An Examination of Curiosity and Academic Self-Concept among Students of Category “A” Senior High Schools in the Central Region of Ghana

Year 2022, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 367 - 378, 01.07.2022

Mark Amponsah , Inuusah Mahama , Ebenezer Takyi-wadieh

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.95.9.4

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Curiosity and academic self-concept as psychological constructs are often mentioned in education and psychology. These constructs are elusive in terms of how they are exhibited or portrayed and measured. Despite their elusive nature, they are highly significant to the success or otherwise of learners. Therefore, the current study explored curiosity and academic self-concept among students of category “A” Senior High schools in the Central Region of Ghana. Using a descriptive-quantitative method, a sample of 400 students was selected through proportionate-stratified and systematic sampling techniques. Adapted curiosity (Kashdan et al., 2018) and academic self-concept (Liu & Wang, 2005) scales were used for the data collection. The data collected were analysed using frequencies, percentages, and structural equation modelling (SEM). The study revealed that the majority of the students possessed low curious abilities and low academic self-concepts. The study further revealed that curiosity of deprivation sensitivity (b=.577, p<.001), the curiosity of stress tolerance (b=.248, p=.007), and curiosity of thrill-seeking (b=.544, p<.001) positively and significantly predicted academic self-concept of students but the curiosity of joyful exploration and social curiosity did not predict academic self-concept of students. It was concluded that students’ curious abilities were precursors to their academic self-concept. Thereupon, teachers need to devise new approaches by allowing students to engage in other learning opportunities without much restrictions so that they could hone their natural potentials.

Keywords

curiosity, academic self-concept, category “A” students, Ghana, curiosity, academic self-concept, category “A” students, Ghana

Thanks

We appreciate the roles played by the management of the schools selected for the study. We also appreciate the roles played by the respondents in taking part in the study without much reservations.

References

• Babbie, E. R. (2010). The practice of social research (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage.
• Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1-40.
• Campbell, E. J. (2015). Six surprising benefits of curiosity. Retrieved from https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/six_surprising_benefits_of_curiosity on 22/08/21.
• Choi, N. (2005). Self‐efficacy and self‐concept as predictors of college students' academic performance. Psychology in the Schools, 42(2), 197-205.
• Engel, S. (2011). Children’s need to know: Curiosity in schools. Harvard Educational Review, 81(4), 625-645.
• Engel. S. (2013). The case for curiosity. Educational Leadership, 70(5), 36-40.
• Fryer, L. K. (2015). Predicting self-concept, interest and achievement for first-year students: The seeds of lifelong learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 38, 107-114.
• Fryer, L. K., Ginns, P., & Walker, R. (2014). Between students' instrumental goals and how they learn: Goal content is the gap to mind. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 612-630.
• Fryer, L. K., Ozono, S., Carter, P., Nakao, K., & Anderson, C. J. (2014). Instrumental reasons for studying in compulsory English courses: I didn't come to university to study English, so why should I? Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 8(3), 239-256.
• Grossnickle, E. M. (2016). Disentangling curiosity: Dimensionality, definitions, and distinctions from interest in educational contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 23-60.
• Gruber, M. J., Gelman, B. D., & Ranganath, C. (2014). States of curiosity modulate hippocampus-dependent learning via the dopaminergic circuit. Neuron, 84(2), 486-496.
• Hidi, S. E., & Renninger, K. A. (2019). Interest development and its relation to curiosity: needed neuroscientific research. Educational Psychology Review, 31(4), 833-852.
• Hidi, S. E., & Renninger, K. A. (2019). Interest development and its relation to curiosity: needed neuroscientific research. Educational Psychology Review, 31(4), 833-852.
• Jirout, J. & Klahr, D. (2012). Children’s scientific curiosity: In search of an operational definition of an elusive concept. Developmental Review, 32(2), 125-160.
• Kalaivani, M., & Rajeswari, V. (2016). The role of academic motivation and academic self-concept in student’s academic achievement. International Journal of Research-Granthaalayah, 4(9), 37-49.
• Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Wang, J. T. Y., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20(8), 963-973.
• Kashdan T. B., Steger M. F. (2007). Curiosity and pathways to well-being and meaning in life: Traits, states, and everyday behaviours. Motivation Emotion, 31, 159–173. doi: 10.1007/s11031-007-9068-7.
• Kashdan, T. B., Sherman, R. A., Yarbro, J., & Funder, D.C. (2013). How are curious people viewed and how do they behave in social situations? from the perspectives of self, friends, parents, and unacquainted observers. Journal of Personality, 81(2), 142-154.
• Kashdan, T. B., & Roberts, J. E. (2004). Trait and state curiosity in the genesis of intimacy: Differentiation from related constructs. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(6), 792-816.
• Kashdan, T. B., Rose, P., & Fincham, F. D. (2004). Curiosity and exploration: Facilitating positive subjective experiences and personal growth opportunities. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82(3), 291-305.
• Kidd, C., & Hayden, B. Y. (2015). The psychology and neuroscience of curiosity. Neuron, 88(3), 449-460.
• Köller, O., Baumert, J., & Schnabel, K. (2001). Does interest matter? The relationship between academic interest and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(5), 448-470.
• Koo, D. M., & Choi, Y. Y. (2010). Knowledge search and people with high epistemic curiosity. Computers in Human Behaviour, 26(1), 12-22.
• Lauriola, M., Litman, J. A., Mussel, P., De Santis, R., Crowson, H. M., & Hoffman, R. R. (2015). Epistemic curiosity and self-regulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 202-207.
• Litman, J. A. (2010). Relationships between measures of I-and D-type curiosity, ambiguity tolerance, and need for closure: An initial test of the wanting-liking model of information-seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(4), 397-402.
• Litman, J. A., & Mussel, P. (2013). Validity of the interest-and deprivation-type epistemic curiosity model in Germany. Journal of Individual Differences, 34(2), 59-68.
• Litman, J. A., & Silvia, P. J. (2006). The latent structure of trait curiosity: Evidence for interest and deprivation curiosity dimensions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 86(3), 318-328.
• Litman, J. A., Crowson, H. M., & Kolinski, K. (2010). Validity of the interest-and deprivation-type epistemic curiosity distinction in non-students. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 531-536.
• Litman, J., Hutchins, T., & Russon, R. (2005). Epistemic curiosity, feeling-of-knowing, and exploratory behaviour. Cognition & Emotion, 19(4), 559-582.
• Liu, W. C., & Wang, C. K. J. (2008). Home environment and classroom climate: An investigation of their relation to students’ academic self-concept in a streamed setting. Current Psychology, 27(4), 242.
• Livio. M. (2017). Why? What makes us curious? Simon & Schuster, New York, NY.
• Lüftenegger, M., Schober, B., van de Schoot, R., Wagner, P., Finsterwald, M., & Spiel, C. (2012). Lifelong learning as a goal–Do autonomy and self-regulation in school result in well prepared pupils? Learning and Instruction, 22(1), 27-36.
• Malanchini, M., Engelhardt, L. E., Grotzinger, A. D., Harden, K. P., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2019). “Same but different”: Associations between multiple aspects of self-regulation, cognition, and academic abilities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(6), 11-64.
• Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 133-163.
• Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2005). Academic self‐concept, interest, grades, and standardized test scores: Reciprocal effects models of causal ordering. Child Development, 76(2), 397-416.
• Muijs, D. (2010). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
• Palomino, M. D. C. P. (2017). An analysis of self-concept in students with compensatory education needs for developing a mindfulness-based psychoeducational program. SAGE Open, 7(2), 21-58.
• Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2015). Self-Concepts: Educational Aspects. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioural Sciences, 469–474. doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.92018-x
• Rashid, K., & Iqbal, Z. (2015). Development of self as a concept in the university students. Bulletin of Education and Research, 37(2), 43-58.
• Richards, J. B., Litman, J., & Roberts, D. H. (2013). Performance characteristics of measurement instruments of epistemic curiosity in third-year medical students. Medical Science Educator, 23(3), 355-363.
• Shah, P. E., Weeks, H. M., Richards, B., & Kaciroti, N. (2018). Early childhood curiosity and kindergarten reading and math academic achievement. Pediatric Research, 84(3), 380-386.
• Silvia, P. J. (2008). Appraisal components and emotion traits: Examining the appraisal basis of trait curiosity. Cognition and Emotion, 22(1), 94-113.
• Tang, X., Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., Murayama, K., Lavonen, J., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2020). The differences and similarities between curiosity and interest: Meta-analysis and network analyses. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/wfprn
• Tejada, J. J., & Punzalan, J. R. B. (2012). On the misuse of Slovin’s formula. The Philippine Statistician, 61(1), 129-136.
• Turner, J. C. (1984). Psychological group formation'. The Social Dimension: European Developments in Social Psychology, 2, 518-38.
• Turner, J. C., & Reynolds, K. J. (2011). Self-categorization theory. Handbook of Theories in Social Psychology, 2(1), 399-417.
• Turner, J. C. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5(1), 1-34.
• Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 72–121). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Vansteenkiste, M., Soenens, B., Verstuyf, J., & Lens, W. (2009). What is the usefulness of your schoolwork? The differential effects of intrinsic and extrinsic goal framing on optimal learning. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 155-163.
• Vogl, E., Pekrun, R., Murayama, K., & Loderer, K. (2020). Surprised–curious–confused: Epistemic emotions and knowledge exploration. Emotion, 20(4), 625.