Reducing Inequality in Academic Success for Incoming College Students: A Randomized Trial of Growth Mindset and Belonging Interventions
Broda, Michael; Yun, John; Schneider, Barbara; Yeager, David S.; Walton, Gregory M.; Diemer, Matthew (2018). Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, v11 n3 p317-338. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1181580
-
examining4,357Students, gradePS
Social Belonging Intervention Report - Supporting Postsecondary Success
Review Details
Reviewed: October 2021
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Social Belonging.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Hispanic or Latino, end of fall term;
|
2.92 |
2.73 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black, end of fall term;
|
2.65 |
2.56 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Hispanic or Latino, end of spring term;
|
2.80 |
2.69 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Black, end of spring term;
|
2.53 |
2.48 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White, end of fall term;
|
3.23 |
3.22 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of fall term;
|
3.16 |
3.14 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Hispanic or Latino, end of spring term;
|
2.68 |
2.64 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of spring term;
|
3.11 |
3.11 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Black, end of spring term;
|
2.41 |
2.41 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
White, end of spring term;
|
3.19 |
3.20 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of spring term;
|
3.06 |
3.08 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
White, end of spring term;
|
3.15 |
3.17 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College enrollment, full time (%) |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black students, fall term;
|
94.00 |
94.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College enrollment, full time (%) |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Hispanic or Latino students, fall term;
|
94.00 |
97.00 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
College enrollment, full time (%) |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White students, fall term;
|
95.00 |
96.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College enrollment, full time (%) |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample (excluding international students), fall term;
|
95.00 |
96.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Hispanic or Latino, end of fall term;
|
12.36 |
12.44 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black students, end of fall term;
|
11.76 |
12.06 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Hispanic or Latino, end of spring term;
|
11.84 |
11.87 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White, end of fall term;
|
13.26 |
13.28 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
White, end of spring term;
|
13.02 |
13.14 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of spring term;
|
12.79 |
12.91 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of fall term;
|
13.08 |
13.12 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College credits completed |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Black, end of spring term;
|
11.11 |
11.43 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 54%
Male: 46% -
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Michigan
-
Race Black 63% Other or unknown 37% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 37% Not Hispanic or Latino 63%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at a public university in Michigan. Several weeks before arriving on campus for a two-day orientation program, incoming first-year students received a survey link from the university and completed the survey either prior to, or after arriving, on campus for orientation.
Study sample
Among students included in the overall analysis sample, 54% were female, 78% were White, 7% were Black, and race was not specified for 15% of the sample. Four percent were Hispanic. Approximately 24% were first-generation college students and 26% were eligible for a Pell grant. Among the students in the main analytic samples for this review, 63% were Black and 37% were Hispanic.
Intervention Group
After reviewing a series of stories about students of the same gender and race/ethnicity dealing with several challenges of starting college, including leaving home, fitting in, and trying to find their own identity, students in the intervention group were asked to respond to a series of questions reflecting on their own expectations for starting college. On average, students spent 15 to 20 minutes on the intervention activities.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group read stories about adapting to the physical aspects of college life, including the weather in Michigan, navigating around the university campus, adjusting to a new class schedule, and finding places to eat. Next, students wrote short essay responses to questions about how the stories they had read related to the start of their own college-going experience. On average, students spent 10 to 15 minutes on the comparison group activities.
Support for implementation
The university administration supported a pilot test of the Growth Mindset and Social Belonging interventions in January 2014 prior to the larger study with all 2014-2015 incoming first year students.
Growth Mindset Intervention Report - Supporting Postsecondary Success
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2021
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Growth Mindset.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of fall term;
|
3.18 |
3.14 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Hispanic or Latino, end of fall term;
|
3.13 |
2.73 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Hispanic or Latino, end of spring term;
|
3.05 |
2.69 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Hispanic or Latino, end of spring term;
|
2.97 |
2.64 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black, end of fall term;
|
2.60 |
2.56 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of spring term;
|
3.12 |
3.11 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White, end of fall term;
|
3.24 |
3.22 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Black, end of spring term;
|
2.48 |
2.48 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative GPA |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
White, end of spring term;
|
3.19 |
3.20 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of spring term;
|
3.06 |
3.08 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
White, end of spring term;
|
3.14 |
3.17 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Semester Grade Point Average (GPA) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Black, end of spring term;
|
2.37 |
2.41 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College Enrollment Full Time - Fall Semester |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of fall term;
|
96.00 |
96.00 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
College Enrollment Full Time - Fall Semester |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Hispanic or Latino;
|
97.00 |
97.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Enrollment Full Time - Fall Semester |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White;
|
96.00 |
96.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Enrollment Full Time - Fall Semester |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black;
|
93.00 |
94.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College Credits Completed - Fall |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of fall term;
|
13.18 |
13.12 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
College Credits Completed - Spring |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Hispanic or Latino, end of spring term;
|
12.80 |
11.87 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Credits Completed - Fall |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Hispanic or Latino, end of fall term;
|
13.14 |
12.44 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Credits Completed - Spring |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample (excluding international students), end of spring term;
|
12.87 |
12.91 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Credits Completed - Fall |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White, end of fall term;
|
13.29 |
13.29 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Credits Completed - Spring |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
White, end of spring term;
|
13.07 |
13.14 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Credits Completed - Fall |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black, end of fall term;
|
11.87 |
12.06 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College Credits Completed - Spring |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Black, end of spring term;
|
11.15 |
11.43 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 54%
Male: 46% -
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Michigan
-
Race Black 7% Other or unknown 15% White 78% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 4% Not Hispanic or Latino 96%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at a public university in Michigan. Several weeks before arriving on campus for a two-day orientation program, incoming first-year students received a survey link from the university and completed the survey either prior to, or after arriving, on campus for orientation.
Study sample
Among students included in analyses for main findings, 54% were female, 78% were White, 7% were Black, and race was not specified for 15% of the sample. Four percent were Hispanic. Approximately 24% were first-generation college students and 26% were eligible for a Pell grant.
Intervention Group
Students in the intervention group read an article summarizing research showing that the brain is malleable and that intelligence can grow if students exert effort when facing a challenge. Next, students wrote short essay responses to questions about how they may or may not have applied a growth mindset to a challenge. Finally, students wrote a letter, incorporating elements of the “brain is malleable” article, offering advice for a future first-year student. On average, students spent 20 to 25 minutes on the intervention activities.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group read stories about adapting to the physical aspects of college life, including the weather in Michigan, navigating around the university campus, adjusting to a new class schedule, and finding places to eat. Next, students wrote short essay responses to questions about how the stories they had read related to the start of their own college-going experience. On average, students spent 10 to 15 minutes on the comparison group activities.
Support for implementation
No additional information provided.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).