The Effect of the Growth Mindset Approach on Mathematics Achievement in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Children

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of growth mindset strategies on self-efficacy, self-regulation, metacognitive skills, academic achievement, and mindset beliefs of socio-economically disadvantaged eighth-grade students in Turkey. An embedded mixed-method design was employed with 57 students (experimental group: 28; control group: 29) over an eight-week intervention. Quantitative data were collected via the Mindset Scale, Self-Efficacy Scale, Self-Regulation Scale, Metacognitive Skills Scale, and the Academic Achievement Test, administered both before and after the intervention. Qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews and classroom observations conducted before, during, and after the application. Qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews and classroom observations conducted before, during, and after the intervention and were analyzed using thematic content analysis. Quantitative data were analyzed using ANCOVA, Mann–Whitney U test, and t test. Findings revealed significant improvements in favor of the experimental group in all measured variables. The qualitative results supported the quantitative data, indicating that students exposed to growth mindset strategies developed attitudes such as persistence in the face of difficulty, increased effort, determination, and goal orientation toward mastery. Overall, the study demonstrates that structured growth mindset interventions can effectively enhance both cognitive and motivational outcomes among disadvantaged learners.

Keywords

• growth-mindset
• metacognitive skills
• self-efficacy
• self-regulation.

Gelişim Zihniyeti Yaklaşımının Sosyoekonomik Olarak Dezavantajlı Çocukların Matematik Başarısı Üzerindeki Etkisi

Öz

Bu araştırma, Türkiye’de sosyo-ekonomik açıdan dezavantajlı sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin öz yeterlik, öz düzenleme, biliş üstü beceriler, akademik başarı ve zihniyet inançları üzerindeki gelişim zihniyeti stratejilerinin etkisini incelemektedir. Sekiz hafta süren uygulama sürecinde 57 öğrencinin (deney grubu: 28; kontrol grubu: 29) yer aldığı iç içe geçmiş karma yöntem deseni kullanılmıştır. Nicel veriler, uygulama öncesi ve sonrasında uygulanan Zihniyet Ölçeği, Öz Yeterlik Ölçeği, Öz Düzenleme Ölçeği, Biliş Üstü Beceriler Ölçeği ve Akademik Başarı Testi aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Nitel veriler ise uygulama öncesi, süreci ve sonrasında gerçekleştirilen yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler ve sınıf içi gözlemler yoluyla elde edilmiş ve tematik içerik analizi ile çözümlenmiştir. Nicel verilerin analizinde ANCOVA, Mann–Whitney U testi ve t testi kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, ölçülen tüm değişkenler açısından deney grubu lehine anlamlı farklılıklar olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Nitel bulgular da nicel sonuçları destekleyerek, gelişim zihniyeti stratejilerine maruz kalan öğrencilerin zorluklar karşısında sebat etme, daha fazla çaba gösterme, kararlılık geliştirme ve ustalık yönelimli hedefler belirleme gibi tutumlar geliştirdiklerini göstermiştir. Genel olarak çalışma, yapılandırılmış gelişim zihniyeti müdahalelerinin dezavantajlı öğrencilerde hem bilişsel hem de motivasyonel çıktıları etkili biçimde geliştirebileceğini ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• gelişim zihniyeti
• öz-yeterlik
• öz-düzenleme
• üstbilişsel beceriler

References

1. Ahmar, F., & Anwar, E. (2013). Socio economic status and its relation to academic achievement of higher secondary school students. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 13(6), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-1361320
2. Ahn, J., Luna-Lucero, M., Lamnina, M., Nightingale, M., Novak, D., & Lin-Siegler, X. (2016). Motivating students' STEM learning using biographical information. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v7i1.19409
3. Aslanargun, E., Bozkurt, S., & Sarıoğlu, S. (2016). Sosyo ekonomik değişkenlerin öğrencilerin akademik başarısı üzerine etkileri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(27/3), 201-234.
4. Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(2), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1491
5. Bai, B., Wang, J., & Nie, Y. (2020). Self-efficacy, task values and growth mindset: what has the most predictive power for primary school students’ self-regulated learning in English writing and writing competence in an Asian Confucian cultural context? Cambridge Journal of Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1778639
6. Barry, J. (2006). The effect of socio-economic status on academic achievement.(Unpublished master dissertation). Wichita State University, USA.
7. Becker, J. (1981). Differential treatment of females and males in mathematics classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics and Education, 12, 356–372. https://doi.org/10.2307/748657
8. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child development, 78(1), 246-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x

9. Boaler, J. (2002). Learning from teaching: Exploring the relationship between reform curriculum and equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(4), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.2307/749740
10. Boyer, J. C., & Mailloux, N. (2015). Student teachers’ self-perception of their mathematical skills and their conceptions about teaching mathematics in primary schools. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1434-1442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.772
11. Browman, A. S., Destin, M., Carswell, K. L., & Svoboda, R. C. (2017). Perceptions of socioeconomic mobility influence academic persistence among low socioeconomic status students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 72, 45-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.03.006
12. Burnette, J. L., O'Boyle, E. H., VanEpps, E. M., Pollack, J. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological Bulletin, 139(3), 655–701. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029531
13. Canning, E. A., & Limeri, L. B. (2023). Theoretical and methodological directions in mindset intervention research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, e12758. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12758
14. Caro, D. H., McDonald, J. T., & Willms, J. D. (2009). Socio-economic status and academic achievement trajectories from childhood to adolescence. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 32(3), 558-590.
15. Carpenter, L. (2018). Feedback and growth mindset: Nurturing a growth mindset through feedback with middle school students [Unpublished masters thesis]. https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/med_theses/123
16. Chen, J. A., & Pajares, F. (2010). Implicit theories of ability of grade 6 science students: Relation to epistemological beliefs and academic motivation and achievement in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.003
17. Chiu, M. M., & Chow, B. W. Y. (2015). Classmate characteristics and student achievement in 33 countries: Classmates’ past achievement, family socioeconomic status, educational resources, and attitudes toward reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 152. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036897
18. Chow, S. J., & Yong, B. C. S. (2013). Secondary school students' motivation and achievement in combined science. Online Submission, 3(4), 213-228.
19. Claro, S., Paunesku, D., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Growth mindset tempers the effects of poverty on academic achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(31), 8664-8668. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1608207113
20. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. P. (2007). Mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA.
21. Çakıoğlu, V., & Ergen, H. (2022). Ortaöğretime geçiş sistemine ilişkin öğretmen görüşlerinin incelenmesi. IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (13), 51-69. https://doi.org/10.21733/ibad.1099537
22. Çatalbaş, N. C., & Susam, E. (2022). Liselere Geçis Sisteminin (LGS) Ortaokul Matematik Öğretmenlerinin Görüşleri Doğrultusunda İncelenmesi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(3), 1482-1500. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.1134613
23. Da Fonseca, D., Cury, F., Fakra, E., Rufo, M., Poinso, F., Bounoua, L., & Huguet, P. (2008). Implicit theories of intelligence and IQ test performance in adolescents with Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46(4), 529-536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2008.01.006
24. De Fraja, G., Oliveira, T., & Zanchi, L. (2010). Must try harder: Evaluating the role of effort in educational attainment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(3), 577-597.
25. Demir, N. (2019). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin ders olarak matematiğe yönelik algılarının incelenmesi [Unpublished Masters Thesis], Yildiz Technical University, Turkey.
26. Demir, S. B., & Yilmaz, A. T. (2019). En iyisi bu mu? Türkiye’de yeni ortaöğretime geçiş politikasının velilerin görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 164-183. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2019.19.43815-445515
27. Delioğlu, H. N. (2017). Sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin matematik başarısı ile sınav ve matematik kaygısı, matematiğe yönelik özyeterlik algısı arasındaki ilişki [Master's thesis]. Adnan Menderes University, Turkey.
28. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Caution-praise can be dangerous. American Educator, 23, 4-9.
29. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random house.
30. Farrington, C. A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., Nagaoka, J., Keyes, T. S., Johnson, D. W., & Beechum, N. O. (2012). Teaching Adolescents to Become Learners: The Role of Noncognitive Factors in Shaping School Performance--A Critical Literature Review (ED542543). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED542543.pdf
31. Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of meta-cognition. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding, 21-29.
32. Hart, K. M. (1980). Secondary school children's understanding of mathematics. A report of the mathematics component of the concepts in secondary mathematics and science programme.
33. Hong, Y. Y., Chiu, C. Y., Dweck, C. S., Lin, D. M. S., & Wan, W. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(3), 588.
34. Job, V., Walton, G. M., Bernecker, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2015). Implicit theories about willpower predict self-regulation and grades in everyday life. Journal of personality and social psychology, 108(4), 637.
35. Kachnowski, K. (2019). The Link Between Mindset, Self-Efficacy for Self-Regulated Learning, and Metacognitive Learning Strategies [ Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]The Ohio State University, USA.
36. Karadag, E., & Karadeniz, İ. (2014). Kırsal bölgelerdeki ortaokul öğrencilerinin matematik kaygı ve tutumları: korelasyonel bir araştırma. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 5(3), 259-273.
37. Karlen, Y., Hirt, C. N., Liska, A., & Stebner, F. (2021). Mindsets and self-concepts about self-regulated learning: Their relationships with emotions, strategy knowledge, and academic achievement. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 661142. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.661142
38. Kılıç, Ç. (2015). İlköğretim 5. sınıf matematik dersinde Van Hiele düzeylerine göre yapılan geometri öğretiminin öğrencilerin akademik başarıları, tutumları ve hatırda tutma düzeyleri üzerindeki etkisi [ Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]Anadolu University,Turkey.
39. Madland, D., & Bunker, N. (2011). Middle-Class Societies Invest More in Public Education: A Stronger Middle Class Is Associated with Higher Levels of Spending on Education. Center for American Progress.
40. McCutchen, K., Jones, M. H., Carbonneau, K. J., & Mueller, C. E. (2016). Mindset and standardized testing over time. Learning and Individual Differences, 45, 208-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.11.027
41. McWilliams, E. C. (2015). Self-efficacy, implicit theory of intelligence, goal orientation and the ninth grade experience. Northeastern University.
42. Ministery of National Education. (2021). 2021 Liselere Geçiş Sistemi (LGS) Merkezi Sınavla Yerleşen Öğrencilerin Performansı Raporu. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://cdn.eba.gov.tr/icerik/2021/07/rapor/No_17-LGS_2021-merkezi_yerlestirme_211730.pdf
43. Ministery of National Education. (2022). 2022 Ortaöğretim Kurumlarına İlişkin Merkezi Sınav Raporu. Chrome-xtension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://cdn.eba.gov.tr/icerik/2022/07/LGS_2022_2_Merkezi_Sinav_Performans.pdf
44. Mrazek, A. J., Ihm, E. D., Molden, D. C., Mrazek, M. D., Zedelius, C. M., & Schooler, J. W. (2018). Expanding minds: Growth mindsets of self-regulation and the influences on effort and perseverance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.07.003.
45. Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children's motivation and performance. Journal of personality and social psychology, 75(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33
46. O'Shea, A., Booth, J. L., Barbieri, C., McGinn, K. M., Young, L. K., & Oyer, M. H. (2017). Algebra performance and motivation differences for students with learning disabilities and students of varying achievement levels. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 50, 80-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.03.003
47. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019a). PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf
48. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019b). Education at glance 2019. https://www.oecdilibrary.org/docserver/f8d7880den.pdf?expires=1586886222&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=B41FF42CD97F0E73A2FF8CD6B82F1020
49. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). “Growth mindset”, in PISA 2018 results (Volume III): What school life means for students’ lives. OECD Publishing, Paris.
50. Palazzolo, S. (2016). The relationship between mindset and self-efficacy in pre-service elementary teacher candidates teaching science, and its implications on science teaching [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Windsor.
51. Paunesku, D., Walton, G. M., Romero, C. L., Smith, E. N., Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2015). Mindset interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science, 26, 784-793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615571017
52. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
53. Plaks, J. E., & Stecher, K. (2007). Unexpected improvement, decline, and stasis: A prediction confidence perspective on achievement success and failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(4), 667–684. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.667
54. Pokropek, A., Borgonovi, F., & Jakubowski, M. (2015). Socio-economic disparities in academic achievement: A comparative analysis of mechanisms and pathways. Learning and Individual Differences, 42, 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.07.011
55. Pomerantz, E. M., & Ruble, D. N. (1997). Distinguishing multiple dimensions of conceptions of ability: Implications for self-evaluation. Child Development, 68(6), 1165–1180. https://doi.org/10.2307/1132299
56. Rhew, E., Piro, J. S., Goolkasian, P., & Cosentino, P. (2018). The effects of a growth mindset on self-efficacy and motivation. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1492337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1492337
57. Samuel, T. S., & Warner, J. (2021). “I can math!”: Reducing math anxiety and increasing math self-efficacy using a mindfulness and growth mindset-based intervention in first-year students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 45(3), 205-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2019.1666063
58. Sarrasin, J. B., Nenciovici, L., Foisy, L. M. B., Allaire-Duquette, G., Riopel, M., & Masson, S. (2018). Effects of teaching the concept of neuroplasticity to induce a growth mindset on motivation, achievement, and brain activity: A meta-analysis. Trends in neuroscience and education, 12, 22-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2018.07.003
59. Savvides, H., & Bond, C. (2021). How does growth mindset inform interventions in primary schools? A systematic literature review. Educational Psychology in Practice, 37(2), 134-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2021.1879025
60. Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
61. Schwarzer, R. (2014). Self-efficacy: Thought control of action. Routledge.
62. Selvitopu, A., & Kaya, M. (2023). A meta-analytic review of the effect of socioeconomic status on academic performance. Journal of Education, 203(4), 768-780. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574211031978
63. Shih, S.-S. (2011). Perfectionism, implicit theories of intelligence, and Taiwanese eighth-grade students’ academic engagement. J. Educ. Res., 104, 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670903570368
64. Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of educational research, 75(3), 417-453. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417
65. Sisk, V., Burgoyne, A., Sun, J.,Butler, J. & Brooke, M. (2018). To What Extent and Under Which Circumstances Are Growth Mind-Sets Important to Academic Achievement? Two Meta-Analyses. Psychological Science, 29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617739704
66. Suna, H. E. , Tanberkan, H. , Gür, B., Perc, M. & Özer, M. (2020). Akademik başarının yordayıcıları olarak sosyoekonomik durum ve okul türü. Ekonomi Kültürü ve Toplum Dergisi, (61), 41-64. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-0034
67. Süer, N. (2014). Öz düzenleme becerilerinin TEOG sınavı üzerindeki etkisi [Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi.
68. Tomul, E., & Savaşçı, H. S. (2012). Socioeconomic determinants of academic achievement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 24(3), 175-187. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-1-10-7
69. Truax, M. (2017). The impact of teacher language and growth mindset feedback on writing motivation. Literacy Research and Instruction, 57, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2017.1340529
70. Ulusoy, B. (2020). 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin liselere geçiş sınavı (LGS)’na ilişkin algılarının metaforlar aracılığıyla incelenmesi. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2), 186-202. https://doi.org/10.51119/ereegf.2020.5
71. Wang, M. T., Zepeda, C. D., Qin, X., Del Toro, J., & Binning, K. R. (2021). More than growth mindset: Individual and interactive links among socioeconomically disadvantaged adolescents’ ability mindsets, metacognitive skills, and math engagement. Child Development, 92(5), e957-e976. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13560
72. Walton, G. M., & Wilson, T. D. (2018). Wise interventions: Psychological remedies for social and personal problems. Psychological Review, 125(5), 617–655. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000115
73. Walton, G. M., & Yeager, D. 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
74. Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.722805
75. Yeager, D. S., Henderson, M. D., Paunesku, D., Walton, G. M., D'Mello, S., Spitzer, B. J., & Duckworth, A. L. (2014). Boring but important: A self-transcendent purpose for learning fosters academic self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(4), 559–580. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037637
76. Yüksel, M., & Ertürk, A. (2023). Türkiye’deki illerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişlik endeksine göre LGS fen ve matematik testleri ile LGS diğer alt test başarılarının karşılaştırmalı analizi. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 25(2), 426-447.
77. Zeng, G., Hou, H. & Peng, K. (2016). Effect of growth mindset on school engagement and psychological well-being of Chinese primary and middle school students: The mediating role of resilience. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1873. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01873
78. Zhao, S., Du, H., Li, Q., Wu, Q., & Chi, P. (2021). Growth mindset of socioeconomic status boosts subjective well-being: A longitudinal study. Personality and Individual Differences, 168, 110301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110301 Zimmerman, B. J. & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In D.J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A.C.Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education.