Attribution research has identified student ability and effort expended as causes of achievement outcomes that result in differing teacher affect, evaluative feedback, and expectation of future performance. Ninety-seven elementary-school general education teachers (84 women and 13 men) rated their responses to the test failures of hypothetical boys with and without learning disabilities. In most cases, greater reward and less punishment, less anger and more pity, and higher expectations of future failure followed the negative outcomes of the boys with learning disabilities, when compared with their nondisabled ability and effort matches, indicating that learning disability acts as a cause of achievement outcomes in the same way as ability and effort. This pattern of teacher affect and response can send negative messages that are often interpreted as low-ability cues, thus affecting students' self-esteem, sense of competence as learners, and motivation to achieve.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Burger, J. M., Cooper, H. M., & Good, T. L. (1982). Teachers' attributions of student performance: Effects of outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 685–690.
2.
Cooper, H. M., & Burger, J. M. (1980). How teachers explain students' academic performances: A categorization of free response academic attributions. American Educational Research Journal, 17, 95–109.
3.
Doris, J. L. (1993). Defining learning disability: A history of the search for consensus. In G. R. Lyon, D. B. Gray, J. F. Kavanagh, & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Better understanding learning disabilities (pp. 97–116). Baltimore: Brookes.
4.
Federal Register. (1977, August 23). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
5.
Frieze, I. H. (1976). Causal attributions and information seeking to explain success and failure. Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 293–305.
6.
Frieze, I. H., & Snyder, H. N. (1980). Children's beliefs about the causes of success and failure in school settings. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 186–196.
7.
Graham, S. (1990). On communicating low ability in the classroom: Bad things good teachers sometimes do. In S. Graham & V. Folkes (Eds.), Attribution theory: Applications to achievement, mental health, and interpersonal conflict (pp. 17–36). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
Graham, S. (1991). A review of attribution theory in educational contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 5–39.
9.
Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1986). From attribution theory to developmental psychology: A round-trip ticket?. Social Cognition, 4, 152–179.
10.
Kelley, H. H., & Michaela, J. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 457–501.
11.
Kistner, J. A., Osborne, M., & Le Verrier, L. (1988). Causal attributions of learning disabled children: Developmental patterns and relation to academic progress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 82–89.
12.
Licht, B. G. (1983). Cognitive-motivational factors that contribute to the achievement of learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 483–490.
13.
Payette, K. A., & Clarizio, H. F. (1995). Discrepant team decisions: The effects of race, gender, achievement and IQ on LD eligibility. Psychology in the Schools, 31, 40–48.
14.
Speece, D. L. (1993). Broadening the scope of classification research: Conceptual and ecological perspectives. In G. R. Lyon, D. B. Gray, J. F. Kavanagh, & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Better understanding learning disabilities (pp. 57–72). Baltimore: Brookes.
15.
Speece, D. L. (1994, April). Classroom ecologies, problem learners and school success: How far have we come?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
16.
Tollefson, N., Melvin, J., & Thippavajjala, C. (1990). Teachers' attributions for students' low achievement: A validation of Cooper and Good's attributional categories. Psychology in the Schools, 27, 75–83.
17.
U.S. Department of Education. (1994). Sixteenth annual report to congress.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
18.
Wang, M. C., Reynolds, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (1987). Integrating the children of the second system. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 248–251.
19.
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences, Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3–25.
20.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548–573.
21.
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion.New York: Springer-Verlag.
22.
Weiner, B. (1993). On sin versus sickness: A theory of perceived responsibility and social motivation. American Psychologist, 48, 957–965.
23.
Weiner, B., Graham, S., & Chandler, C. (1982). Pity, anger and guilt: An attributional analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 226–232.
24.
Weiner, B., Graham, S., Stern, P., & Lawson, M. E. (1982). Using affective cues to infer causal thoughts. Developmental Psychology, 18, 278–286.
25.
Weiner, B., & Kukla, A. (1970). An attributional analysis of achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, 1–20.
26.
Wimer, S., & Kelley, H. H. (1982). An investigation of the dimensions of causal attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 1142–1162.
