This paper examines theories of the self as they relate to intelligence and the learning process. Drawing on Carol Dweck's entity and incremental theories of intelligence, the paper analyzes how individuals perceive their own cognitive capacities and how those perceptions shape educational behavior. It then explores three major motivation theories — self-efficacy, self-worth, and self-determination — identifying both their shared emphasis on perceived competence and their points of divergence. Together, these frameworks illuminate how the self is not a fixed entity but a continuously developing construct shaped by effort, strategy, and social connection.
The paper demonstrates effective synthesis of multiple theoretical frameworks. Rather than treating each theory in isolation, the writer draws explicit connections — for example, linking entity theory's external motivation to learned helplessness, and connecting all three motivation theories through the shared concept of competence. This integrative approach shows how disparate theories can reinforce a single overarching argument.
The paper opens with a philosophical framing of the self, supported by a quote from Burkitt. It then introduces Dweck's two intelligence theories and their educational consequences. The middle section covers the three motivation theories in two passes: first their shared features, then their differences. A brief conclusion synthesizes the full argument. The structure follows a classic academic pattern — establish context, present evidence, analyze, conclude.
Human beings have always been consumed by a drive to define themselves in relation to some criteria. In the course of establishing who they are, individuals most frequently make use of some type of social activity for the purpose of unveiling and expressing the self. People employ certain jobs, hobbies, arts, sporting activities, and forms of education as continuous expressions of who they are. Thus, the search for self is dependent on action, and it is through various activities — and the talents and capacities developed through them — that people reveal who they are.
This essentially dynamic mechanism suggests that "the self may not be pre-given: it is not something hidden that we have to find, but something that has to be made" (Burkitt, 2008). Based on this statement, it can be concluded that throughout his lifetime, an individual constantly defines and redefines, creates and recreates his self, which makes life a continuous learning process conditioned by intelligence. The present paper analyzes theories of self in society, with special emphasis on intelligence theories and those that are insightful of the learning process.
Carol Dweck was the first to identify two particular theories of intelligence derived from the process of learning: entity theory and incremental theory. Even though these theories of intelligence are opposites of each other and remain relatively stable for a person over time, they possess the quality of being interchangeable for the same individual throughout his lifetime. In terms of proportions, it is alleged that nearly "40% of adults and children endorse an entity theory of intelligence, about 40% endorse an incremental theory, and about 20% are undecided" (Dweck & Master, 2008).
Entity theorists are those individuals who perceive intelligence as having a certain static value — an unchangeable, fixed internal instrument that cannot be outwardly influenced over time. This outlook, when applied to the educational process, has been found to cause learners to have a high desire to prove themselves to others, through behavior patterns designed for appearing smart and avoiding the appearance of unintelligence. Another risk that comes with this approach is susceptibility to learned helplessness, meaning that students may feel circumstances are outside of their control and easily give up when faced with challenges. Apart from that, they may even undertake extremely difficult tasks that would ensure failure, and thus justify it.
The entity theory stipulates that success or failure in an endeavor is automatically correlated to what is perceived to be an innate level of intelligence, rather than personal effort. This may lead individuals to believe that failure stems from a natural limitation of their intellectual capacities. Interestingly, Dweck claims that people with a long history of success may be predisposed to learned helplessness because they may equate their continuous success with an intrinsically high level of intelligence (Self-theories, n.d.).
By contrast, the incremental theory involves perceiving intelligence as akin to a muscle that can be exercised through effort and thus improved. Unlike entity theorists, incremental theorists maintain that the amount of effort put into the learning process and into strategy development undoubtedly increases one's level of intelligence (Self-theories, n.d.). In this case, individuals shift their attention from what the outcome could potentially say about them to what they can actually gain from tackling the challenge. Therefore, these students take every opportunity to master obstacles and immediately invest much effort into evaluating and selecting the best strategies for approaching the task. Considering the two theories related to intelligence in the learning process, it is clear that the first is correlated with external motivation and is decisively negative, whereas the latter is significantly more desirable and attached to internal motivation.
Motivation, as a vital component of the learning process, is supported by three major theories: self-efficacy, self-worth, and self-determination, all of which are grounded in the concept of competence as a force that shapes the self. Self-efficacy can be defined as an individual's expectation that he is capable of successfully performing an activity. According to the self-worth theory, individuals need a constant positive appraisal of their own value as persons, and the way to protect self-worth is by maintaining the belief that one is competent. Finally, the self-determination theory asserts that human beings possess universal, inherent needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
What transpires from all three theories is the fact that human beings need to envision themselves as competent, which entirely justifies an inherent desire to explore and attempt mastery of certain skills. At the very root of self-efficacy is the personal belief that one has the knowledge or skills to succeed in a given activity, whereas self-worth is grounded in the basic need to defend an individual's perception of competence. Lastly, the need to feel competent is central to the motivational striving for self-determination. Notably, students with a high level of self-efficacy are more likely to "engage in self-regulatory processes such as goal setting, self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and effective strategy use" (Dweck & Master, 2008).
It can be asserted that autonomy, competence, and relatedness, along with the necessity to protect self-worth, are generally valid human characteristics, insomuch as they are valuable factors in forming and expressing the self in a continuous learning process. The three motivation theories, taken together with the two main intelligence theories, exist for the purpose of optimizing education, so that it becomes a process whereby an individual can actively unfold his entire potential.
You’re 74% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.