School underachievement is a persistent problem in the United States. Direct-to-student, computer-delivered growth-mindset interventions have shown promise as a way to improve achievement for students at risk of failing in school; however, these interventions benefit only students who happen to be in classrooms that support growth-mindset beliefs. Here, we tested a teacher-delivered growth-mindset intervention for U.S. adolescents in Grades 6 and 7 that was designed to both impart growth-mindset beliefs and create a supportive classroom environment where those beliefs could flourish (N = 1,996 students, N = 50 teachers). The intervention improved the grades of struggling students in the target class by 0.27 standard deviations, or 2.81 grade percentage points. The effects were largest for students whose teachers endorsed fixed mindsets before the intervention. This large-scale, randomized controlled trial demonstrates that growth-mindset interventions can produce gains when delivered by teachers.
AmrheinV.GreenlandS. (2018). Remove, rather than redefine, statistical significance. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0224-0
2.
AutorD. H. (2014). Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the “other 99 percent.” Science, 344(6186), 843–851.
3.
BarberB. K.OlsenJ. A. (2004). Assessing the transitions to middle and high school. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19(1), 3–30.
4.
BlackwellL. S.TrzesniewskiK. H.DweckC. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263.
5.
BowersA. J. (2010). Grades and graduation: A longitudinal risk perspective to identify student dropouts. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(3), 191–207.
6.
BrodaM.YunJ.SchneiderB.YeagerD. S.WaltonG. M.DiemerM. (2018). Reducing inequality in academic success for incoming college students: A randomized trial of growth mindset and belonging interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 11(3), 317–338.
7.
BürknerP. C. (2017). brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01
8.
CanningE. A.MuenksK.GreenD. J.MurphyM. C. (2019). STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes. Science Advances, 5(2), Article eaau4734. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4734
9.
CheungA. C.SlavinR. E. (2016). How methodological features affect effect sizes in education. Educational Researcher, 45(5), 283–292.
10.
DweckC. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Psychology Press.
11.
EcclesJ. S.WigfieldA.MidgleyC.ReumanD.IverD. M.FeldlauferH. (1993). Negative effects of traditional middle schools on students’ motivation. The Elementary School Journal, 93(5), 553–574.
12.
EndersC. K.TofighiD. (2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12(2), 121–138.
13.
EvansG. W.LiD.WhippleS. S. (2013). Cumulative risk and child development. Psychological Bulletin, 139(6), 1342–1396.
14.
FolianoF.RolfeH.BuzzeoJ.RungeJ.WilkinsonD. (2019). Changing mindsets: Effectiveness trial. National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
15.
GelmanA. (2006). Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models (comment on article by Browne and Draper). Bayesian Analysis, 1(3), 515–534.
16.
GelmanA.RobertC. P. (2014). Revised evidence for statistical standards. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 111(19), Article E1933. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1322995111
17.
HaimovitzK.DweckC. S. (2016). Parents’ views of failure predict children’s fixed and growth intelligence mind-sets. Psychological Science, 27(6), 859–869. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616639727
18.
HeyderA.WeidingerA. F.CimpianA.SteinmayrR. (2020). Teachers’ belief that math requires innate ability predicts lower intrinsic motivation among low-achieving students. Learning and Instruction, 65, Article 101220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101220
19.
KraftM. A. (2020). Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions. Educational Researcher, 49(4), 241–253.
20.
Lortie-ForguesH.InglisM. (2019). Rigorous large-scale educational RCTs are often uninformative: Should we be concerned?Educational Researcher, 48(3), 158–166.
21.
McFarlandJ.CuiJ.StarkP. (2018). Trends in high school dropout and completion rates in the United States: 2014 (Publication No. 2018117). National Center for Education Statistics.
22.
PattonG. C.SawyerS. M.SantelliJ. S.RossD. A.AfifiR.AllenN. B.AroraM.AzzopardiP.BaldwinW.BonellC.KakumaR.KennedyE.MahonJ.McGovernT.MokdadA. H.PatelV.PetroniS.ReavleyN.TaiwoK.. . . VinerR. M. (2016). Our future: A Lancet commission on adolescent health and wellbeing. The Lancet, 387(10036), 2423–2478.
23.
PauneskuD.WaltonG. M.RomeroC.SmithE. N.YeagerD. S.DweckC. S. (2015). Mind-set interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science, 26(6), 784–793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615571017
24.
PumaM. J.OlsenR. B.BellS. H.PriceC. (2009). What to do when data are missing in group randomized controlled trials (Publication No. 20090049). Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
25.
RaudenbushS. W.SpybrookJ.CongdonR.LiuX. F.MartinezA.BloomH.HillC. (2011). Optimal Design software for multi-level and longitudinal research (Version 3.01) [Computer software]. http://hlmsoft.net/od/
26.
RosenthalR.JacobsonL. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The Urban Review, 3(1), 16–20.
27.
SiskV. F.BurgoyneA. P.SunJ.ButlerJ. L.MacnamaraB. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two meta-analyses. Psychological Science, 29(4), 549–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617739704
28.
SnyderT. D.de BreyC.DillowS. A. (2019). Digest of education statistics 2017 (Publication No. 2018070). National Center for Education Statistics.
29.
Stan Development Team. (2021). Stan modeling language user’s guide and reference manual (Version 2.26). https://mc-stan.org
30.
SunK. L. (2018). Brief report: The role of mathematics teaching in fostering student growth mindset. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(3), 330–335.
31.
SunK. L. (2019). The mindset disconnect in mathematics teaching: A qualitative analysis of classroom instruction. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 56, Article 100706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.04.005
32.
van de SchootR.WinterS. D.RyanO.Zondervan-ZwijnenburgM.DepaoliS. (2017). A systematic review of Bayesian articles in psychology: The last 25 years. Psychological Methods, 22(2), 217–239.
33.
WagenmakersE.-J.MoreyR. D.LeeM. D. (2016). Bayesian benefits for the pragmatic researcher. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(3), 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416643289
34.
WaltonG. M.YeagerD. S. (2020). Seed and soil: Psychological affordances in contexts help to explain where wise interventions succeed or fail. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 219–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420904453
35.
What Works Clearinghouse. (2020). What Works Clearinghouse standards handbook (Version 4.1). Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
36.
YeagerD. S.CarrollJ. M.BuontempoJ.CimpianA.WoodyS.CrosnoeR.MullerC.MurrayJ.MhatreP.KerstingN.HullemanC.KudymM.MurphyM.DuckworthA. L.WaltonG. M.DweckC. S. (2022). Teacher mindsets help explain where a growth-mindset intervention does and doesn’t work. Psychological Science, 33(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211028984
37.
YeagerD. S.HanselmanP.WaltonG. M.MurrayJ. S.CrosnoeR.MullerC.TiptonE.SchneiderB.HullemanC. S.HinojosaC. P.PauneskuD.RomeroC.FlintK.RobertsA.TrottJ.IachanR.BuontempoJ.YangS. M.CarvalhoC. M.. . . DweckC. S. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573(7774), 364–369.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
