4.4 Article

An online growth mindset intervention in a sample of rural adolescent girls

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 88, Issue 3, Pages 428-445

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12192

Keywords

academic interventions; belonging; efficacy; growth mindsets; learning motivation

Funding

  1. NIH [R00 HD075654, DK056350]
  2. NC State College of Humanities and Social Sciences Research Office
  3. NCI [P30-CA16086]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundStudents living in rural areas of the United States exhibit lower levels of educational attainment than their suburban counterparts. Innovative interventions are needed to close this educational achievement gap. AimsWe investigated whether an online growth mindset intervention could be leveraged to promote academic outcomes. SampleWe tested the mindset intervention in a sample of 222 10th-grade adolescent girls (M age=15.2; 38% White, 25% Black, 29% Hispanic) from four rural, low-income high schools in the Southeastern United States. MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of the growth mindset intervention, relative to a sexual health programme. We used random sampling and allocation procedures to assign girls to either the mindset intervention (n=115) or an attention-matched control programme (n=107). We assessed participants at pre-test, immediate post-test, and 4-month follow-up. ResultsRelative to the control condition, students assigned to the mindset intervention reported stronger growth mindsets at immediate post-test and 4-month follow-up. Although the intervention did not have a total effect on academic attitudes or grades, it indirectly increased motivation to learn, learning efficacy and grades via the shifts in growth mindsets. ConclusionsResults indicate that this intervention is a promising method to encourage growth mindsets in rural adolescent girls.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available