Local and national policy initiatives on engagement in everyday activities highlight the self-concepts that prompt participation in shaping subsequent experiences (e.g., Harter 1986; Kirsch et al. 2002; Möller et al. 2011; Simpkins et al. 2012). For instance, the research consistently shows that self-concepts support and constrain health behaviors and that “engaged readers… provide themselves with self-generated learning opportunities” (Bornholt and Piccolo 2005; Guthrie and Wigfield 2000, p. 404). Although some reports may refer to global self-worth, motivation for learning, health, and well-being typically rests on self-concepts about particular activities (e.g., Archambault et al. 2010; Eccles 1994; Marsh et al. 2005; Möller et al. 2006). Although other approaches may also report weak or no links between skills and self-concepts (Archambault et al. 2010, p.812; Fisher 2013a), distinctions in directions of effects are clarified by attention to statistical significance with large samples, standardized assessments, socioeconomic and other factors (Hattie 1992, 2002).

Key roles of self-concepts in children’s motivation to participate in activities are highlighted in substantial research (Eccles et al. 1993; Guthrie et al. 2012; Harter 1986; Hattie 1992) and contemporary Motivational spiral models (MSM; Fisher 2013a). For instance, Fig. 1 shows that self-concepts motivate and justify participation. There are some indirect links with skills, and context-specific influences of strategies, positive and negative feelings about everyday activities (e.g., Bornholt 2005c; Bornholt and Piccolo 2005; Guthrie et al. 2012).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Conceptual motivational spiral models for literacy (MSM-L) and numeracy (MSM-N) link self-concepts, feelings, strategies, skills and participation at Time 1 and Time 2 (a year apart). Adapted from Bornholt and Piccolo (2005) and Fisher (2013a)

Full size image

It is therefore important to understand more about the foundations of children’s self-concepts of everyday activities. The main aim here is to define these foundations as identities and self-categorizations. In terms of social group identities, contemporary research shows the complex ‘self-stereotyping’ for adolescents and adults and also for children (Bennett and Sani 2008; Tanti et al. 2011). Advances in theory and practice for analogous processes within the individual depend on clear understandings of self-concepts typically portrayed as cognitive self-evaluations, and specifically in terms of identities and self-categorizations. This means thinking of oneself and activities, in saying, “For my age, I am quite fit and healthy,” and when a child says, “I think I am quite good at reading” (Ashmore, Deaux, and McLaughlin-Volpe et al. 2004; Bornholt 2005b). Such self-evaluations entail implied or stated identities in comparative contexts, where the validity is in relation to intended and behavioral choices in models of participation. In this regard, foundations of self-concepts are in children’s interpretations and experiences, rather than measured events and available evidence about oneself and other people. Earlier work on explicit comparisons over time (e.g., Albert 1977) is important in focusing on complex thinking within individuals and coherent self-identities, yet nonetheless tend to assume goals of “accurate self-definitions” (p. 494). Other studies, such as Conway and Ross (1984), add a level of abstraction in thinking of one’s attitudes as changing (or not) over time, and Wilson and Ross (2000) consider comparisons over time and among people to acknowledge multiple goals. Yet these explicit goals of accuracy or self-enhancement would fit better with ideas on self-concepts in relation to skills. For instance, Wilson and Ross (2000) go on to say, “the past is ephemeral: if people choose to see themselves as improving, there is often little in the way of objective evidence to prove them wrong, even if their perception is illusory” (p. 940). On the contrary, it can be argued that we need to draw on children’s thinking as foundations of self-concepts that support (or constrain) participation in everyday activities, typically and meaningfully at odds with skills. Indeed, a so-called “illusory glow” and patterns of traditional self-stereotyping by adolescents in social contexts provide satisfactory explanations for their subsequent participation in the activities (Bornholt 2000a).

Personal and social realities of self-concepts are suggested in diverse profiles with age of skills and self-concepts. For example, Fig. 2 shows that profiles of children’s general cognitive skills vary systematically with age. That is, general cognitive skills typically increase for young children and approach an asymptote (e.g., Ouvrier et al. 1999). In contrast, children’s self-concepts of activities do not reflect such profiles (e.g., Archambault et al. 2010; Bornholt 2005a, b; Bornholt and Spencer 2003; Marsh et al. 2005). Instead, clusters of standard and alternative profiles tend to vary somewhat about an optimal; as on average, children tend to consider themselves a bit above average. In theory, such self-concepts are what children think of oneself personally and socially. Yet alternative models in this field often suggest self-concepts directly reflecting skills. Instead, it is proposed here that identities are a base for self-concepts, where various self-categorizations explain the phenomena—as shifts in thinking among content, over time, in relation to others and so on. In many ways, such shifts in thinking are analogous to person-identities as categorizations that resemble group identities and categorizations (Bennett and Sani 2008; Bornholt 2000a); and departing somewhat from the classic comparative models (e.g., Asgari et al. 2012; Bornholt and Cooney 1993; Maras 2007; Pohlmann and Möller 2009).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Profiles of children general cognitive skills and self concepts about cognitive skills. General cognitive screening from SYSTEMS-R increases with age to an asymptote, where the scores are unbiased by gender, socioeconomic indicators, and community language groups (e.g., Fisher et al. 2010; Ouvrier et al. 1999). Self-concept profiles vary about an optimal range (above the mid-point of scales) for clusters of children (as standard A profiles 66 %, alternatives B 17 % and C 18 %, from k-means clusters), where profiles are unbiased by gender, age, and socioeconomic indicators and independent of children’s cognitive skills (e.g., Bornholt and Spencer 2003; Bornholt 2005c; Fisher 2013a).

Full size image

Background to children’s personal and social realities

The focus is firmly on the thinking by persons, in terms of identities and categorizations—in a careful reading of work on group identities (e.g., Tajfel 1982; Turner 1987; Oakes et al. 1994). In addition to such well-known group processes, classic and contemporary research also suggests relational processes between individuals (such as expectations and self-disclosure), as well as discrete processes within individuals (e.g., Albert 1977; Bornholt et al. 2009; Maras 2007; Reynolds and Oakes 2000). The approach developed in this paper also proposes flexibility in thinking but the foundations are distinct personal and social identities (Bornholt 2000b; Turner 1987, p.95). It is argued that the characteristic flexibility is in the children’s thinking as self-categorizations that rely on children’s identities (e.g., Bornholt 2000a, 2001). For example, situations that prompt children to consider their personal characteristics rely on a sense of uniqueness or individuality. Such situations may cover thinking of now, next week, stable and varying over time and place, as comparative contexts within the person. Analogous processes around a person’s sense of belonging are independent of such personal foundations of self-concepts. This means that children may also think of oneself socially, in relation to others, real or imagined, present or absent, as self-categorizations about one’s classmates, family and friends.

The theoretical development of the proposal builds on person-identities as a form of flexible personality. Other work with adolescents and adults also suggests distinct identities that influence motivation for health and well-being, such as individuality, belonging, place, spirituality and so on. The focus here is on children’s sense of individuality and belonging, to clarify these distinct identities rather than a personal-to-social continuum (Bornholt 2000a, b; Oakes et al. 1994; Fisher 2013b). It may be useful to consider such flexible thinking about a prototypical self (as for prototypical group members) that is not inconsistent with notions of developing “personality” (see also Bergh et al. 2012; Bornholt 2000b; Latrofa et al. 2010; Oakes et al. 1994).

In principle, personal and social foundations of children’s self-concepts are conceptual rather than direct reflections of actual situations. This proposal for everyday activities of literacy and numeracy is usefully set against implied content and peer frames of reference in models of self-concepts based on actual skills (e.g., Bong 2001; Chen et al. 2011; Marsh 1990; Skaalvik and Rankin 1995; Fisher et al. 2013). Points of agreement with a “frame of reference” approach highlight independent processes in balancing the personal and the social (Skaalvik and Rankin 1995, p.163). Yet there are certain departures; specifically, where proposed personal and social identities entail shifts in thinking within and among persons rather than so-called “standards of comparison” with actual events and other children such as classmates and friends.

Children’s personal and social identities

The foundations of self-concepts are considered in addition to substantial diversity among individuals, amidst vigorous debates on social identities and personality (e.g., Bergh et al. 2012; Onorato and Turner 2004). The proposed approach positions children’s thinking of oneself and everyday activities on a continuum from apparent stability to openness to experience. The main implications are that: (a) openness to experience highlights where we may alter self-concepts that support participation; (b) influences of both personal and social identities suggest that tailored personal and social interventions would be effective; and (c) the content of interventions would combine self-categorizations as features of persons, as well as features of children’s social life.

Personal basis of self-concepts

This optimizes thinking about “threads of consistency” and diversity over time, content and other situations, given a sense of individuality (Bornholt 2000b; Hattie 1992). Yet other models tend to have a particular focus, for instance, frame of reference studies of self-concepts with adolescents and young adults tend to focus on content comparisons (e.g., Möller and Köller 2001; Skaalvik and Rankin 1995). In a study of the personal basis of self-concepts for children, Bornholt and Ingram (2001) explored identities and self-concepts about drawing, to show that children tend to consider drawing as a stable trait. This self-categorization approach was also used to alter self-concepts and choices for children with reading difficulties (Bornholt 2004; Coleman and Bornholt 2003). Although each study may highlight one or more particular comparative contexts, a general model of personal foundations of self-concepts would involve identity as a sense of individuality with various combinations of personal contexts that may cover variability, stability, content, time, place and many other situations within persons.

Social basis of self-concepts

In a classic study by Brewer (1991), social processes optimize a need to be socially distinct and also assimilated. In such situations, a social foundation of self-concepts relies on a sense of belonging and balancing several social contexts (Bornholt 2000b; Tanti et al. 2011). For instance, in self-concepts of literacy and numeracy, relevant contexts may involve thinking of oneself within and between groups (such as gender), in forms of self-stereotyping (Bennett and Sani 2008). In addition, peer comparisons are implied as models of self-concepts in substantial studies with adolescents and young adults (e.g., Chen et al. 2011; Marsh 1990; Möller et al. 2011; Skaalvik and Rankin 1995). In other studies with children on physical movement, specific self-categorizations in relation to age and gender were more relevant than thinking of oneself as prototypically “bookish” or “sporty” (Brake and Bornholt 2004; Bornholt and Piccolo 2005). Overall, a general model would involve identity as a sense of belonging in self-categorizations by friends, peers, family and many other salient features of children’s social life.

Outline of the project

Understanding foundations of children’s self-concepts (e.g., Bennett and Sani 2008; Bornholt 2004; Senn 2012) is valuable in models of motivation with long-term outcomes (e.g., McGee et al. 2002; Prior 1994; Prior et al. 2011; Smart et al. 2001). Whereas other projects challenge broad age-trends such as glowing perceived abilities by children and diverse downward trajectories (e.g., Archambault et al. 2010; Eccles et al. 1993; Stipek 1993), the aim of this project was to examine subtle shifts in children’s thinking of oneself and everyday activities, within the relevant personal and social contexts that define children’s self-concepts.

Hypothesis

The basic question was whether correlational and experimental evidence supports a general theory in terms of proposed complex personal and social foundations for self-concepts. It was expected that: (a) the correlational evidence would relate identities, personal and social contexts to self-concepts about everyday activities, and (b) experimental evidence would show that personally and socially tailored information alters children’s self-concepts about activities. In this study, identities include individuality and belonging, and comparative contexts considered time and content, age and gender, as foundations for self-concepts about literacy and numeracy.

Method

Design

The pilot study was designed to validate experimental manipulations based on personal and social self-categorizations. Study 1 examined alternative models of self-concepts in relation to skills, and explored proposed models of identities (individuality and belonging) in relation to self-concepts of literacy and numeracy. Study 2 was designed to show several relevant personal as well as social contexts for children’s self-concepts of literacy and numeracy. Study 3 was an experiment to show personal and social foundations of self-concepts of literacy and numeracy. Specific content from Study 2 was used in Study 3 as a demonstration for children with low self-concepts. This was considered appropriate in an educational setting where complex combinations of other personal and social features would also be effective with other groups of children.

Location and recruitment

Samples were recruited from government schools in suburban areas with moderate socioeconomic indices [socioeconomic indexes for areas (SEIFA) 995 to 1,022, with 1,000 the Australian national average, ABS 2006]. The children were from diverse community groups who all speak English at school and also speak English at home or speak English with Asian, European, and other community languages.

Participants

Children participated with informed consent from their parents or guardians, and recruitment included girls and boys across a broad age range in order to include children with diverse skills. The pilot study (N = 16) was with boys (50 %) and girls (50 %), aged from 9 to 12 years (mean 10.7, SD 1.1). Study 1 (N = 297) was with boys (55 %) and girls (45 %), aged from 8 to 12 years (mean 10.3, SD 0.9). In Study 2 (N = 42, boys 62 %, girls 38 %), the children were 9 to 11 years old (mean 9.9, SD 0.5), and the children in Study 3 (N = 74, boys 57 %, girls 43 %) were 9 to 12 years old (mean 10.0, SD 0.7).

Materials

Self-concepts

The self-concepts were from the ASK-KIDS Inventory for children (Bornholt 1997, 2005a, b). ASK-KIDS is brief, useful, and meaningful for children with diverse skills and abilities in educational, clinical, and other settings (e.g., Bornholt and Ingram 2001; Russell et al. 2002; Marsh et al. 2005). The sample items for self-concepts about everyday activities of literacy and numeracy are described in Table 1. ASK-KIDS takes about 15 min to administer; there are five items in each scale, and the responses from reliable scales (alpha from 0.67 to 0.84). Children’s responses use simple dot-point ratings that range from (1) low to (5) high.

Table 1 Sample items from the ASK-KIDSa Inventory on identities and self-concepts of everyday activities, and items about the personal and social comparative contexts for everyday activities
Full size table

Identities

Identities about individuality and belonging are in the ASK-KIDS Inventory (e.g., Bornholt 2000b, 2005a). There are five items in each scale, with sample items in Table 1. Responses use dot-point ratings, and formed reliable scales (alpha = 0.67, 0.77), from (1) low to (5) high.

Comparative contexts

Direct questions in Table 1 are single items that ask children to think about personal contexts (by time and content) and social contexts (by age and gender). The separate items are not bipolar scales such as variability-to-stability (see Bennet and Sani 2008). Items are suited to general applications by using local phrases with standard meaningful prompts for younger and older children. The responses use dot-point ratings from (1) low to (5) high.

Standard assessments

Children’s literacy and numeracy skills were indicated by responses to standard assessments [Tests of Reading Comprehension (TORCH), ACER 2003; Progressive Achievement Tests (PAT)-Maths, ACER 2007]. These reliable and valid materials are suitable for diverse skills across ages. TORCH scores range from 0 to 22, and PAT-Maths scores range from 0 to 28.

Personal and social experiment

Templates of personally and socially based information on literacy and numeracy were prepared beforehand for all possible personal and social content and then tailored for each child based on the pre-test responses (e.g., Bornholt and Ingram 2001). Each child received one information sheet and templates were similar for literacy and numeracy. For instance, a personally tailored information sheet about stability over time was “How good you are at reading may vary from time to time, and your position is about here on the scale.” One of the socially tailored information sheets about age was that “Some children are better than others at reading and children like you in Year 4 at school are typically about here on the scale.”

Following the pre-test sessions, a tailored information sheet was prepared for each child (as a personal or social self-categorization about literacy or numeracy). Prototypical positions were calculated from each child’s pre-test responses. This position was hand-drawn as a large arrow on a dot-point scale (1 to 5). The position of the arrow was just above the child’s pre-test self-concept. This meant that positions were plausible rather than obviously positive, maintaining constant intensity of a meta-contrast ratio (MCR) close to 1.0 (e.g., Oakes et al. 1994). MCR is the average of distances between this position and the other possible positions on the scale, divided by the difference between the position of the arrow and the pre-test self-concept.

Pre-test and post-test self-concepts

Pre-test and post-test self-concepts were about everyday activities of numeracy and literacy. ASK-KIDS self-concepts are suitable for screening, experiments, and interventions, with sound retest reliability over brief intervals (r about 0.70 to 0.80, Spencer and Bornholt 2003). Over longer intervals (up to a year), moderate stability suggests openness to experience (r T1–T2 = 0.40). It is evident that although the rank order varies over time, the group averages would appear similar from one occasion to the next (e.g., Aunola et al. 2002; Bornholt and Piccolo 2005).

Procedure

The project was approved by the University Ethics Committee and the State Government Education Department. The recruitment was conducted by school administrators in cooperation with school principals and classroom teachers, and children participated with written informed consent of their parents or guardians.

Pilot study

The purpose of the pilot study was to validate materials in experimental manipulations based on self-categorizations. Classroom teachers selected several boys and girls in each class to cover a range of abilities, and school administrators arranged written consent from parents or guardians. The researcher interviewed each child individually in a quiet room at school and administered pre-test self-concepts of literacy and numeracy, selected appropriate literacy or numeracy materials for children with low self-concepts, and administered modified templates for the experiment as either personal or social interventions, and then administered the relevant post-test self-concepts. The researcher also showed children their tailored information sheet and asked “What does it mean to be this good at reading?” or “What does it mean to be this good at number activities?” (where appropriate). The evidence to support valid materials would show that (a) the meaning of the arrow on the rating scale on templates were in accordance with children’s explanations, and (b) individually tailored-interventions based on self-categorizations altered children’s self-concepts.

Study 1. Self-concepts, skills, and identitites

Self-concept inventories were administered by researchers to groups of children. Inventories were read aloud as children made their responses on the dot-point rating scales. Then the researchers administered standard assessments, so that children’s self-concepts would be about everyday activities of literacy and numeracy, rather than standard assessments. The purposes of Study 1 were: (a) to examine an alternative skills-based model of self-concepts; and (b) to examine the proposed identities (individuality and belonging) in relation to children’s self-concepts about everyday activities of literacy and numeracy.

Study 2. Comparative contexts

The personal and social inventories were administered by researchers to groups of children in their regular classrooms. Researcher read each item aloud as the children read the items to themselves and then provided their own responses to each item on the dot-point rating scales.

Study 3. The experiment

General screening by trained researchers in class groups was used to select the participants (used as pre-test scores for the experiment). Selected participants were children with low self-concepts of literacy or numeracy. (Children with high self-concepts and children with low self-concepts on both literacy and numeracy were excluded). Selection of children with low self-concepts used an item about current performance and was defined as responses from 1.0 and 3.8, as below optimal range on five-point scales (e.g., Bornholt 2005a).

Within the literacy and numeracy conditions, the children were randomly allocated to the experimental groups, and the templates were prepared for each child based on pre-test responses. The next day, the experiment was run in small groups. Children were given one of four sets of written materials (personal or social tailored information about literacy or numeracy). To ensure children paid attention to the material, the researcher spoke to each child while pointing to the position of the arrow and quietly read the statement, and the child also wrote a response to an open question “What does it mean to be this good at…?” (reading or number as appropriate). The children then completed the post-test self-concept inventories about everyday activities of literacy and numeracy.

Analysis

Descriptive (mean, SD) and inferential statistics (partial correlations, MANOVA) in SPSS Windows used standard criteria for statistical significance (p < 0.05). Meaningful effect sizes were >0.4 of SD, which are differences between the means over pooled SD (Kline 2000). According to Hattie (1992, p. 236). “Treatment that can bring about even this amount of change in such a complex structure as self-concept is worth considering.” Structural equation modeling (AMOS) used standard goodness of fit indices [low ChiSq/df, high TLI ≥ 0.90 and low root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) ≤ 0.08, Hoyle 2011].

Results

Pilot study

Results from the pilot study suggested that materials were valid. The children’s self-concepts increased from pre-test to post-test scores. In particular, the individually tailored information based on self-categorizations were effective in response to personally based materials on literacy (effect 0.50 SD) and numeracy (effect 0.60 SD) and in response to socially based materials about literacy (effects 0.66 SD) and numeracy (effect 0.75 SD).

The children’s responses also supported the validity of the experimental manipulation. That is, the meanings of the positions of tailored arrows on the five-point scale suggested that the materials were understood by the children. For instance, an arrow at four on the scale meant “to be good at vocabulary and to have good reading skills” and may also mean “to concentrate, to put more effort into it, and to try harder.”

Study 1. Self-concepts, skills, and identitites

Demographic factors

Preliminary results suggest few influences of demographic factors. Self-concepts were similar among home language groups, over and above test scores, age and gender (self-concepts of literacy effect 0.1 SD, and numeracy effect 0.3 SD), and locations (literacy F = 2.7 ns, numeracy F = 0.2 ns). Regression analysis showed that self-concepts were unbiased by age (literacy β = 0.10 ns, numeracy β = 0.01 ns) and gender (literacy β = -.07 ns, numeracy β = 0.19 ns). Therefore the responses were combined across demographic factors.

Self-concepts and skills

Structural equation modeling tested an alternative skills-based model of self-concepts (with standard assessments of literacy and numeracy and correlated residuals for self-concepts). The model was a good fit (low ChiSq/df 2.6, high GFI 0.93, TLI 0.92, low RMSEA 0.08). A completely standardized solution showed skills and self-concepts were independent (literacy β = 0.13 ns, numeracy β = 0.12 ns). This means that there was no link between children’s skills and self-concepts of these everyday activities.

The results also showed a link between literacy and numeracy test scores (r = 0.56, p < 0.001), and contrary to typical skills-based models, there was a link between literacy and numeracy self-concepts (r = 0.51, p < 0.001). Furthermore, cross-links were weak or not statistically significant (numeracy skills and literacy self-concepts β = 0.19, p > 0.05; literacy skills and numeracy self-concepts β = -0.16 ns). The residuals were generally not linked (with few weak links for self-concept items about task difficulty). Therefore, the findings confirm research with meta-analyses by Hattie (1992, 2002) to reject a skills-based model of self-concepts.

It is interesting to note that although skills-based models are commonly reported, the results here are consistent with previous evidence in other studies as weak or no links between skills and self-concepts. Given that other studies may report on findings with substantial samples, some reports of statistical significance may be misinterpreted as meaningful links (Hattie 1992, 2002; Kline 2000). In brief, results show that children’s self-concepts were not based on actual skills measured by standard assessments. There was no support for an alternative skills-based model.

Identities and self-concepts

With substantial variations among individuals, there were few variations in self-concepts with demographic factors. It is notable that children’s responses were similar for younger and older girls and boys. The one exception was slightly stronger self-concepts of numeracy for older boys than girls (small effect 0.3 SD). Therefore, the responses of younger and older girls and boys were combined.

The results in Table 2 describe profiles of self-concepts about everyday activities of literacy and numeracy. On average, self-concepts were within an optimal range (about 3.8 on five-point scale, e.g., Bornholt 2005a; Bornholt and Ingram 2001). Profiles also describe moderate identities as a sense of individuality and somewhat stronger sense of belonging. Results confirm that these identities of individuality and belonging were separate constructs (r = 0.11, ns). This means that personal and social foundations of self-concepts are independent and may be added.

Table 2 Means, standard deviations (SD), range, and reliability (alpha) of identities (individuality and belonging) and self-concepts about literacy and numeracy for younger and older boys and girls
Full size table

The overall results identified the conceptual rather than the actual basis of self-concepts in terms of children’s personal and social identities. It is evident that personal identity as a sense of individuality had a significant influence on children’s self-concepts about literacy (β = 0.28) and also numeracy (β = 0.27). In addition, a sense of belonging socially had significant influence on children’s self-concepts about literacy (β = 0.32) and also about numeracy (β = 0.38).

In summary, the findings suggested that it was worthwhile exploring both personal and social realities further as the foundations of what children think about oneself in relation to literacy and numeracy. Consequently, the experiment in Study 3 was designed to demonstrate a personal basis as well as a social basis to self-concepts about everyday activities of literacy and numeracy.

Study 2. Personal and social contexts

Personal comparative contexts were considered here for the person over time and content. Table 3 shows that a personal basis of children’s self-concepts about literacy is particular to children’s ideas about the stability of literacy skills over time. In this situation, other personal self-categorizations were not significant influences on children’s self-concepts about literacy.

Table 3 Personal and social comparative contexts in relation to literacy and numeracy self-concepts
Full size table

The relevant personal basis of self-concepts about numeracy includes a negative influence as invariance over time, moderate positive influences of stability over time, and by content about numeracy compared to literacy. In this situation, personal self-categorization about literacy compared to numeracy was not a statistically significant influence on self-concepts of numeracy.

In addition, the social contexts considered here were self-categorizations of age and gender. Results in Table 3 show that thinking about oneself and others the same age and gender were relevant contexts for children’s self-concepts about literacy. Table 3 also suggests that thinking of oneself and others the same age and perhaps gender were also relevant to self-concepts about numeracy. In this situation, others contexts were not necessarily relevant.

In summary, the common findings highlight children’s ideas about stability over time and comparisons among age groups. Therefore, the intervention in the experiment concentrated on these specific processes in crafting the personally and socially referenced information.

Study 3. Experiment on personal and social basis of self-concepts

Preliminary analyses showed that pre-test self-concepts were similar in literacy [F(1,40) = 1.7 ns] and numeracy [F(1,39) = 0.01 ns]. Pre-test self-concepts were also similar for younger and older children [literacy F(1,40) = 0.01, numeracy F(1,39) = 0.30, ns]. Pre-test self-concepts were similar for girls and boys in self-concepts about literacy [F(1,40) = 0.1, ns] and slightly higher for boys than girls in self-concepts about numeracy [F(1,39) = 6.9, p < 0.05, small effect 0.24 SD]. Therefore, the children’s responses were combined in order to examine the effects of the experiment on children’s post-test self-concepts.

Table 4 shows the means (SD) for pre-test and post-test self-concepts in personal and social conditions about literacy and numeracy activities. The results showed significant overall effects of the intervention on children’s post-test self-concepts about literacy [F(1,37) = 19.9, p < 0.001]. These were substantial effects of personally based tailored information (effect 0.7 SD) and socially based tailored information (effect 0.8 SD) on children’s self-concepts of literacy.

Table 4 Children’s self-concepts about everyday activities before and after the tailored interventions that were designed with either a personal basis or a social basis
Full size table

The results also showed the personal and social basis of self-concepts about numeracy. The tailored information had a significant overall effect on children’s self-concepts about numeracy [F(1,41) = 23.9, p < 0.001]. It is evident that these effects were substantial for personally based (effect 0.6 SD) and socially based information (effect 0.4 SD).

Discussion

Overall, the results supported the proposed personal and social theory of children’s self-concepts. The pilot study suggested that the materials for the experiment were meaningful to the children and that carefully tailored information using self-categorization protocols effectively altered self-concepts. The correlational evidence in Study 1 and Study 2 served two main purposes. First, the results suggested that self-concepts are conceptually based. In particular, children’s self-concepts are not based directly on actual skills, which confirmed meta-analysis by Hattie (1992, 2002). Second, the correlational evidence in Study 1 and Study 2 suggested a personal and a social basis of self-concepts of literacy and numeracy. In particular, the results supported the common foundations of self-concepts in terms of identities (individuality and belonging) in comparative contexts. These identities and particular self-categorizations were used here as a demonstration to support the general proposal. In this situation, children’s thinking about the stability of skills over time was meaningful to literacy and numeracy self-concepts. In addition, children’s thinking of oneself and others by age was meaningful to self-concepts about literacy and numeracy. Clearly, other identities and salient comparative contexts may also be relevant to particular subgroups of children and in other situations. These may include children thinking about varying skills over time, among content and other personal features, within and between gender and other social self-categorizations.

Experimental evidence in Study 3 also supported the personal and social hypothesis. In particular, self-concepts about literacy and numeracy were responsive to both personally and social-tailored information in self-categorization protocols. Findings therefore confirm that self-evaluations express the children’s personal and social reality. In brief, the correlational and experimental evidence provided ample support for the proposed theory of personal and social self-concepts.

Limitations and strengths of the design

Features of the design may limit or strengthen implications of the findings for research and practice in similar contexts. The main consideration is that samples included girls and boys with diverse skills and self-concepts, in satisfactory samples. The pilot study was necessarily small for such close attention to each child, the sample size in Study 2 was adequate to identify comparative contexts, and sample sizes were more than sufficient for the purposes in Study 1 and Study 3. As a guide, an estimate of 80 % power is based on the standard criteria for correlations (N > 67 with r > 0.30, p < 0. 05) and experimental evidence (N > 64 with effect size 0.40, p < 0. 05).

The second point is about indicators of self-concepts, identitites, and comparative items that were administered by trained researchers. One of the main limitations in the design is that particular personal and social comparative contexts were explored and implemented in the experiment. Ideally, larger samples and replications of the proposed personal and social models would allow simple and complex combinations of these materials. Yet the initial findings here suggest the materials may be readily applied to others in similar contexts including younger children (e.g., Bornholt 2005a, b). Overall, findings rely on materials that are brief, meaningful, and useful, with appropriate procedures for children in clinical, community, and other settings.

The third point concerns well-known roles of socioeconomic indicators in education. It is clear that resources available to communities may alter achievement at school levels rather than for individuals (Bornholt et al. 2004). To date, research suggests few effects of socioeconomic indicators on self-concepts about activities. For instance, responses of children to ASK-KIDS and adolescents to ASK-Q inventories about common activities, such as reading, making friends and movement (β range from -0.15 to 0.14 ns for SEIFA 869 to 1,271, Bornholt 2005a; Bornholt et al. 2009), suggest that we may extend similar projects across socioeconomic contexts.

In brief, the main strengths of the project are correlational and experimental evidence with individually tailored interventions in self-categorization protocols and materials appropriate for children. These features of the design suggest that we may readily draw inferences from the findings.

Interpretations of personal and social meanings

Results highlight the complex personal and social processes as foundations of children’s self-concepts. The results support the idea that the meanings of self-concepts rely on personal and social identities in comparative contexts to explain children’s thinking of oneself and everyday activities of literacy and numeracy. The common threads for literacy and numeracy suggest that similar foundations with variations across situations may also apply to other activities.

The main contributions to theory and research concerns flexible self-evaluations that balance optimal positions on a continuum, from classic personality approaches to self-evaluations more open or responsive to experience (Fisher et al. 2013). The approach developed here goes some way toward explaining the flexibility of children’s personal and social realities as self-concepts about everyday activities of literacy and numeracy. Similar approaches are clearly relevant to our understanding of complex self-stereotyping for adults and also for children about group identities. According to Bennett and Sani (2008, p.71), “the findings make plain that even among young children, self-conception is not invariant but contextually variable.” It is therefore vital that such approaches draw on and extend earlier work on group or social identities by Tajfel (1982) and others within broader self-categorization and related theories.

The findings provide a sound framework for a general personal and social theory of self-concepts. Further research would be worthwhile on other everyday activities with children, and adolescents and adults, to cover an array of identities in varied personal and social contexts. For this project, the correlational and experimental findings are meaningful and also practical in understanding children’s personal and social realities.

The framework is also useful in reviewing earlier studies on particular identities and specific comparative contexts, to demonstrate subtle shifts in children’s thinking. For instance, an earlier study showed a strong personal basis and moderate social basis of children’s concepts about drawing (Bornholt and Ingram 2001). In the present study, personal meanings of stability over time and social meanings by age were relevant to children’s self-concepts of literacy and numeracy. It builds on earlier work using self-categorization protocols to consider what thinking about various content means to children with reading difficulties (Coleman and Bornholt 2003) and adds to substantial work on the small yet consistent effects of self-stereotyping about gender in context (e.g., Bennett and Sani 2008; Eccles et al. 1993; Bornholt and Cooney 1993; Bornholt 2000a). Such diversity is also evident in projects in related fields about health behaviors to suggest ways to motivate children to participate in exercise (Bornholt and Piccolo 2005). Specifically, personal and social realities included a sense of individuality that may limit self-concepts about movement, and a sense of belonging socially that supported self-concepts for older children. It is clear that such complex personal and social processes make meanings from children’s experiences. It would therefore seem worthwhile expanding the framework of identities and comparative contexts to generate projects about other vital everyday activities.

Conclusion

The overall conclusion is that identities in relevant comparative contexts define a personal and social theory of children’s self-concepts. Findings therefore extend general social-developmental research to highlight the flexibility and balance within self-categorizations for individuals. The ideas fit well with substantial research on group identities and self-stereotyping; to reject ideas of fixed reflections of skills and go beyond explicit personal and social comparisons (e.g., Bergh et al. 2012; Turner 1987; Skaalvik and Rankin 1995; Bornholt 2000b). It is readily apparent that skills and self-concepts develop independently and that we may usefully consider the validity of self-concepts in relation to intentions and choice behaviors. And so it seems reasonable to conclude that children’s self-concepts may be explained in terms of the proposed personal and social realities.

Findings highlight the personal and social foundations of children’s self-concepts in ongoing work on children’s participation in activities that promote health, learning, and well-being. These models explore the foundations of the self-concepts that motivate and justify participation within MSM about everyday activities (e.g., Bornholt 2005a, b, c; Bornholt and Piccolo 2005; Fisher 2013a). It remains for others to apply these ideas to research and professional practice with children in diverse settings. Ideally, applications would make effective use of these ideas in screening, intervention, and prevention program with carefully tailored interventions based on each child’s personal and social realities.