Few theories have gotten more teacherly attention than Carol Dweck’s work on Mindset.
As you no doubt know, she has found that a “fixed mindset” (the belief that ability and intelligence can’t really change) demotivates people. On the other hand, a “growth mindset” (the belief that the right kind of hard work enhances ability) promotes intrinsic motivation.
(We’ve posted about Mindset several times, including here and here.)
Because it’s so well known, Dweck’s theory is a popular target. You’ll often read that this or that study disproves her argument. For years now, this mindset controversy has raged on.
The Mindset Controversy: This Week’s Big News
Scholars at Case Western Reserve University looked at over 300 Mindset studies, and found…not much. By looking at all the relevant research, rather than just the well-known or successful studies, they got a comprehensive view.
That view showed only very modest effects.
Here’s lead author Brooke Macnamara (by the way, the word “significant” here means “statistically significant” not “deeply meaningful”):
“We found a significant but weak relationship between growth mindsets and academic achievement, and a significant, but small effect of growth mindset interventions on academic achievement.” (source)
Predictably, this meta-analysis has produced lots of strong responses.
Nick Soderstrom–a researcher whose work I admire–mused on Twitter that Mindset is “the new learning styles.” That is: a theory which lots of people believe, but which doesn’t have empirical support.
[Editor’s note, added 3/23/18: Dr. Soderstrom has responded to this post, and his comment includes this important point: “After seeing that you referenced one of my tweets, I feel compelled to mention that none of my tweets comparing growth mindset to learning styles have been assertive in nature. That is, I have never said that mindset IS the new learning styles. Indeed, such an assertion would be unfair and irresponsible at this point. Rather, I’ve simply asked the question and expressed my concern that it might be heading in that direction. I just don’t want your readers to assume that I’ve made up my mind on the utility of mindset interventions because I certainly haven’t. More evidence, or the lack thereof, is needed for that to happen.” My thanks for this clarification. You can see his full comment below.]
If, in fact, Mindset interventions just don’t do very much, should we stop?
Mindset Controversy: Don’t Give Up The Ship
I myself am still on board with mindset, and for several reasons.
First: other people have looked at large populations and found impressive effects.
For instance, this report found that for some groups of students, a growth mindset basically added an extra month’s worth of learning to school. Mind you, these authors looked at data for 125,000+ students to reach this conclusion.
Other thoughtful scholars and wise skeptics, have written sympathetically about Mindset. Here, for example, is recent article by John Hattie — not one to accept a theory simply because it’s popular.
Second: we should ask not simply “do Mindset interventions work?” but “do they work compared to something else?”
Mindset seeks to influence students’ motivation, and motivation is notoriously hard to influence. So, I’m not surprised it doesn’t produce dramatic changes. To get my attention in the world of motivation, even a small boost will do.
Third: Dweck is a famously careful scholar. When others criticize her work, she doesn’t ignore them; she doesn’t rant; she doesn’t change the subject. Instead, she accepts fair critiques and updates her thinking.
For example: many of Dweck’s early studies focused on the importance of hard work. You have to work hard to learn most anything, and students need to accept that.
Teachers and scholars offered a reasonable rejoinder. Some students do work hard and yet don’t learn, because they’re doing the wrong kind of work. We need a more precise phrase.
Accepting this criticism, Dweck now speaks of the right kind of hard work. She listened, and refined her theory appropriately.
Next Steps
A: I’ll be curious to hear what Dweck has to say once she’s digested this new information.
B: we should keep our eyes out for new theories of motivation that provide genuine assistance to teachers and students.
C: we should, of course, not overhype Mindset interventions. Until we get a better theory, however, we can call on these strategies at the right moments to help deepen our students’s motivation.
This is what ticks me off about academics. YOU NEVER DO ANYTHING. Mindset’s been around in yoga for about 15,000 years, written in Sanskrit 5,200 years ago. Humming mantras puts the positive or growth mindset into the resonators or cavities in the front of the face WHICH SURROUND THE PREFRONTAL CORTEX where the executive function and choices are made. Duh! And of course check with Herrigel in Zen Archery. I’ve had this exact conversation at Learning and the Brain with Dr. Posner. He was great. He spoke on meditation and I sheepishly said “Dr. Posner, we musicians and actors have known about this for at least 2,500 years.” He laughed and said “Yes, Barrie, AND WE SCIENTISTS ARE FINALLY CATCHING UP.”
Before Dr. Dweck wrote her book, world famous performers and teachers, from Maynard Ferguson to the astronauts to Carmine Caruso and Luciano Pavarotti, and today’s modern genius actors and musicians such as Jack Black speak openly about their Zen positive meditations.
So who do you trust? The lonely academic sitting at home playing with their apps, or we professionals who have spent a lifetime studying with the world’s greatest and using the three taxonomies of learning, especially focusing on the kinesthetic because of its ability to shift brain states and produce the cascade of positive growth mindset chemicals such as Dopamine, Epinephrine, etc. ?
It was these discoveries that led me back to TEACHING IN THE TOUGHEST PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE TOUGHEST SECTION OF BROOKLYN, starting in Bed-Stuy. I used my process “Positive Learning with Music, Performing Arts and My PAL.” I then added the secret sauce that NONE OF YOU has recognized as a magical educational process: WHO WANTS TO BE IN THE MOVIES? ON AMERICAN IDOL? I turned every class, cross curriculum into a pretend “Recording Studio of the Mind.” Students wrote in every music class – stories, television scenes, matched messages. And I polished the performance with professional recording studio and acting etiquette that I have used in my own musical, television and film performances. Dopamine the Chocolate Gene is produced when you perform in anything. But you get another free piece of “chocolate” when you watch and listen to yourself on the playback, which also reviews and reinforces the curriculum. It’s all self-motivated positive growth mindset and it is reinforced by the students’ performance.
The most thrilling example was when a hardscrabble mother came in with the mental and physical scars etched deep in her face from her struggles. I said “Would you like to see your son on TV?” I played a videotape and her face CHANGED, it glowed; the emotional scars disappeared. Of course, it was the brain’s reward centers releasing dopamine and the other chemicals from seeing and hearing her son’s voice. She saw him in a whole new light.
I know this; why don’t you?
Andrew,
You make a lot of good points in this article. Like you, I don’t think we should give up on the idea of growth mindset because, unlike the idea of learning styles, growth mindset enjoys at least has SOME evidence in its favor. But we have to be cognizant of the fact that researchers are having a hard time replicating it and that the meta-analysis you reference concluded that such an intervention has minimal effects. Now, I have absolutely no problem telling students that hard work can pay off because it can. But, at this point I’m wondering if the time and money devoted to mindset interventions would be better spent elsewhere–say, on educating teachers, students, and parents about effective learning strategies that have been empirically-validated hundreds of times over that last several decades (e.g., retrieval, spacing, interleaving). My hunch–and there’s actually some research to suggest this might be the case–is that the positive academic outcomes students could experience as a result of using such strategies would have a much greater impact on their motivation than would a mindset intervention. Of course, these are unresolved issues that deserve empirical attention, but I’m very interested in the possibility that learning might beget motivation more than motivation begets learning.
One final note: After seeing that you referenced one of my tweets, I feel compelled to mention that none of my tweets comparing growth mindset to learning styles have been assertive in nature. That is, I have never said that mindset IS the new learning styles. Indeed, such an assertion would be unfair and irresponsible at this point. Rather, I’ve simply asked the question and expressed my concern that it might be heading in that direction. I just don’t want your readers to assume that I’ve made up my mind on the utility of mindset interventions because I certainly haven’t. More evidence, or the lack thereof, is needed for that to happen.
All the best and keep up your great work!
Nick