Saturday, May 19, 2018

Growth Mindset Literature Review January 2017 (Post Grad Study )

Context


Growth mindset is becoming an acceptable professional development focus within New Zealand Schools.
There are numerous ways of going about this from using a  mindset works facilitator to opting for integrating the
growth mindset focus into teaching as inquiry (Flannery, 2016). Growth Mindset is a popularised term for an
incremental theory of intelligence. Incremental theory is derived from implicit theories of intelligence. Implicit
theories of intelligence are focused on how people perceive intelligence (Donohoe, Topping, & Hannah, 2012).
 Implicit theory of intelligence has been researched and developed by Carol Dweck (2006), over the past three
decades. Implicit theories of intelligence offer two lenses through which to view two opposing perspectives of
intelligence. The theory of malleable or incremental intelligence,also known as growth mindset, is the belief that
you can always improve your intelligence. The opposing perspective is the belief that you are born with a certain
fixed amount of intelligence, an entity theory of intelligence, also known as fixed mindset. It is important to note
that these opposing perspectives need to be viewed as opposite poles of a continuum where your beliefs can
vary depending on the context, e.g. swimming, reading, maths, Kapa Haka and environment.
(Yeager, & Walton, 2011; Dockterman, & Backwell, 2014; Dweck, 2006).


Purpose


The purpose of this literature review is to investigate the literature around growth mindset to determine if it is
worthy as a professional development focus to promote increased engagement, motivation and self efficacy of
students. This review investigates the question; How might growth mindsets impact on student engagement
motivation and self efficacy? This review looks at the impact of teachers on student mindsets, engagement,
motivation, and self efficacy. And the impact of students mindsets on engagement, motivation and self efficacy,
in all aspects of learning?


Teacher’s impact on student mindsets and consequent engagement and motivation


Praise
Research by Mueller, & Dweck, (1998), found children praised for effort, the strategies, and the positive behaviours
they engaged in while working on a task were less likely to attribute failure to ability, and to continue to show
enjoyment of the task. They found children praised for ‘effort’ also achieved greater accuracy after failure and had
a high preference for learning goals, focussed on growing their competence.  Praise for ability appeared to have a
detrimental effect on motivation by influencing children’s goal orientation. Children praised for ability e.g.
“you are clever at maths”, were more likely to attribute failure to a lack of ability and consequently have
decreased enjoyment for the task, especially a challenging task. Children praised for ability also showed a
preference for easy tasks, and performance goals, focused on demonstrating their ability.


Caution needs to be applied when transferring these findings to the classroom as using effort praise in a manner
that implies it is a fixed trait “e.g. You must be a hard worker,” may also have hidden negative effects. All of this
research was carried out by trained researchers and they interacted with each child one on one which is not the
dynamic of a typical primary classroom (Mueller,, & Dweck, 1998).  


Teacher Instructional practices and pedagodgy
Rattan, Good, & Dweck, (2012)  found teachers holding an incremental theory used strategies that engaged
students and focussed on improving students learning. Teacher feedback tended to be strategy orientated which
increased student engagement. Teachers holding an entity theory of math intelligence  were significantly more
likely to attribute a poor test result to low ability and to use pedagogical practices like giving easier work. They
also gave more consolation feedback to low achieving students e.g. Not everyone can be good in all subjects.
Both of these actions resulted in a decreased motivation and engagement with maths. Through these actions
teachers communicated an entity perception of intelligence to the student and lead students to lower their
expectations for future achievement. A disturbing finding was teachers expectations for students future
achievement can be formed at the beginning of the year after the first test score!  Study 1 and 2 of this research
was conducted by asking undergraduates to imagine they were teachers giving feedback to a student who had a
low test score. Due to the imaginary scenario the results may not be valid. The research did not elaborate on
consoling feedback or on the teaching strategies that could reduce engagement in math.


Park, Gunderson, Tsukauama, Levine, & Beilcock, (2016) found 6 and 7 year olds,were already holding beliefs
about intelligence and showing preferences for easy or challenging tasks. These preferences were linked to their
math achievement over the year. They found the instructional practices used by the teacher influenced the
students preference for easy verses challenging work. Using mastery based teaching practices, may promote
the development of incremental theories of intelligence and incremental framework of motivation,
(preference for challenge and deep learning). This research relied on teachers self reporting their instructional
practices and could be improved by adding teacher observations, also the students opted in so sample
may be biased. They found that the teacher's theory of intelligence did not influence the students it was
the teachers instructional practices.  


Donohoe et al., (2012) studied the impact of the Brainology programme on a small group of students.  
After the programme five of the members had shifted to a growth mindset. However they followed up three
months later and found the intervention group had shifted back towards their post intervention mindset.
However, Schmidt, Shumow & Kackar-Cam, (2015) followed two teachers implementing the Brainology
programme with their classes and followed up post intervention several months later. They found the teacher’s
daily practices appeared to influence the durability of the growth mindset message. The teacher whose students
maintained the growth mindset orientation linked the growth mindset message to learning, used mastery goals,
taught for deep understanding and conceptual development and taught learning strategies. This teacher also
linked the growth mindset intervention to her appraisal. As this was a small sample size, only 2 teachers, further
research is needed to confirm the above possible contributing factors and to generalise these findings.


Emerging issues; The possibility that teachers can view early success or failure as an indication of future
achievement and respond to a low score with low expectations. What teachers say and do can affect students
self beliefs and teacher held beliefs about intelligence, weather a student can learn or not, influences how teachers
respond, consequently limiting or extending the opportunities for learning (Yeager & Dweck, 2012: Rattan et al.,  
2011). Teachers need to be aware of the students motivations and feelings of self efficacy. The importance of
relationships and knowing the learner in a holistic sense is highlighted. (Park et al., 2016; Deakin-Crick, &
Goldspink, 2014). Growth mindset is developed when students engage in challenging tasks, therefore we need
to ensure we are providing challenging tasks for all students even high achievers as research has shown many
high achieving students suffer setbacks, especially those with a fixed mind set when they encounter a challenge
for the first time.


             
Student mindsets and their impact on engagement and motivation


Engagement and Motivation
Students theories of intelligence influence their responses to challenge, even when they show equal ability.
Research by, Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck (2007) followed students for 2 years and showed students with
an incremental theory of intelligence had higher achievement at the end of each year. They identified a relationship
between holding an incremental theory of intelligence and greater perseverance and engagement.
This research highlighted interventions  teaching students intelligence is malleable have the greatest impact
on students who hold an entity theory. Teacher reports indicated students in the growth mindset intervention
group showed greater engagement and effort in class.  However this research has small effect sizes and also
taught study skills and anti stereotypic thinking. More data may have been gained by seeking parents input.


Deakin-Crick et al., (2014) found self theories shape engagement and consequently influence learning outcomes.
Holding a fixed mindset predicted low engagement. Dweck, & Leggett, (1988),  found growth mindset holders to
be more motivated than entity theorists, because growth mindset holders focussed on learning and were able to
learn from mistakes. They , developing adaptive strategies that enabled them to overcome challenges . This
adaptive response to errors is supported by Moser, Schroder, Heeter, Moran, & Lee, (2011) measured the brain's
response to errors and found differences in how the brain responded depending on the person's implicit theory of
intelligence. Adults holding a growth mindset paid greater attention to self monitoring and correcting errors.
Further research needs to be done to ascertain if applying a growth mindset intervention to a person with a fixed
mindset can visibly alter the brain function and to generalise these results to different age groups.


Students holding a fixed mindset may think, I’m just not good at…, when they encounter a challenging task.
They see having to apply effort or failing, as implying they are not intelligent and this can lead to disengagement
(Dockterman, & Blackwell, 2013; Donohoe, et al., 2012).  Haimovitz, Wormington, & Corpus (2011), found children
holding an entity theory of intelligence, experienced a significant decline in intrinsic motivation over a school year
and a consequent decline in grades. This study used students actual grades However, this research focussed on
ability validation goals rather than performance or mastery goals of previous research (Dweck, & Leggett, 1988),
and only had a small sample size. It did highlight the need for further research to explain the relationship between
theories of intelligence and the different goal types.   


Self efficacy


Research by Blackwell et al,. (2007), found incremental theorists showed higher self efficacy than entity theorists
who were prone to low engagement and helplessness.  Diseth, Meland, & Breidablik, (2014), found an entity
theory of intelligence did not appear to affect self efficacy negatively, but it did affect achievement.
This was not a longitudinal study. Self reported achievement grades, were used. There is debate regarding the
validity of self reporting as a tendency has been identified for low achieving students to inflate their grades,
(Dweck 2006, Cole & Gonyea, 2010).  Further, this research highlighted the paradox of girls having lower self
efficacy than boys even though girls academically outperformed performed boys. This may be attributed to
reference bias. Most of the implicit theories of intelligence research has relied on self report surveys to measure
the students beliefs and attitudes. Using self report measures are prone to reference bias and consequently
could result in misleading data. However,  reference bias may be less of an issue with measuring implicit theories
of intelligence as this is an internal belief (Moulden, & Dweck, 2006; West, Kraft, Finn,, Martin,
Duckworth,Gabrieli. C, and Gabrieli. J, 2016).


Growth mindset research shows the link between an individual's implicit theory of intelligence and their preference
for learning or performance goals (Mueller & Dweck 1998). Fixed mindset individuals want to look smart.
They prefer, performance goals that prove their intelligence.  They are less likely to seek our challenges and use
feedback from mistakes. (Dweck & Leggett 1988). Learning goal orientations are more prevalent amongst
individuals holding a growth mindset. Learning goals emphasise a mastery response, you are on a learning
journey, mistakes or failure are learning experiences, consequently these individuals seek out challenges with the
intention of stretching and growing.They are prepared to apply effort with an emphasis on improving their abilities.
(Elish-Piper, 2010; Dweck 2006; & Deakin- Crick, & Goldspink 2014).  


New Zealand research has shown Maori students are more performance orientated and more likely to attribute
success at school to inherent ability, than European students. Maori students also felt current expectations were
too high.  (Rubie-Davies, Peterson, Garrett, Watson, Flint, O’Neill, & McDonald, 2012). This research highlighted
the need for further investigation and possibility of adapting growth mindset to individual or group differences.


Growth in ability comes about by engaging and persisting with challenging tasks. A growth mindset influences how
you engage and interact with learning opportunities. (Dweck, 2014). Further research is needed to determine the
relationship between self efficacy and implicit theories of intelligence (Diseth et al., 2014).


An emerging issue is the social implication of changing mindset and embracing hard work as it can lead to
being stereotyped as a “geek” (Donohoe, et, al 2012).

Maori
Mindsets have been identified as interventions to lift achievement. Their effect has been particularly beneficial for
underachieving students. Often these underachieving students are from a  minority culture (Aronson et al., 2009;
Good, Aronson, & Inzlicht: 2003). As Maori students are underperforming in our education system a link can be
made to the concept of stereotype threat which is defined as a “fear among members of a group of reinforcing
negative stereotypes about intellectual achievement.”  (Aronson et al., 2009, p. 2). Research in America using
implicit theory of intelligence interventions have achieved positive outcomes, increasing student motivation and
achievement. Good et al., (2003), make a clear link between stereotype threat and fixed beliefs about intelligence.
They make a strong case that students achievement improved after the stereotype threat and after the
incremental theory of intelligence intervention. But combining the 2 interventions in one package did not
increase the achievement outcomes. Therefore, they argue, both interventions enabled students to attribute their
difficulties more accurately to the real causes of their underachievement.  They highlighted the need to be wary
of making judgments about a student's ability from standardized tests.
Ruby-Davis et, al (2012) found Maori students were more inclined to hold entity views of intelligence and that
teachers held lower expectations of achievement for Maori in reading and math.  An element of stereotype threat
may be at play in our education system. This is supported by the concept of ‘deficit theorising’ by teachers in
Te Kotahitanga.


The Effective Teaching Profile promotes the development of a growth mindset in teachers and consequently
akonga, to foster effective relationships, a sense of belonging, and effective pedagogy focussed on raising maori
achievement.


Conclusion


The evidence strongly supports teaching students that the brain is like a muscle and can grow with exercise.
This can alter how students think and feel in school, and consequently lead to increased self efficacy, engagement
and motivation towards improving their capabilities. (Dweck and Leggett 1988, Yeager & Walton, 2011).  Although
Growth Mindset interventions have a powerful impact on student self beliefs and motivation they do not work
in isolation from other factors (Park et al 2016; Yager & Walton 2011). Teachers practices can affect students,
opportunities for learning and their self beliefs. Students still need to have high quality and engaging learning
and teaching experiences.  (Aronson, et, al 2009; Flannery., 2016). Professional development of growth mindset
needs to begin by focusing teachers on scrutinising their beliefs and expectations of students to ensure their
practices are focussed on growing capabilities rather than limiting opportunities. (Rubie-Davies, Hattie & Hamilton
2006: Blackwell et al., 2007).


An emerging issue is the need to develop improved ways to measure non-cognitive skills.
Deakin et,al (2014) highlight the paramount importance of relationships in responding effectively to each learner's
sense of self, their thoughts, beliefs and ideas. They see relationships as being pivotal to achieving growth
mindset and enhanced, engagement, self efficacy and self beliefs. This is also reflected in te Kotahitanga as
it points the way towards a holistic view of the learner. Bishop, Berryman, Cavanagh & Teddy 2009: &,
Ruby-Davis, et al. , 2012, also emphasise the importance of further research to explore the ‘interrelationships of
psychosocial variables and their relationship to achievement.


Further research needs to be undertaken within New Zealand to inform and guide educators at all levels about
the effectiveness of implementing theories of intelligence interventions as school wide, professional development
focus to enhance outcomes for all akonga. Especially within primary schools and for Maori students.  

References



Aronson, J., Cohen, G., & McColskey, W. (2009). Reducing Stereotype Threat in Classrooms:
A Review of Social-Psychological Intervention Studies on Improving the Achievement of Black Students.
Issues & Answers. REL 2009-076. Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast.


Bishop, R. , Berryman, M., Wearmouth, J. ,  Peter, M. , & Clapham. S., (2011) Te Kotahitanga:
A SUMMARY Of maintaining, replicating and sustaining change in Phase 3 and 4 schools.
Faculty of Education, University of Waikato. Ministry of Education.


Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007).
Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition:
A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child development, 78(1), 246-263.doi0009-3920/2007/7801-0014


Cole, J. S., & Gonyea, R. M. (2010). Accuracy of self-reported SAT and ACT test scores
: Implications for research. Research in Higher Education, 51(4), 305-319.  DOI 10.1007/s11162-009-9160-9


Deakin Crick, R. & Goldspink, C. , "Learner dispositions, self-theories and student engagement."
British Journal of Educational Studies 62.1 (2014): 19-35. DOI 10.1080/00071005.2015.1006574


Diseth, Å., Meland, E., & Breidablik, H. J. (2014). Self-beliefs among students:
Grade level and gender differences in self-esteem, self-efficacy and implicit theories of intelligence
. Learning and Individual Differences, 35, 1-8. doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.06.003


Dockterman, D. & Blackwell, L (2013, July 1). Growth Mindset in Context Content and Culture Matter Too.
Retrieved from http://www.leadered.com/pdf/GrowthMindset.pdf


Donohoe, C., Topping, K., & Hannah, E. (2012). The impact of an online intervention (Brainology)
on the mindset and resiliency of secondary school pupils: a preliminary mixed methods study.
Educational Psychology, 32(5), 641-655. doi:10.1080/01443410.2012.675646


Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.


Dweck C. (2014, Dec 17). The power of believing that you can improve. [Video File]. Retrieved from


Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality.
Psychological review, 95(2), 256- 273.


Elish-Piper, L., (2014). Parent involvement in Reading. Illinois reading
Council Journal. Vol. 42,No4 pgs 59-63, Fall 2014


Flannery., M. (2016, July).   Sabbatical report, Growth mindset and it’s impact on learning and school culture    
Retrieved from: http://www.educationalleaders.govt.nz/Leadership-development/SSMs-sabbatical-reports/
SSM-award-recipients-2016/Flannery-Maree


Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents' standardized test performance:
An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24(6),
645-662.doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2003.09.002


Haimovitz, K., Wormington, S. V., & Corpus, J. H. (2011). Dangerous mindsets:
How beliefs about intelligence predict motivational change. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(6), 747-752.
doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.09.002.


Moser, J. S., Schroder, H. S., Heeter, C., Moran, T. P., & Lee, Y. H. (2011).
Mind Your Errors Evidence for a Neural Mechanism Linking Growth Mind-Set to Adaptive Posterror Adjustments.
Psychological Science, 0956797611419520. DOI:10.1177/0956797611419520


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.  0022-341498/53.00


Park, D., Gunderson, E. A., Tsukayama, E., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2016).
Young children’s motivational frameworks and math achievement: Relation to teacher-reported instructional
practices, but not teacher theory of intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology,
108(3), 300.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000064


Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). “It's ok—Not everyone can be good at math”:
Instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 731-737.doi:1016/j.jesp.2011.12.012


Rubie-Davies, C., Peterson, E., Garrett, L., Watson, P., Flint, A., O’Neill, H., & Mc Donald, L. (2012).
Ethnicity as a factor in student beliefs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences
, 69, 262-270.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.408


Rubie-Davies, C., Peterson, E., Garrett, L., Watson, P., Flint, A., O’Neill, H., & Mc Donald, L. (2012).
Ethnicity and teacher expectations in New Zealand.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 256-261262-270.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.407


Schmidt, J. A., Shumow, L., & Kackar-Cam, H. (2015).
Exploring teacher effects for mindset intervention outcomes in seventh-grade science classes.
Middle Grades Research Journal, 10(2), 17. ISSN 1937-0814


West, M. R., Kraft, M. A., Finn, A. S., Martin, R. E., Duckworth, A. L., Gabrieli, C. F., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2015).
Promise and Paradox Measuring Students’ Non-Cognitive Skills and the Impact of Schooling.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 0162373715597298.

Yeager, D. S., & Walton, G. M. (2011). Social-psychological interventions in education They’re not magic.
Review of educational Research,
81(2), 267-301.

No comments:

Post a Comment