This study investigated at-risk freshmen’s future-oriented motivation (motivation for developing and pursuing academic future goals) and future-oriented self-regulated learning (commitment to utilizing self-regulatory strategies to achieve those goals) using the Persistent Academic Possible Selves Scale (PAPSS). Study goals were to validate the factor structure of the PAPSS and to assess the relationships between the PAPSS factors and important academic measures. Probationary at-risk freshmen due to low grade point averages (i.e., below 2.0) participated in an online survey at the end of the semester (n = 226). The final factor model consists of three persistent goal factors (improving grades, better student, and more attention in class) and four theory-based factors (social identity, self-concept, motivational self-regulation, and performance). The factor structure and the relationships between the factors and other measures supported the PAPSS as an adequately valid measure for assessing at-risk college students’ future-oriented motivation and future-oriented self-regulated learning in educational settings.
AeleneiC.LewisN. A.Jr.OysermanD. (2017).
No pain no gain? Social demographic correlates and identity consequences of interpreting experienced difficulty as importance. Contemporary Educational Psychology,
48, 43–55.
2.
AndermanE. M.AndermanL. H.GriesingerT. (1999).
The relation of present and possible academic selves during early adolescence to grade point average and achievement goals. The Elementary School Journal,
100(1), 3–17. doi:10.1086/461940
3.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
New York, NY:
W H Freeman and Company.
4.
BanduraA.SchunkD. H. (1981).
Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
41(3), 586–598. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.586
5.
BeattieG.LalibertéJ. W. P.OreopoulosP. (2018).
Thrivers and divers: Using non-academic measures to predict college success and failure. Economics of Education Review,
62, 170–182.
6.
BiC.OysermanD. (2015).
Left behind or moving forward? Effects of possible selves and strategies to attain them among rural Chinese children. Journal of Adolescence,
44, 245–258. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.08.004
7.
BongM.SkaalvikE. M. (2003).
Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really?Educational Psychology Review,
15(1), 1–40.
8.
BoulterL. T. (2002).
Self-concept as a predictor of college freshman academic adjustment. College Student Journal,
36(2), 234–246.
9.
ChemersM. M.HuL. T.GarciaB. F. (2001).
Academic self-efficacy and first-year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology,
93(1), 55–64. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.93.1.55
10.
CherryL.ColemanL. (2010).
A plan for academic success: Helping academically dismissed students achieve their goals. Learning Assistance Review,
15(2), 21–32.
11.
CrossS. E.MarkusH. R. (1994).
Self-schemas, possible selves, and competent performance. Journal of Educational Psychology,
86(3), 423–438. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.86.3.423
12.
DemetriouC.Schmitz-SciborskiA. (2011). Integration, motivation, strengths and optimism: Retention theories past, present and future. In Proceedings of the 7th national symposium on student retention (pp. 300–312).
Norman, OK:
The University of Oklahoma.
13.
DunkelC.KerpelmanJ. (2006). Possible selves: Theory, research, and applications.
Hauppauge, NY:
Nova Science Publishers.
14.
EspinozaP.GennaG. M. (2018).
Hi, I want to talk to you about your progress: A large course intervention for at-risk college students. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 1–26. doi:10.1177/1521025118790054
15.
GrayS. (2013).
Framing “at risk” students: Struggles at the boundaries of access to higher education. Children and Youth Services Review,
35(8), 1245–1251.
16.
HortonJ. (2015).
Identifying at-risk factors that affect college student success. International Journal of Process Education,
7(1), 83–101.
17.
HusmanJ.ShellD. F. (2008).
Beliefs and perceptions about the future: A measurement of future time perspective. Learning and Individual Differences,
18, 166–175. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.08.001
18.
Institute of Education Sciences. (2018). Graduation rate from the first institution attended for first-time, full-time bachelor's degree-seeking students at 4-year postsecondary institutions, by race/ethnicity, time to completion, sex, control of institution, and acceptance rate: Selected cohort entry years, 1996 through 2010. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_326.10.asp?current=yes
LeeJ.HusmanJ.GreenS. B.BremS. K. (2016).
Development and validation of the persistent academic possible selves scale for adolescents (PAPSS). Learning and Individual Differences,
52, 19–28. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.09.005
21.
LeeJ.HusmanJ.MaezC.ScottK. A. (2011, April). The outcome space of the open-ended possible selves questionnaire of female adolescents in poverty. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
22.
LewisS. E.ShawJ. L.HeitzJ. O.WebsterG. H. (2009).
Attitude counts: Self-concept and success in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education,
86(6), 744.
MarkusH.NuriusP. (1986).
Possible selves. American Psychologist,
41(9), 954.
25.
MarshH. W. (2007). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice: The role of self-concept in educational psychology.
Leicester, England:
British Psychological Society.
26.
MarshH. W.ByrneB. M.ShavelsonR. J. (1988).
A multifaceted academic self-concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology,
80(3), 366.
27.
MarshH. W.O’NeillR. (1984).
Self-description questionnaire III: The construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late adolescents. Journal of Education Measurement,
21(2), 153–174.
28.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.).
Los Angeles, CA:
Muthén, & Muthén.
OysermanD. (2007). Social identity and self-regulation. In KruglanskiA.HigginsT. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (2nd ed., pp. 432–453).
New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
32.
OysermanD. (2015). Identity-based motivation. In ScottR. A.KosslynS. M. (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 1–11).
Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons.
33.
OysermanD.BybeeD.TerryK. (2006).
Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
91, 188–204.
34.
OysermanD.DestinM. (2010).
Identity-based motivation: Implications for intervention. The Counseling Psychologist,
38(7), 1001–1043.
35.
OysermanD.DestinM.NovinS. (2015).
The content-sensitive future self: Possible selves motivate in context, not otherwise. Self and Identity,
14(2), 173–188. doi:10.1080/15298868.2014.965733
36.
OysermanD.ElmoreK.SmithG. (2012). Self, self-concept, and identity. In LearyM. R.TangneyJ. P. (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 69–104).
New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
37.
OysermanD.ElmoreK.NovinS.FisherO.SmithG. C. (2018).
Guiding people to interpret their experienced difficulty as importance highlights their academic possibilities and improves their academic performance. Frontiers in Psychology,
9, 1–15. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00781
38.
OysermanD.FrybergS. (2006). The possible selves of diverse adolescents: Content and function across gender, race and national origin. In DunkelC.KerpelmanJ. (Eds.), Possible selves: Theory, research and applications (pp. 17–39).
Hauppauge, NY:
Nova Science Publishers.
39.
OysermanD.GantL.AgerJ. (1995).
A socially contextualized model of African American identity: Possible selves and school persistence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
69(6), 1216–1232.
40.
OysermanD.JamesL. (2009). Possible selves: From content to process. In MarkmanK.KleinW. M. P.SuhrJ. A. (Eds.), The handbook of imagination and mental stimulation (pp. 373–394).
New York, NY:
Psychology Press.
41.
OysermanD.LewisN. A.Jr.YanV. X.FisherO.O’DonnellS. C.HorowitzE. (2017).
An identity-based motivation framework for self-regulation. Psychological Inquiry,
28(2–3), 133–147. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2017.1337406
42.
OysermanD.MarkusH. R. (1990).
Possible selves and delinquency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
59(1), 112–125.
43.
OysermanD.TerryK.BybeeD. (2002).
A possible selves intervention to enhance school involvement. Journal of Adolescence,
25, 313–326.
44.
OzakiC. (2016).
Possible selves, possible futures: The dynamic influence of changes in the possible selves on community college returnees’ persistence decisions. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice,
17(4), 413–436. doi:10.1177/1521025115579248
45.
PanaderoE. (2017).
A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology,
8, 1–28. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
46.
RicksK. G.RichardsonJ. A.SternH. P.TaylorR. P.TaylorR. A. (2014).
An engineering learning community to promote retention and graduation of at-risk engineering students. American Journal of Engineering Education,
5(2), 73–90.
47.
SandozE. K.KellumK. K.WilsonK. G. (2017).
Feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of acceptance and commitment training for academic success of at-risk college students from low income families. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science,
6(1), 71–79. doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2017.01.001
48.
SchunkD. H. (1991).
Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist,
26(3–4), 207–231. doi:10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133
49.
SchunkD. H.PintrichP. R.MeeceJ. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (3rd ed.).
Columbus, OH:
Merrill.
50.
StephensN. M.HamedaniM. G.DestinM. (2014).
Closing the social-class achievement gap: A difference-education intervention improves first-generation students’ academic performance and all students’ college transition. Psychological Science,
25(4), 943–953. doi:10.1177/0956797613518349
51.
StephensN. M.TownsendS. S.HamedaniM. G.DestinM.ManzoV. (2015).
A difference-education intervention equips first-generation college students to thrive in the face of stressful college situations. Psychological Science,
26(10), 1556–1566.
52.
SunJ. C.OhY. J.SeliH.JungM. (2017).
Learning behavior and motivation of at-risk college students: The case of a self-regulatory learning class. Journal of At-Risk Issues,
20(2), 12–24.
53.
SweckerH. K.FifoltM.SearbyL. (2013).
Academic advising and first-generation college students: A quantitative study on student retention. NACADA Journal,
33(1), 46–53. doi:10.12930/NACADA-13-192
ValentineJ. C.HirschyA. S.BremerC. D.NovilloW.CastellanoM.BanisterA. (2011).
Keeping at-risk students in school: A systematic review of college retention programs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
33(2), 214–234. doi:10.3102/0162373711398126.
56.
Van der ZandenP. J. A. C.DenessenE.CillessenA. H. N.MeijerP. C. (2018).
Domains and predictors of first-year student success: A systematic review. Educational Research Review,
23, 57–77.
57.
WibrowskiC. R.MatthewsW. K.KitsantasA. (2017).
The role of a skills learning support program on first-generation college students' self-regulation, motivation, and academic achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice,
19(3), 317–332.
58.
WinklerC.SriramR. (2015).
Development of a scale to measure academic capital in high-risk college students. The Review of Higher Education,
38(4), 565–587.
59.
WoltersC. A.PintrichP. R.KarabenickS. A. (2003, March). Assessing academic self-regulated learning. Paper session presented at the Conference on Indicators of Positive Development: Definitions, Measures, and Prospective Validity, Washington, DC.
60.
WoltersC. A.HoopsL. D. (2015). Self-regulated learning interventions for motivationally disengaged college students. In ClearyT. J. (Ed.), Self-regulated learning interventions with at-risk youth (pp. 67–88).
Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
61.
YeL.ShuniakC.OueiniR.RobertJ.LewisS. (2016).
Can they succeed? Exploring at-risk students' study habits in college general chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice,
17(4), 878–892.
62.
ZimmermanB. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP. R.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39).
San Diego, CA:
Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7
63.
ZimmermanB.KitsantasA. (2007).
Reliability and validity of self-efficacy for learning form (SELF) scores of college students. Journal of Psychology,
215(3), 157–163.
