Post by Cynicus Rex on Aug 1, 2019 6:13:04 GMT
To my understanding the growth mindset could be false.
learningspy.co.uk/psychology/growth-mindset-bollocks/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_Dweck#Criticism
Found the pdf here: saraslistofedresources.com/2019/07/28/changing-mindsets-effectiveness-trial-evaluation-report-foliano-rolfe-buzzeo-runge-wilkinson/
So, my initial reaction was that I felt bamboozled.
However, upon continuing reading the study:
I don't know, given their limitations, I think it's fair to say further research is needed to firmly discredit the validity of the growth mindset.
In July 2019, a large randomized controlled trial of growth mindset training by the Education Endowment Foundation involving 101 schools and 5018 pupils across England found that pupils in schools receiving the intervention showed no additional progress in literacy or numeracy relative to pupils in the control group, as measured by the national Key Stage 2 tests in reading, grammar, punctuation, and spelling (GPS), and maths. —Folioano, Francesca; Rolfe, Heather; Buzzeo, Jonathan; Runge, Johnny; Wilkinson, David (July 2019), Changing Mindsets: Effectiveness trial
The study: educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Projects/Evaluation_Reports/Changing_Mindsets.pdf
The study: educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Projects/Evaluation_Reports/Changing_Mindsets.pdf
learningspy.co.uk/psychology/growth-mindset-bollocks/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_Dweck#Criticism
Found the pdf here: saraslistofedresources.com/2019/07/28/changing-mindsets-effectiveness-trial-evaluation-report-foliano-rolfe-buzzeo-runge-wilkinson/
So, my initial reaction was that I felt bamboozled.
However, upon continuing reading the study:
In theory, there are three possible reasons why the intervention’s measured impact was not statistically significant:
• the programme was not delivered as intended, or was too short, so that pupils did not take on its messages and change their attitudes, behaviours, and, consequently, their performance;
• control schools were also using growth mindset approaches, and the treatment schools had already been using it to some extent; and
• the pupils were too young and that older children are much better able to use growth mindsets to improve their performance, particularly as reflected in tests.
• the programme was not delivered as intended, or was too short, so that pupils did not take on its messages and change their attitudes, behaviours, and, consequently, their performance;
• control schools were also using growth mindset approaches, and the treatment schools had already been using it to some extent; and
• the pupils were too young and that older children are much better able to use growth mindsets to improve their performance, particularly as reflected in tests.
This is the second EEF project on growth mindset; neither of the evaluations found an impact on pupil attainment overall. However, both were relatively short term interventions and pupil attainment was measured within a relatively short period following the end of the programme. It is possible that a more prolonged and in-depth intervention, with regular reinforcement, may yield stronger impacts in the longer term. At the same time, growth mindset is now a well-known theory which is likely to have been adopted by many schools and teachers, so that establishing a counterfactual is likely to be difficult. Before further growth mindset projects are commissioned, it would be advisable to carry out a survey of schools to establish the extent to which it is used either by teachers or in whole-school approaches.
I don't know, given their limitations, I think it's fair to say further research is needed to firmly discredit the validity of the growth mindset.