Emphasis on the Learning Process¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 3 claims (3 for) · 6 studies (2 quant-synthesis, 2 theoretical, 1 causal, 1 review), q3–q4 · 2 of 6 report an effect size

Description¶

This strategy shifts learner attention from outcomes (grades, scores, rankings) toward the processes that produce learning — effort, strategy use, revision, and self-monitoring. It is enacted through process-focused feedback, reflective discussion, and assessment practices that reward improvement and strategy quality. Without this emphasis, learners may base self-perceptions of ability on grades alone, which promotes a fixed mindset and avoidance of challenge.

Design Implications¶

Process-focused praise and feedback produce more persistent, mastery-oriented behavior than person- or grade-focused feedback Praise for effort and strategy sustains persistence after setbacks better than praise for ability. [+S]. Framing goals around learning processes rather than performance outcomes improves novice achievement Process goals outperform outcome goals for novices. [+M], and feedback directed at the task and process level outperforms feedback directed at the self or the grade Feedback is most effective at task and process levels. [+S]. Structured self-monitoring of one's own learning process strengthens self-regulation Self-monitoring improves self-regulation. [+M].

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Regular opportunities for structured reflection on what was done, what was difficult, and what strategies were used
• Feedback and grading schemes that reference strategies, progress, and revision — not just correctness (Assessment for Learning)
• Instructor modeling of process talk: discussing one's own mistakes, revisions, and reasoning openly
• Classroom norms that treat errors as information rather than failure

Constraints¶

• Highly grade-driven learners may dismiss process talk as irrelevant until grading practices change to match; exhortation without assessment alignment is ineffective [-M]
• Effort praise applied indiscriminately can backfire — praising effort after failure can signal low ability expectations [~M]
• In high-stakes, norm-referenced environments, process emphasis conflicts with the reward structure and may be undermined by it [-M]
• Requires sustained facilitation skill; superficial "reflection" activities become compliance rituals with no learning benefit [-W]

Implementation Variability¶

• Written reflective journals vs. oral discussion vs. portfolio-based self-assessment
• Process-focused rubrics that explicitly score strategy use and revision quality
• Error analysis routines (e.g., exam wrappers, "my favorite mistake" discussions)
• Learning-to-learn framing at course start vs. continuous process reflection throughout

Target Learners¶

• Novices, who benefit most when goals and feedback target learning processes rather than outcomes Process goals outperform outcome goals for novices. [+M]
• Grade-focused or fixed-mindset learners who attribute failure to stable ability
• Learners building self-regulatory habits; monitoring one's own process is a core self-regulation skill Self-monitoring improves self-regulation. [+M]
• Less effective for advanced learners who already regulate their own learning well [~W]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Metacognitive: strategy evaluation, self-monitoring, reflection on learning
• Motivational: valuing learning over grades, growth mindset, persistence after setbacks
• Dispositional: intellectual risk-taking, comfort with productive struggle

Instructions¶

1. Open the course by naming the learning process explicitly — how skills develop through effort, strategy, and revision — and connect this to learner beliefs about ability (Activation)
2. During tasks, prompt learners to articulate their strategies and reasoning, not just their answers (Articulation)
3. Deliver feedback that names specific strategies and their effects, and identifies next process steps (Coaching)
4. After major assessments, run structured reflection on preparation strategies and error patterns (Class Discussion or written Assessment wrappers)
5. Align grading so that revision, process documentation, or improvement carries weight — otherwise the process message is contradicted by the reward structure

Related Strategies¶

• Formative Assessment — process-level feedback is the core mechanism of formative practice
• Competency-Based Learning — replaces grade comparison with progress against criteria, structurally supporting process emphasis
• Growth-mindset-informed math teaching practices: norms, no fixed labels, mixed-ability grouping, process praise, and formative assessment with retakes

Related Elements¶

• Articulation — learners verbalize strategies, making process visible
• Coaching — the delivery vehicle for process-focused feedback
• Assessment — grading schemes must align with the process message

Examples¶

• Exam wrappers (widely used in physics and math courses, e.g., at Carnegie Mellon's Eberly Center, https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/teach/examwrappers.html) — students answer brief questions about how they prepared and what they would change before receiving their graded exam, redirecting attention from the score to the process.
• Process-focused praise studies — Mueller & Dweck's experiments showed that children praised for effort after success subsequently chose harder tasks and persisted longer than children praised for intelligence [+S].
• Portfolio assessment with revision narratives — students submit drafts plus a short memo describing what they revised and why, making the learning process an assessed artifact.

Key Sources¶

• Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children's motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 33–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102
• Cimpian, A., Arce, H.-M. C., Markman, E. M., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Generic language with "some" signals a category-wide pattern of ability. Psychological Science, 18(4), 314–319.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2