Teaching that intelligence grows with learning halted the fall in math grades
No comparisonThe short version
Students who saw intelligence as changeable tended to get better math grades. Fixed-view students stayed flat.
- 91
- seventh graders in New York City schools
- Randomised
- groups picked at random
- Recorded
- behaviour was recorded
- 1 tool
- tested
The study
Who took part
373 seventh graders at one New York City school were followed for two years. A classroom experiment used 91 seventh graders from another school, with whole advisory groups placed in two groups by chance.
What they did
Eight weekly 25-minute sessions taught one group that intelligence grows with learning. They used a reading, an activity and talks. The other group had the same sessions on brain, study skills and stereotyping, with a memory lesson instead.
What happened
Among 373 students in the first study, those who saw intelligence as changeable tended to have rising math grades. In the experiment, math grades kept falling for the other group but stopped falling for the taught group. The paper gives the same grade figures for two analyses, so treat the exact numbers with care.
What the study found
- No comparisonGoals
Students who saw intelligence as changeable tended to get better math grades. Fixed-view students stayed flat.
Small randomised trial of 91 seventh graders in New York City schools · no comparison group · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole groups were assigned, not people; numbers unreliable
- HelpedMotivation
Teachers more often noticed better motivation in the taught students. They had been taught that intelligence grows with learning.
Small randomised trial of 91 seventh graders in New York City schools · vs the same workshop with a memory lesson · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole groups were assigned, not people; numbers unreliable
- HelpedGoals
After the workshops, math grades kept falling for the other group, but not for students taught that intelligence grows.
Small randomised trial of 91 seventh graders in New York City schools · vs the same workshop with a memory lesson · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole groups were assigned, not people; numbers unreliable
How solid is this?
- Groups picked at random
- Behaviour was recorded
- Small group
- Whole groups were assigned, not people
- Numbers unreliable
Source
Implicit Theories of Intelligence Predict Achievement Across an Adolescent Transition: A Longitudinal Study and an Intervention (2007)
