When we give students "F's", do we do so in part hoping this harsh confrontation with reality will make more clear what it takes to succeed in our courses and business? We want our students to "buckle down", put forth more effort, try harder now, before it is too late. And some of our students do; but others do not. Some of our students drop the course; sometimes they change majors; and sometimes they leave college. Is there a reason that failure does not motivate our students to try harder? In limited enrollment colleges and programs, we feel that most (not all, but most) could succeed if they just applied themselves.


As educators, we are interested in advancing learning. Stage et al. (1998) advance the role of attribution theory in learning. Attribution theory can be used to explain behavior, and it can be applied to educational settings. When something unexpected happens or a goal is not attained, the person will undertake a "casual search" through which he or she tries to understand why events have happened as they have if the situation has important personal implications. For example, a student failing an exam will undertake a "casual search" to try and understand the reason for the failure.


In the case of classroom achievement generally and examinations specifically, students may attribute outcome to two variables: ability and effort. Traditionally, we reward ability more than effort. We do not necessarily want accountants who try hard; we want accountants who provide meaningful financial information. Thus, it is important for accounting students to protect and advance their perceptions of their individual abilities; and it makes for large educational consequences once students become convinced their level of ability prevents them from succeeding in certain kinds of classes, say cost accounting, intermediate accounting, and advanced accounting.


Ability and effort as causes for successor failure can further classified along three dimensions: control (whether a student has the power to increase or decrease the cause), stability (whether the cause fluctuates or remains the same), and locus (whether the cause is internally or externally controlled). Ability is not something over which individuals have much control. While ability is relatively stable, its locus is internal: it's the student's ability. Effort is something that students can control. While effort fluctuates (a student can try a lot or a little), and it can more easily be influenced internally.


How do these factors interact in the case of success or failure on tests, for example. If students attribute their success to their ability and if the conditions are stable (generally similar types of questions), then the students are likely to have high expectations of future success. " I do well in accounting; I've taken Dr. Joyce before. I'll do well in this next class."


Failure experiences work in reverse and illustrate why giving some students "F's" fails to motivate them. If the student does not believe he or she have the ability and the circumstances are not stable (different courses and different instructors each term), some students may lose their motivation to try. These students may feel that it will make no difference if they try since they feel they lack the basic ability. This attitude makes accurate beliefs about ability extremely important. I will not make any difference.


A student's attitude towards failure may explain why it is in the student's best interest to "handicap" his or her ability by exerting low effort. If a student parties all night before a test, waits until the end of the term to start on the term paper, does not do the assigned readings, he or she has a built-in effort excuse that can be used to explain failure without compromising what the student and others believe about his or her ability. If a student "cheats" on effort, the student never needs to determine that they are truly unable to accomplish the task.


The locus variable is also interesting, and it illustrates by attributing a student's success to good or bad luck. "I really 'lucked out' on the test" renders ability and effort less important than an uncontrollable, external factor: "he just happened to ask the essay question I didn't know. It was bad luck."


There are implications of how the attribution theory explains responses to success and failure. First, accounting faculty need a deeper understanding of why failure experiences do and do not motivate students. Second, accounting faculty need to comprehend the importance of perceptions of ability are. If a student concludes upon earning an "F" the he or she cannot learn something because he or she is not smart enough, the result may be a series of educational decisions made on false assumptions. While many of us have had students who lacked ability, much more often the problem was that the students lacked the understanding of how much effort they needed to exert. For most of us (faculty and students alike), success is much more about hard work, dedications, discipline, and perseverance than ability.


Bibliography
Stage, F., P. Muller, J. Kinzie, and A. Simmons. "Creating Learning Centered Classrooms," ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 26(4). Pp 9-21.