No diseases. We want to stimulate a growth mindset, especially in students with a fixed mindset. Students with a fixed mindset are less resilient, and therefore have higher risk for adverse life events.
Conditions
Interventions
In the growth-mindset course, students learn about brain plasticity (lesson 1), growth-mindset (lesson 2), neurofeedback (lesson 3), and how everything relates to their own school career (lesson 4). M
Sponsors
European Research Council
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: First grade Dutch high-school students (aged ~12 years); males and females; mavo, havo, havo/vwo, vwo, vwo+ (ranging from vocational to pre-university)
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: All interested students in the participating schools are included, irrespective of for example psychiatric or physical disorders
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Questionnaires (T0 versus T2 and T3): - ability beliefs (mindset) [DeCastella & Byrne, 2015], - school performance (global point average, math grade), - school burnout inventory [Salmela-Aro, Kiuru, Leskinen, & Nurmi, 2009], - effort beliefs (Blackwell, 2004), - goal orientation [Elliot & Murayama, 2008], - academic self-regulation [Ryan, R.M., & Connell, J.P. 1989]. Covariate in analyses: socio-economic status (SES) based on postal code. Changes to methods after trial commencement (1): The COVID-19 epidemic started in between T2 and T3. Because this is an unplanned major global event, with far-reaching (physical and psychological) consequences for the participating students due to lock-down constrictions, and larger than expected study drop-outs, we concluded that it was not feasible to reliably answer the original research question about the efficacy at the 2-year follow-up (T3). We did, however, add two new questionnaires (T3) with the aim to investigate the relation between mindset and resilience during covid, and the mediating role of coping mechanisms: brief Cope [Carver (1997], COVID-related stress Exposure (Veer et al., 2021). For these additional questionnaires, an amendment was approved by the local ethics committee (VCWE-S-21-00041). The results will be published elsewhere. Changes to methods after trial commencement (2): Parallel to this RCT, we conducted a Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) framework study to improve the alignment between mind, brain, and education (MBE) research, the educational practice, and other societal stakeholders (https://doi-org.vu-nl.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/mbe.12213). Part of RRI, is for researchers to be reflexive and responsive to the stakeholders needs and values and to integrate their perspectives in research projects. One of their perspectives was on the framing/focus of the intervention: on developing resilience & wellbeing, instead of maximizing grades. To address this as researchers, we decided to cons | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The following questionnaires were for exploring additional research questions at T0: self-efficacy [PALS, Midgley et al., 2000], locus of control [Reid, I., & Croucher, A. 1980], perception of classroom goal structure [Midgley et al. 2002], BIS/BAS [Nederlandse versie Franken, Muris & Rassin, 2005]. Extra lab study in subgroup (T0 versus T2): approach and avoidance behavior and their electrophysiological correlates (EEG, ECG, EDA) during a math effort task, event-related potentials of error processing and response inhibition during the stop-signal task Changes to methods after trial commencement (3): due to covid-19 restrictions, we could not include enough participants for T2. | — |
Contacts
Public ContactTieme Janssen
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Outcome results
None listed