutually reinforcing, each leading to gains in the other. We then attend to the generality of the REM by assessing the hypothesised process in relation to self-concept and achievement/performance in cross-cultural settings, health (physical activity), and non-elite (gymnastics) and elite 3

4 Academic Self-concept 4 (international swimming championships) sport. We then conclude by summarising implications of the REM for educational practice. Construct Definition of Self-concept: A Multidimensional, Hierarchical Construct Historically, self-concept measurement, theory, research, and application have been plagued by the poor quality of both theoretical models and self-concept measurement instruments (e.g., Shavelson, Hubner, & Stanton, 1976; Wells & Marwell, 1976; Wylie, 1979). In an attempt to remedy this situation, Shavelson et al. (1976) reviewed existing self-concept research and instruments, proposed a new theoretical model of self-concept, and provided a blueprint for the development of a whole new generation of multidimensional self-concept instruments (see review by Marsh & Hattie, 1996). Self-concept, broadly defined by Shavelson et al. (1976), is a person s self-perceptions formed through experience with and interpretations of one s environment. Self-concept according to Shavelson et al. is multifaceted and hierarchically organised with perceptions of personal behaviour in specific situations at the base of the hierarchy, inferences about self in broader domains (e.g., social, physical, and academic) at the middle of the hierarchy, and a global self-concept (also known as self-esteem) at the apex. Theoretical Background: A Multidimensional, Hierarchical Model of Self-concept. Definition of Self-concept and Self-esteem. Based upon their extensive review of self-concept theory and research, Shavelson, et al. (1976) noted the plethora of theoretical definitions of self-concept and the potential confusion between self-concept and self-esteem. Based on their integration of different theoretical models, they defined self-concept to be a person s self-perceptions that are formed through experience with and interpretations of one s environment. They emphasised the importance of social influences and self-attributions, and asserted that although self-concept is a hypothetical construct, it can nonetheless be useful in explaining and predicting behaviour. Extending upon this, they suggested that behaviour and self-perceptions have reciprocal relations one basis for the REM that is the emphasis here. 4

5 Academic Self-concept 5 Particularly relevant to the present investigation is the distinction between self-concept and self-esteem. This distinction has caused much confusion and controversy as informal interpretations in the lay population take the two terms to be synonymous. Particularly since the development of Shavelson et al. (1976) model, researchers (e.g. Blascovich, & Tomaka, 1991; Hattie, 1992; Marsh, 2007) have viewed general self-esteem as a global and relatively stable construct, reflecting the broad view that an individual has about oneself. Marsh (2007) argued that self-esteem items such as those on the widely used Rosenberg s Self-Esteem instrument (1965) are specifically constructed so that they do not refer to any specific domain. Historically, some theoretical models distinguished between self-esteem as the evaluative component of selfconcept whilst self-concept was posited to be descriptive. Shavelson et al. (1976) addressed this issue, arguing that self-concept has both a descriptive and an evaluative aspect such that individuals may describe themselves ("I am happy") and evaluate themselves ("I do well in sports"). Evaluations can be made against an absolute ideal (e.g., the five minute mile), the relative performance of others, a personal, internal standard (a personal best), or other standards of comparison (e.g., expectations of others). Following Shavelson et al., it is generally accepted that self-concept is both descriptive and evaluative (e.g., Byrne, 1996a, 1996b; Marsh, 2007) so that this is not a useful distinction between self-concept and self-esteem. In the context of Shavelson et al. multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept, self-esteem is the global construct at the apex of the hierarchy, whilst self-concept refers to specific components within this model (e.g., ASC, physical self-concept, social self-concept). In this sense, we treat the terms global self-concept, self-esteem, and global self-esteem as synonymous. This usage is somewhat analogous to the use of IQ as a term for general or global intelligence that appears at the hierarchy of multidimensional, hierarchical models of intelligence (e.g., Vernon, 1950). As the Shavelson et al. s (1976) multidimensional, hierarchical model has been so important in subsequent theoretical and methodological advances in self-concept research, we now consider it in more detail. 5

6 A Multidimensional, Hierarchical Model of Self-concept. Academic Self-concept 6 The distinction between self-concept and self-esteem is also fundamental to understanding the distinction between multidimensional and unidimensional perspectives to self-concept. Unidimensional perspectives emphasise a single, global domain of self-concept, typically referred to as self-esteem. Multidimensional perspectives emphasise multiple, relatively distinct components of self-concept. Historically, a unidimensional perspective dominated self-concept research. Importantly, these two perspectives are both consistent with a multidimensional, hierarchical model. The relatively distinct domains of self-concept support its multidimensionality whilst the hierarchical aspect is consistent with a focus on self-esteem. However, subsequent factor analytic research (e.g., Marsh & Hattie, 1996; Marsh, Byrne, & Shavelson, 1988) showed that the hierarchical aspect of the multidimensional, hierarchical model proposed by Shavelson et al. (1976) was much weaker than originally hypothesised. In particular, specific components of self-concept were more differentiated and less highly correlated with each other than anticipated, so that much of the variance in domain specific factors of self-concept could not be explained in terms of higher-order self-concept factors or self-esteem. Thus, for example, the hierarchy of self-concept domains (with self-esteem at the apex) is much weaker than the hierarchy of abilities (with IQ at the apex). Marsh and Craven (2006) reported that the acceptance of a multidimensional rather than a unidimensional perspective of self-concept varies substantially across social science disciplines and within sub-disciplines in psychology. However, its broadest acceptance and strongest support comes from educational psychology with its focus on ASC and its relation to academic achievement, school grades, student learning, and other academic outcomes. Thus, Marsh and Craven (2006; also see 1996a, 1996b; Marsh, 1993) reviewed a large body of research showing that diverse academic outcomes were systematically related to ASC but nearly unrelated (or even negatively related) to global self-esteem and other non-academic components of self-concept. This extreme multidimensionality and domain specificity of self-concept was convincingly 6

7 Academic Self-concept 7 demonstrated by factor analysis of adolescent responses to a recent adaptation of the multidimensional SDQ III (Marsh, Trautwein, Lüdtke, Köller, & Baumert, 2006). The 17 selfconcept factors that the instrument was designed to measure were clearly identified and the average correlation among the 17 self-concept factors even after controlling for unreliability was only.14. They found a well-defined multivariate pattern of relations between the 17 selfconcept factors, personality constructs (e.g., Big Five personality factors, positive and negative affect,; life satisfaction), and academic criteria (e.g., school grades, coursework selection in different school subjects). Consistent with theory and previous research, math and verbal selfconcepts were somewhat negatively related to each other and this extreme domain specificity was reflected in the systematic and substantial relations with academic criteria measures, whilst non-academic components were nearly unrelated to the achievement measures. For example, math self-concept was substantially related to math school grades (r =.71), math standardised achievement test scores (r =.59), and taking advanced math courses (r =.51). In contrast, the academic outcomes were nearly unrelated to global self-esteem (rs ranging from -.03 to.05) as well as nine other non-academic domains of self-concept. Although specific components of selfconcept explained substantial amounts of variance in the personality factors, very little variance was uniquely due to self-esteem. This highly differentiated multivariate pattern of relations argues against the unidimensional perspective of self-concept that is still prevalent in some disciplines (for further discussion, see Marsh, 2007; Marsh & Craven, 2006). Methodological Background: A Construct Validity Approach Following from the Shavelson review, self-concept researchers (e.g., Byrne, 1996a, 1996b; Marsh & Hattie, 1996; Wylie, 1989) have routinely evaluated responses to self-concept instruments through the application of: (a) confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate the structure of self-concept; (b) structural equation models (SEMs) to relate self-concept to other constructs; and (c) multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) analyses to establish the convergent and discriminant validity of self-concept responses. Early research based on the SDQ instruments 7

8 Academic Self-concept 8 provided strong support for the multidimensionality of self-concept responses (e.g., Marsh, Smith, Barnes & Butler, 1984; see reviews by Byrne, 1996a, 1996b;). In support of a multidimensional perspective, this research also showed that the proposed hierarchy was weak and that the specific components of self-concept (e.g., social, academic, physical, emotional) were highly differentiated (Marsh & Craven, 1997). Important advances in self-concept research have come through the systematic application of a construct validity approach. As a hypothetical construct, self-concept is best understood through investigations of construct validity. The within-construct aspects of construct validity examine the relations between self-concept domains, while between-construct studies attempt to establish the relationship between the multiple dimensions of self-concept and a host of other constructs (Shavelson et al., 1976). Marsh (2007) noted that The essence of the construct validity approach is to look for areas of convergence and non-convergence in measures of the same construct across multiple methods: multiple indicators, multiple outcomes, multiple independent variables, multiple methodologies, multiple analytical approaches, and multiple settings (p. 81). In this regards, a particularly strong basis for testing the convergent and discriminant validity of self-concept interpretations is to show that relevant indicators of achievement are substantially related to ASC but almost unrelated to self-esteem, as shown by Marsh, Trautwein et al. (2006) and discussed earlier. In our review we extend this test of convergent and discriminant validity to evaluation of longitudinal relations between self-concept and achievement. Self-concept in the Context of Other Psycho-Educational Factors. The importance of ASC in educational research was also highlighted by results of OECD- PISA Students Approaches to Learning instrument (SAL; Marsh, Hau et al., 2006). Through a rigorous process of selecting educational psychology s most useful affective constructs, it was constructed to measure 14 factors that assess self-regulated learning strategies, self-beliefs, motivation, and learning preferences. Marsh, Hau et al. evaluated SAL responses from nationally 8

9 Academic Self-concept 9 representative samples of approximately 4, year-olds from each of 25 countries (N = 107,899). Across this set of 14 factors, mathematics and verbal achievement were consistently more strongly correlated with the three (math, verbal, and academic) self-concept measures than any of the other Students Approaches to Learning constructs. Furthermore, formal tests of factorial invariance showed that the pattern, direction and relative sizes of these correlations were relatively invariant across the 26 countries. Whilst these results support the importance of ASC in educational settings, it is important to reiterate that correlations based on a single wave of data as in PISA study does not provide any basis for inferring causality. To address this issue, we turn to longitudinal studies specifically designed to evaluate the causal ordering of ASC and performance. Causal Ordering of Self-Concept and Academic Performance Calsyn and Kenny (1977) contrasted self-enhancement and skill-development models of the self-concept/achievement relation. According to the self-enhancement model, self-concept is a primary determinant of academic achievement, thus supporting the self-concept enhancement interventions explicit or implicit in many educational programs (e.g., Hattie, Marsh, Neill & Richards, 1997; Marsh & Peart, 1988; Marsh & Richards, 1988; Marsh, Richards & Barnes, 1986). In contrast, the skill development model implies that ASC emerges principally as a consequence of academic achievement so that ASC is enhanced by developing stronger academic skills. Byrne (1984) proposed three criteria that studies addressing such issues must satisfy: (a) a statistical relationship must be established, (b) a clearly established time precedence must be evident, and (c) a causal model must be tested using appropriate statistical techniques such as structural equation modelling (SEM). Reciprocal Effects Model (REM) A question commonly posed is, Which comes first ASC or academic achievement? Not surprisingly, either-or answers to this question are too simplistic and a growing body of research supports a REM in which ASC both affects and is affected by academic achievement (Marsh, 9

10 Academic Self-concept ; Marsh, 2007; Marsh, Byrne & Yeung, 1999; Marsh & Craven, 2006; Marsh & Scalas, in press). Theoretically, as clearly articulated by Shavelson et al. (1976) and many others, prior academic accomplishments are important in the formation of subsequent ASC. Hence, it makes no theoretical sense to argue that this linkage does not exist. Rather, the critical issue is whether the linkage from self-concept to subsequent achievement also exists. Most causal ordering studies rely on longitudinal panel data in which both self-concept and achievement are measured on at least two occasions (i.e., a 2-wave 2-variable design) and preferably three or more. More recent developments in the application of structural equation modelling (SEM) have evolved for the analysis of such longitudinal panel designs. Figure 1 presents a prototypical REM designed to test the causal ordering of ASC and achievement. The critical issue is whether there are statistically significant paths leading from prior self-concept to subsequent achievement (in support of self-enhancement predictions) and from prior achievement to subsequent self-concept (in support of skill development predictions). Support for the REM requires that both sets of paths are statistically significant, but from the perspective of self-concept theory and practice, the linkages from prior self-concept to subsequent achievement are particularly important. In the introduction of the REM, Marsh (1990) tested the causal ordering of ASC and academic achievement with data from the large, nationally representative US Youth in Transition study (Figure 2). Data were considered from Times 1 (early 10th Grade), 2 (late 11th Grade), 3 (late 12th Grade), and 4 (one year after normal high school graduation). Three latent constructs were considered: academic ability inferred on the basis of four standardised test scores, ASC inferred from self-report responses, and school grades. Of particular importance are the effects of latent constructs in one wave on latent constructs in subsequent waves (Figure 2). At T2, ASC is influenced by academic ability and T1 ASC, but not T1 grades. At T2, school grades are influenced both by T1 ASC and by T1 school grades. Similarly, school grades at T3 are influenced significantly both by T2 ASC and by T2 grades. ASC at T4 was influenced 10

11 Academic Self-concept 11 significantly by ASC at T2 (there was no T3 ASC measure), but not by T3 school grades. The findings provide strong support for the effect of prior self-concept on subsequent school grades as they spanned two intervals. Based in part on this study, Marsh (2007; Marsh & Craven, 1997, 2006) provided an overview of important design features for the ideal REM studies: Ideally, studies will: (a) measure ASC and academic achievement (school performance, standardized test scores, or preferably both) at least twice (i.e., a 2-wave study) and preferably more frequently; (b) infer all latent constructs on the basis of multiple indicators; (c) consider a sufficiently large and diverse sample to justify the use of CFA and the generality of the findings, and (d) fit the data to a variety of CFA models that incorporate measurement error and test for likely residual covariation among measured variables. If both test scores and school grades are collected in the same study, then they should be considered as separate constructs unless there is empirical support for combining them to form a single construct. If any of the latent constructs are measured with a single measured variable, an a priori estimate of reliability should be used and the sensitivity analysis should be conducted on the full model to determine the generality of the conclusions. The reciprocal pattern of relations between self-concept and performance posited in the REM is also represented in many other theoretical accounts of related self-belief constructs (e.g., Bandura, 1997; Byrne, 1996a, 1996b; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Harter, 1998; Hattie, 1992; Skaalvik, 1997; Valentine & DuBois, 2005;Wigfield & Eccles, 2002). Thus, for example, expectancy-value theorists (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002) hypothesize academic self-beliefs to be a function of prior academic successes and to affect subsequent academic success directly or indirectly through their influence on other mediating constructs. More generally, in their theoretical review and meta-analysis of empirical research, Valentine and DuBois concluded that reciprocal effects relating academic self-beliefs and achievement are consistent with theories of learning and human development that view the self as a causal agent (e.g., Bandura, 1997; 11

12 Carver & Scheier, 1981; Deci & Ryan, 1985). Academic Self-concept 12 Meta-analysis of Studies of the Reciprocal Effects Model (REM) The strongest support for the generalizability and robustness of the REM comes from the extensive meta-analysis conducted by Valentine and colleagues (Valentine, DuBois & Cooper, 2004; Valentine & Dubois, 2005). Whereas REM studies have mostly focused specifically on measures of ASC, Valentine and colleagues considered self-belief constructs more generally. In their meta-analysis, they began with a through search of all published and unpublished research that allowed them to determine the relation between T1 self-beliefs and T2 achievement whilst controlling for T1 achievement. This resulted in a total of 55 publications, including of 60 independent samples, and 282 separate effect sizes. They found that the effect of prior selfbeliefs on subsequent achievement after controlling for the effects of prior achievement was highly significant overall and positive in 90% of the studies in their meta-analysis. These results led Valentine and Dubois to conclude that their meta-analysis provided clear support for the REM and that any claims that prior self-beliefs are unrelated or detrimental to subsequent student achievement is inconsistent with the results of empirical research. A particular strength of meta-analysis is its ability to evaluate the generalizability of the results across different study characteristics, something that is typically not possible in a single study. Valentine and colleagues (Valentine et al., 2004; Valentine & Dubois, 2005) considered a wide variety of potential moderators of the REM effects: year the study was published/reported; base year of data collection; sample size of the study; stability of the achievement measure (i.e., T1 T2 stability coefficient); reliability of the self measure; the number of variables used as controls in the analysis; whether the effect size was from an analysis of manifest or latent variables; use of a convenience sample vs. random selection from a known population; age of students; type of achievement; time interval between the collection of T1 and T2 measures; and country from which the sample of students came. However, none of these potential moderators had a significant effect in the size of the REM. These meta-analysis results provide compelling 12

13 Academic Self-concept 13 support for the robustness and generalizability of the REM in a way that could not be achieved on the basis of any single primary study. One design characteristic, the globality of the self-belief measure, did have a substantial moderating effect on the REM effect sizes. In support of a multidimensional perspective that is a theoretical underpinning for the REM, Valentine and colleagues (Valentine et al., 2004; Valentine & Dubois, 2005) found that the effects of prior self-beliefs were significantly stronger when the self-belief measure was based on academic self-beliefs rather than on global measures such as self-esteem, and when the self-belief and achievement measures were matched in terms of subject area (e.g., mathematics achievement and math self-concept). In particular, they reported little evidence of any effects of global or generalized self-beliefs (e.g., self-esteem) on academic achievement. Valentine and colleagues (Valentine, et al, 2004; Valentine & Dubois, 2005) also found that the strength of the REM was weaker in studies where students experienced a normative school transition (e.g., from elementary school to middle school). In particular, the effects of prior self-beliefs (collected prior to the transition) on subsequent achievement (collected after the transition) were smaller than in studies where there was no transition. In summary, this meta-analysis of self-belief research provides clear support for the REM, the robustness and generalizability of the effect, the theoretical focus on a multidimenstional perspective, and the methodological focus on a construct validity approach that has been central to REM studies and self-concept research more generally. Extension of the REM In their review of REM research Marsh et al. (1999; also see Valentine et al., 2004) provided clear support for reciprocal effects of ASC and achievement. With the hindsight of 15 years experience, Marsh et al. offered commentary on potential methodological issues and directions for further research. Here we summarise some subsequent research in response to needs identified by Marsh et al (also see Marsh & Craven, 2006). 13

14 Academic Self-concept 14 Cross-cultural generalisability. Partly in response to Marsh et al. (1999), subsequent research demonstrated that this support for the REM of ASC and achievement generalised to different cultural/national settings in a large nationally representative sample of Hong Kong students (Marsh, Hau & Kong, 2002) and large samples of East and West German students at the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall (Marsh & Köller, 2003; Marsh, Köller & Baumert, 2001). Support for the generalisability also comes from research based on French-speaking Canadian primary students (Guay, Marsh & Boivin, 2003) and the German high school students (Marsh, Trautwein et al., 2005), and 487 high school students' (grades 7, 8, and 9) from mainland China (Yeung & Lee, 1999). More generally, in their meta-analysis of REM studies, Valentine and colleagues (Valentine, et al., 2004; Valentine & Dubois, 2005) considered the country from which the sample was drawn as a moderator variable. However, they found that support for the REM did not differ as a function of country. Whilst this research provides cross-national and cross-cultural support for the REM, we note that the majority of the research comes from Western and industrialise countries so that it is premature to claim that support for the REM is universal. Developmental perspectives on the REM. Based on developmental theory, some researchers have suggested that the reciprocal pattern of relations in support of the REM found with adolescents is unlikely to generalise to preadolescents (see Wigfield & Karpathian, 1991). However, both the review of REM studies by Marsh and colleagues (Marsh et al., 1999) and the meta-analysis by Valentine and colleagues (Valentine, et al, 2004; Valentine & Dubois, 2005) concluded that there was not sufficient good-quality research with young children to support this conclusion. Guay et al. (2003) addressed this issue about developmental trends in REM research. They used a multicohort-multioccasion design, a methodological approach that is especially wellsuited to address this issue (as depicted in Figure 3 of the present investigation). In particular, they considered responses by students who at T1 were in Grades 2, 3, and 4 (i.e., three age 14

15 Academic Self-concept 15 cohorts aged 8-10 years of age). Responses for all three cohorts were then collected annually for the next three years (i.e., the three measurement occasions). They found strong support for the REM for all three age cohorts, and these results were reasonably invariant over age when rigorously tested with multigroup tests of invariance across the three age cohort groups. This multicohort-multioccasion design is particularly appropriate for evaluating the development of the REM, but there is need for further research that considers different age groups and longer time intervals. Mediating variables: The role of intrinsic motivation. Implicit in the rationale of the REM is the largely untested assumption that the effect of prior self-concept on subsequent achievement is mediated by student characteristics such as increased conscientious effort, persistence in the face of difficulties, enhanced intrinsic motivation, academic choice, and coursework selection (see Marsh et al., 1999). Thus, for example, Marsh and Yeung (1997a; 1997b) found that coursework selection partially mediated the effects of prior ASC in a specific school subject on subsequent achievement in the same subject (e.g., high math selfconcept led to taking more advanced math courses, which led to higher levels of math achievement). Indeed, Marsh and Yeung found that whereas ASC, academic achievement, and coursework selection were all highly correlated, prior ASC was a much better predictor of subsequent coursework choice than was prior academic achievement. Pursuing this line of thinking, Marsh et al. (1999) suggested that intrinsic motivation might serve this mediating role. Marsh, Trautwein, Lüdtke, Köller, and Baumert (2005) took on the methodological challenge of testing this suggestion with SEMs of longitudinal data based on two large, nationally representative samples of German high school students. They expanded the typical causal ordering REM model to include academic interest and two different measures of achievement (grades and achievement test scores) as well as ASC. In both studies, they found clear support for the REM based on ASC and achievement, demonstrating that the effect of prior math self-concept was substantial for subsequent math 15

16 Academic Self-concept 16 school performance as well as for math test scores. Extending previous results, prior selfconcept also significantly influenced subsequent measures of academic interest beyond the effects of earlier measures of school performance, achievement test scores, and academic interest. However, prior academic interest had only a small effect on subsequent ASC and little or no effect on either school performance or test scores beyond what could be explained by ASC. Thus, the reciprocal effects of ASC and achievement were mediated by academic interest only to a small degree, but any effects of academic interest on achievement were substantially mediated by ASC. More strongly than previous SEM research, the results demonstrated the positive effects of ASC on academic interest as well as achievement based both on standardized test scores and school-based performance measures. Generalisability to other self-concept domains. Although there is a growing body of research based on ASC and academic achievement, Marsh et al. (1999) noted that there were few tests of the REM in non-academic domains. Existing research shows that there are little or no reciprocal effects of academic accomplishments and non-academic domains of self-concept. This, of course, does not preclude the possibility that non-academic domains of self-concept do have reciprocal effects with competence and accomplishments in the matching domain. Indeed, this is a natural extension of the REM and also results from the meta-analysis research described earlier. Sport is well suited to test the generalisability of the REM to non-academic settings because feedback about one s sport performance comes largely from social comparison with the performances of peers (e.g., competitors), direct feedback from peers, and a variety of sources that are not directly related to school. There have been several tests of the REM in the physical domain for general populations and elite athletes. Marsh, Chanal, Sarrazin and Bois (2006) demonstrated REM support for gymnastics self-concept and performance measures collected before and after a 10-week gymnastics program. As predicted by the REM, the results in this short longitudinal study showed that gymnastics self-concept and gymnastics performance were 16

17 both determinants and consequences of each other. Academic Self-concept 17 Recognising the critical importance of health-related physical activity in children and adolescents, Marsh, Papaioannou and Theodorakis (2006) adapted the REM in a study of the causal ordering of physical self-concept and exercise behaviour. The study was based on a large sample of primary and secondary Greek physical education students (2,786 students, 200 classes, 67 teachers) and data collected early (T1) and late (T2) in the school year. There was clear support for the REM as there were significant effects of T1 physical self-concept on T2 exercise behaviour and T1 exercise behaviour on T1 physical self-concept. Physical self-concept was both an effect and a cause of exercise behaviour. Adding a developmental perspective to this research Marsh, Gerlach, Trautwein, Lüdtke, and Brettschneider (2007) tested the generalisability of the REM with preadolescent children in the physical domain. They used longitudinal data for young boys and girls (N = 1,135; M age = 9.67 years) to show that physical self-concept is both a cause and a consequence of physical accomplishments. After controlling for prior physical performance (physical performance-based tests and teacher assessments in Grade 3), physical self-concept had a positive effect on subsequent physical performance in both Grade 4 and subsequently in secondary school. Coupled with previous REM research based largely on studies of adolescents in the academic domain, this study supported the REM s generalisability over gender, self-concept domain, preadolescent ages, and the transition from primary to secondary school. Following from this, we might ask how well does the REM generalise to elite athletes? Marsh and Perry (2005) tested the effects of sport self-concept on subsequent performance for 270 elite swimmers from 30 countries participating in the Pan Pacific Swimming Championships and the World Short Course Championships. Whereas subsequent championship performance was highly related to prior personal best performances (r =.90), structural equation models (SEMs) demonstrated that elite athlete self-concept contributed significantly to the prediction of subsequent championship performance, explained approximately 10% of the residual variance 17

18 Academic Self-concept 18 after controlling for personal best performances. Because each swimmer typically competed in at least two different events, the authors were also able to show that support for the REM was nearly identical for both events. In summary, good athletic self-concepts contributed to winning gold medals in the top echelons of elite sport. The Baumeister et al. Challenge to REM Research and the Value of Self-beliefs Although the REM findings are now widely accepted in educational psychological theory, research and practice, the findings have been contested in other disciplines. In particular, in a set of highly influential reviews published in the Scientific American and Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, and Vohs (2003, 2005) challenged the value of positive self-beliefs and, perhaps, the positive psychology movement more generally. Baumeister et al. (2003) concluded that self-esteem per se is not the social panacea that many people hoped it was (p. 38). Moreover, in apparent contradiction to the REM findings, Baumeister et al. (2005) concluded that efforts to boost people s self-esteem are of little value in fostering academic achievement or preventing undesirable behaviour (p. 84). In response to this challenge, Marsh and Craven (2006) argued that Baumeister et al. had taken an overly narrow focus: adapting a unidimensional perspective that included only studies based on self-esteem (excluding all ASC studies considered here) and only considering studies conducted prior to 1990 that did not incorporate current statistical methodology and conceptual advances in self-concept theory. Furthermore, Marsh and Craven argued that from a multidimensional perspective, it is logical that there are essentially no reciprocal links between academic achievement and self-esteem (as reported by Baumeister et al.), whereas consistent reciprocal relations existed between ASC and achievement (as reported by Marsh and Craven). Consistent with this point of view, the meta-analysis conducted by Valentine and DuBois (2005) indicated that the effect on subsequent school performance was stronger for academic selfbeliefs than for global self-beliefs (such as global self-esteem). In summary, the apparent controversy is easily resolved by placing it within an appropriate theoretical and statistical 18

19 perspective. Academic Self-concept 19 Ironically, there was almost no overlap in the studies considered by Marsh and Craven (2006; as well as those in the Valentine et al., 2004) meta-analysis, and those considered by Baumeister, et al. (2003, 2005). However, both Marsh et al. and Baumeister et al. cited classic studies based on the Youth in Transition (YIT) database as providing particularly strong support of their respective claims. The YIT research emphasised by Baumeister et al. was an early study by Bachman and O Malley (1977) that examined self-esteem but not ASC, whereas Marsh and Craven (2006) emphasised the Marsh (1990) study summarised earlier (see Figure 2) that included ASC but not global self-esteem. In a definitive test of these counter claims, Marsh and O Mara (2008) reanalysed this YIT data including both self-esteem (emphasised by Baumeister et al.), ASC (emphasised by Marsh & Craven), and post-secondary educational attainment (emphasised by Bachman & O Malley) based on all five waves of data, using stronger statistical methods than used in any of the previous studies. Consistent with REM results, they found positive reciprocal effects between ASC and GPA, but also found positive reciprocal links relating ASC and educational attainment not previously reported in this research literature. Consistent with the Baumeister et al. review (and also meta-analyses by Valentine and colleagues), they found only weak and inconsistent linkages between self-esteem and either GPA or attainment. These new results provided clear support for Marsh and Craven s proposed rapprochement in their debate with Baumeister et al., integrating apparently contradictory results into a single theoretical framework based on a multidimensional perspective of self-concept and supporting the REM. Implications and Directions for Further Research The results of causal modelling studies provide a clear affirmative answer to the question Do changes in ASC lead to changes in subsequent academic achievement? This research is important in that it has established that increases in ASC lead to increases in subsequent academic achievement and other desirable educational outcomes. Hence, not only is ASC an 19

20 Academic Self-concept 20 important outcome, but it also plays a central role in mediating the effects of other desirable educational outcomes. It is important to emphasise that the direction of causality between ASC and achievement also has very important practical implications for educators. If the direction of causality were from ASC to achievement (the self-enhancement model), then teachers might be justified in placing more effort into enhancing students self-concepts rather than fostering achievement. On the other hand, if the direction of causality were from achievement to selfconcept (the skill development model), then teachers should focus primarily on improving academic skills as the best way to improve self-concept. In contrast to both these apparently overly simplistic (either-or) models, the REM implies that ASC and academic achievement are reciprocally related and mutually reinforcing. Improved ASCs leads to better achievement and improved achievement leads to better ASCs. For example, if teachers enhance students ASCs without improving achievement, then the gains in self-concept are likely to be short-lived. However, if teachers improve students academic achievement without also fostering students self-beliefs in their academic capabilities, then the achievement gains are also unlikely to be long lasting. If teachers focus on either one of these constructs to the exclusion of the other, then both are likely to suffer. Hence, according to the REM, teachers should strive to improve simultaneously both ASC and achievement. Research reviewed here suggests a number of fruitful directions for further research. The meta-analysis by Valentine and colleagues (Valentine, DuBois & Cooper, 2004; Valentine & Dubois, 2005) suggested that support for the REM was similar for standardized test scores and school grades. However, Marsh and Craven (2006) suggested that the effects of ASC should be stronger on school grades than on test scores. Whilst a number of studies have evaluated the strength of the REM effects with general ASC and domain specific measures, there is not clear consensus about which gives the strongest results. Also, there is research on the internal/external frame of reference model showing that the effect of prior math achievement is positive on math self-concept (consistent with REM predictions) but negative on verbal self-concept, whilst the 20

21 Academic Self-concept 21 effect of prior verbal achievement is positive for verbal self-concept but negative on math selfconcept. Putting together these two models might suggest that the effects of prior self-concept should be positive for achievement in the matching domain but negative for achievement in a contrasting domain (see Marsh & Köller, 2003). However, there has been little research testing these counter-intuitive predictions based on the integration of these two models. The REM implies a causal relation between priori self-concept and subsequent achievement. Whilst the use of longitudinal data clearly provides a stronger basis for causal inferences than cross-sectional data, trying to prove causality is always a very tricky undertaking. As new and better methodological approaches to evaluate causal inferences are developed, there will be stronger tests of REM predictions. In relation to this issue, we also note that the Haney and Durlack (1998) meta-analysis of self-concept interventions concluded consistent with REM inferences that interventions specifically designed to enhance self-concept not only had significant effects on self-concept, but also had positive effects on academic achievement. Finally, although there is evidence for the cross-cultural validity of the REM, we note that most studies are based on research conducted in Western and industrialised countries. There is not sufficient research to argue for the universality of the REM. More sophisticated methodological extensions might consider the interface of individual and context in self-concept effects. For example, cross-level multilevel models (e.g., Goldstein, 2003; Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002; Marsh, et al., 2009) might examine the causal effects of individual self-concept on school or class-level such as aggregate achievement. Similarly, transactional models (Sameroff & Chandler, 1975; Sameroff, 2009) would argue for the interplay of, for example, student academic self-concept on teacher pedagogical self-concept (and vice versa). Also using multilevel approaches it is possible that individual students selfconcept trajectories may differentially predict important outcomes and so multilevel growth modelling (e.g., Holt, 2008) of self-concept over time may reveal distinct intra- and inter-person patterns of self-concept development that affect outcomes in distinct ways. Yet another 21

22 Academic Self-concept 22 application of longitudinal methods might consider intensive longitudinal modelling (Walls & Schafer, 2006). Whereas much self-concept research examines longitudinal effects separated by relatively lengthy intervals (e.g., one academic year), intensive longitudinal modelling (e.g., ratings over the course of the day and across days) may help uncover potential real-time casual variance attributable to self-concept. REM research provides a particularly appropriate methodology for evaluating causal hypotheses that a particular psycho-social variable has a significant effect on subsequent measures of achievement. Based on this review, it seems as if there is strong evidence for the REM that generalises across academic specific self-beliefs such as ASC and academic selfefficacy (but also see Marsh, Walker & Debus, 1991) particularly when there is a clear match between domain specificity of the measures (e.g, math self-concept with math achievement). However, there was no support for REM effects when the self-beliefs were global or general measures such as general self-esteem. The juxtaposition of these two sets of findings support both the convergent and discriminant validity of REM predictions. Marsh et al. (2005) extended this logic to studies of academic interest and intrinsic motivation more generally. Noting that there was clear evidence that intrinsic motivation is correlated with academic achievement, there was almost no research that applied the REM methodology to measures of intrinsic motivation. At least in their study, they found that there was only limited support for REM effects between intrinsic motivation and academic achievement, and even the small effect that they found were largely mediated by ASC. Hence, the methodological approaches used in REM studies of ASC can advantageously applied to the entire spectrum of psycho-social variables that are prevalent in educational psychology research and practice. Conclusion The present review has examined the role of ASC in academic achievement and its extension to other achievement and performance domains. There is theoretical, methodological, and empirical support for the REM positing that ASC and achievement are mutually reinforcing, 22

23 Academic Self-concept 23 each leading to gains in the other. There is also support for the generality of the REM in developmental research, cross-cultural settings, and health and sporting domains. Findings are relevant to researchers seeking to assess longitudinal patterns of ASC and achievement and for practitioners seeking to enhance the educational outcomes of children and young people outcomes that rely on domain-specific ASC. 23

24 Academic Self-concept 24 Figure 1. Prototype causal-ordering model for testing self-enhancement, skill-development, and reciprocal-effects models Notes. In this full-forward, multiwave, multivariable model, multiple indicators of academic selfconcept (ASC) and achievement (ACH) are collected in three successive waves (T1, T2, and T3). Each latent construct (represented by ovals) has paths leading to all latent constructs in subsequent waves. Within each wave, academic self-concept and achievement are assumed to be correlated; in the first wave, this correlation is a covariance between two latent constructs, and in subsequent waves, it is a covariance between residual factors. Curved lines at the top and bottom of the figure reflect correlated uniquenesses between responses to the same measured variable (represented by boxes) collected on different occasions. Paths connecting the same variable on multiple occasions reflect stability (the solid gray paths), but these coefficients typically differ from the corresponding test-retest correlations (which do not include the effects of other variables). Dashed lines reflect effects of prior achievement on subsequent self-concept, whereas solid black lines reflect the effects of prior self-concept on subsequent achievement. Adapted with permission from Marsh (2007). 24