Teacher Mindsets Help Explain Where a Growth-Mindset Intervention Does and Doesn’t Work

A growth-mindset intervention teaches the belief that intellectual abilities can be developed. Where does the intervention work best? Prior research examined school-level moderators using data from the National Study of Learning Mindsets (NSLM), which delivered a short growth-mindset intervention during the first year of high school. In the present research, we used data from the NSLM to examine moderation by teachers’ mindsets and answer a new question: Can students independently implement their growth mindsets in virtually any classroom culture, or must students’ growth mindsets be supported by their teacher’s own growth mindsets (i.e., the mindset-plus-supportive-context hypothesis)? The present analysis (9,167 student records matched with 223 math teachers) supported the latter hypothesis. This result stood up to potentially confounding teacher factors and to a conservative Bayesian analysis. Thus, sustaining growth-mindset effects may require contextual supports that allow the proffered beliefs to take root and flourish.

Children’s Gender Stereotypes in STEM Following a One-Shot Growth Mindset Intervention in a Science Museum

Women are drastically underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and this underrepresentation has been linked to gender stereotypes and ability related beliefs. One way to remedy this may be to challenge male bias gender stereotypes around STEM by cultivating equitable beliefs that both female and male can excel in STEM. The present study implemented a growth mindset intervention to promote children’s incremental ability beliefs and investigate the relation between the intervention and children’s gender stereotypes in an informal science learning site. Participants (n = 143, female n = 77, male n = 66, 5–12-years-old, Mage = 8.6, SD = 1.7) were visitors to a science museum who took part in an interactive space science show. Participants who were exposed to a growth mindset intervention, compared to the participants in the control condition, reported significantly less gender stereotyping around STEM by reporting equitably in the stereotype awareness measure. Relatedly, participants in the control condition reported male bias gender stereotype in the stereotype awareness measure. Further, children between 5 and 8-years-old reported greater male bias stereotypes awareness and stereotype flexibility in space science compared to children between 9 and 12-years-old. Lastly, children demonstrated in-group bias in STEM ability. Male participants reported gender bias favoring males’ ability in stereotype flexibility and awareness measures, while female participants reported bias toward females’ ability in stereotype flexibility and awareness measures. These findings document the importance of a growth mindset intervention in buffering against STEM gender stereotyping amongst children, as well as the significant role a growth mindset intervention can play within an informal science learning site.

The Effect of a Computerized Growth-Mindset Intervention on Teaching Students’ Mindset and Cognitive Stress Appraisal

The present study assessed the impact of a one-time computerized mindset intervention on teaching students’ cognitive stress appraisal before an upcoming exam. Previous research highlights the long-term effectiveness of growth-mindset interventions. Based on theoretical assumptions derived from the transactional stress theory as well as recent empirical evidence on intelligence mindset and stress, we proposed that changing students’ mindset would also impact their cognitive stress appraisal. In order to test this hypothesis, a sample of teaching students received a one-time computerized growth-mindset intervention aiming to foster viewing abilities as incremental. We found a significant as well as relatively lasting impact on participants’ mindset but no significant effect on participants’ stress appraisal. Nevertheless, an exploratory mediation analysis revealed that the intervention’s effect on participants’ appraisal of their coping ability (as part of the cognitive stress appraisal) was fully mediated by participants’ mindset. The results highlight the effectiveness of the utilized intervention and provide first practical insights into how a person’s mindset and their stress appraisal relate.