Internal and External Loci of Control and Community College Students

In a previous post on student comments on their own interactions (and perceptions of their interactions) with local authorities (which we're calling the 'state' in Habermasian terms), the general consensus reflects a sense of both invisibility by the students and their families, as well as one of rhetorical muteness as they attempt to engage with the administrative bureaucracies ostensibly designed and budgeted to support local safety, infrastructure, and general welfare concerns.

My favorite librarian slash information specialist slash cultural critic posted this topical rejoinder:

The question is a good one -- are these students' perceptions new or are they pre-existing ecological rhetorics and are vocalized only now because of the course's syllabus, inquiry, and writing assignments? If pre-existing, then @lSCNHLibrary allusion to locus of control is especially apropos to understand our college's students and their relationship with their communities as well as with the college itself. As I'll show, depending on one's placement of locus, a student's perception of her success may be pre-determined by her mind-set of not only her self-efficacy and intellectual/social attributes, but also with her relationship with the services, administration, student peer group, and ultimately the faculty.

Brief overview of Locus of Control 

Based within Bandura's social learning theory, "locus of control," refined by Rotter, is how one sees power centered in one's world -- internally, or externally. If one has an internal locus of control, then one unconsciously believes one's mental, social, intellectual, economic strengths influence one's effect in the world. In other words, the world is one's oyster. Those with external locus, however, unconsciously believe that the world influences success -- that social, institutional, governmental policies, bureaucrats, even parents and partners have and will continue to strongly influence or determine one's success in life. 

Importantly, when considering failure, those with internal control feel that their failure is due to a lack of effort or effective use of resources; those with external locus interpret failure is due to "luck" or the power of others. Those with internal locus feel confident in access to networks of resources to increase their chances of task success, while those with external locus both lack access to these networks and simultaneously fail to take advantage of any resources even when provided to them. 

As educators, we see this too often -- students who are notified of information resources, for examples; taught how to use these resources in multiple ways and over multiple timelines; reminded of these and others complimentary resources such as writing centers, librarians, databases accessible 24 hours of the day, professorial consultations, etc., etc., and yet who choose not to take advantage of these resources. I feel these choices are influenced by multiple socio-historical environments which nurture an external locus of control:

• a primary/secondary educational history where too many second, third chances were provided so that the student sees the institution as a caretaker instead of a facilitator.
• a standardized testing environment focused solely on quantifiable means of accessing skills instead of nurturing critical thinking/writing skills which by their very nature require independent resource skills.
• a home environment which may depend on institutional assistance for survival. I do not  argue against social welfare networks when they work towards independence, but I have seen families struggle for years within bureaucracies of anonymity and ineptitude which seem to seek their own self-preservation instead of long-term social-economic-educational independence of all family members. These families by their exposure to ineffective bureaucracies literally are at the control of external institutions and waste so much of their lives travelling on buses, for example to and from offices where ineffective bureaucracies make application and distribution of resources untenably difficult for families, especially single-parent families who sincerely want to change their economic environment. Ironically, the smart woman will know that she has to bypass this system and go directly to someone who actually has power and influence to effect change in her life (start at 0:20)
• a political system controlled by the upper and super classes which have no intention of responding to the voices and long-term needs of the working and poverty classes. Any rhetorical analysis of any election cycle easily demonstrates this as strategy and intention. People aren't stupid. They know the two main political parties are operated by and serve the upper and super classes. Why should the working and poverty classes expect any real response from these deaf and blind machines? 

Learned Helplessness

First, this explanation of Seligman's experiment and theory of learned helplessness (with video). Ultimately, Seligman saw that not only do humans (the the poor dogs) learn to be helpless, but they can also learn optimism and change their efficacy in stressful situations.

Ending up this posting quickly, this article in the Chicago Times recommend six ways to change one's worldview from helplessness to optimism, each of which is perfectly applicable in the community and the community college:

1. Change is possible
2. Think big
3. Get perspective
4. Set goals
5. Achieve success (and recognize it as such)
6. Consider a different viewpoint

Returning to the point of the course, my syllabus intends to inform students in our college on public sphere rhetoric in their communities, which are for the most part working class, some poverty class, mostly Latino and/or African American, few public transportation options, few economic opportunities, and living within two public school districts -- Spring ISD and Aldine ISD -- known for their sub-standard (even when standards are considered) education performance. Ultimately, this course has revealed through critical analysis of power systems, institutions, texts, and other inquiries at least what the students have always implicitly known -- that the governmental structure as currently operating is insensitive to the quotidian needs of these students' families. This is why I feel, finally responding to @lSCNHLibrary's original query, that though their locus of control may in fact be externalized, we have actual textual and narrative evidence to demonstrate that some of this is supported by the rhetorical ecology -- which is both subjective and objective -- of these students' lives. 

So, no. And, yes. 

Regardless, the situation must change. And, as I always argue, rhetoric is the key.

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+BruceJMartin 

Twitter @comstone