Improving general chemistry performance through a growth mindset intervention: Selective effects on underrepresented minorities
Fink, A., Cahill, M. J., McDaniel, M. A., Hoffman, A., & Frey, R. F. (2018). Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 783-806.
-
examining565Students, gradePS
Growth Mindset Intervention Report - Supporting Postsecondary Success
Review Details
Reviewed: August 2021
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a compromised randomized controlled trial, but the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Final Exam Score (Chemistry) |
Growth Mindset vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
64.90 |
63.60 |
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: 57%
Male: 43% -
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
Missouri
-
Race Other or unknown 24% White 76%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place as part of a General Chemistry course at a private university. Students participated in the study by completing activities that were incorporated into three online homework assignments.
Study sample
The analytic sample consisted of 565 first-year students enrolled in General Chemistry 1 in the fall of 2015 or fall of 2016 who consented to participate in the study and completed three online study activities. The Growth Mindset intervention group included 275 students and the “transition tips” comparison group included 290 students. Among the 565 students in the analytic sample, 57% were female, 76% were White, and 24% were members of a racial or ethnic group historically underrepresented among students earning a bachelor’s degree in chemistry or another STEM field, including Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and Hispanic students. Asian students were excluded from the sample.
Intervention Group
Students received three online study activities during the semester. In the first, administered two weeks before the first course exam, students read a short article summarizing research showing that the brain is malleable and that intelligence can grow with effortful practice on challenging tasks, and by developing new learning strategies with support from others. For the second activity, administered one week before the second course exam, students received a summary of the article’s key points and were prompted to write about how the article would affect their preparation for the upcoming exam. For the third activity, one week prior to the course final exam, students were prompted to write about how the article would influence their studying strategies for the exam.
Comparison Group
Students received three online study activities during the semester, administered at the same points in time as the intervention group received their assignments. In the first activity, students in the comparison group received a set of “transition tips” for college success that emphasized organization and time management, maintaining their health and balancing academic work with social and extracurricular activities, being an active participant in class, and using available resources to support learning the course material. The second and third activities prompted students to reflect on how the transition tips article would affect their approach to preparing for the second and final course exams.
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).