数学课堂心态干预的系统综述:什么有效,什么无效?

IF 9.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Research Review Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100554
Phuong Bui , Nonmanut Pongsakdi , Jake McMullen , Erno Lehtinen , Minna M. Hannula-Sormunen
{"title":"数学课堂心态干预的系统综述:什么有效,什么无效?","authors":"Phuong Bui ,&nbsp;Nonmanut Pongsakdi ,&nbsp;Jake McMullen ,&nbsp;Erno Lehtinen ,&nbsp;Minna M. Hannula-Sormunen","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A growing body of research has suggested that mindset is one powerful predictor of students' academic achievement and that students are likely to hold self-beliefs about the malleability or stability of their academic abilities. In the domain of mathematics education, a belief in ‘math brain’ – as something you do or do not possess – is widely prevalent. Studies have shown that teachers and students are more likely to consider achievement in mathematics than achievement in other academic domains to be due to inborn ability. Most growth mindset-related research in schools is domain-general; however, given the prevalence of strong beliefs about the innateness of mathematical ability, possible idiosyncratic effects of mindset interventions in the mathematics domain may have been overlooked by research reviews and meta-analyses that do not examine domain-specific effects. The purpose of this paper is to compile and synthesise quantitative and qualitative research on interventions in mathematics classrooms that aim to change or foster teachers' and/or students' beliefs/mindset in primary and secondary schools and the reported impacts of these interventions (16 studies). The interventions in these studies were identified and sorted based on their targets (teacher-focused or student-focused), content (implicit theories of intelligence (ITI) intervention for general domains or in mathematics domain), and delivery mode (technology-based or in-contact). The results suggested most of the considered studies were quantitative and used student-focused interventions. Moreover, when ITI interventions were conducted specifically in the mathematics domain, positive results were reported, regardless of the intervention target or content or mode of delivery, whereas general ITI interventions yielded mixed results. Future studies should therefore consider the impacts of domain-specific effects and intervention targets when designing mindset interventions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"40 ","pages":"Article 100554"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review of mindset interventions in mathematics classrooms: What works and what does not?\",\"authors\":\"Phuong Bui ,&nbsp;Nonmanut Pongsakdi ,&nbsp;Jake McMullen ,&nbsp;Erno Lehtinen ,&nbsp;Minna M. Hannula-Sormunen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100554\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A growing body of research has suggested that mindset is one powerful predictor of students' academic achievement and that students are likely to hold self-beliefs about the malleability or stability of their academic abilities. In the domain of mathematics education, a belief in ‘math brain’ – as something you do or do not possess – is widely prevalent. Studies have shown that teachers and students are more likely to consider achievement in mathematics than achievement in other academic domains to be due to inborn ability. Most growth mindset-related research in schools is domain-general; however, given the prevalence of strong beliefs about the innateness of mathematical ability, possible idiosyncratic effects of mindset interventions in the mathematics domain may have been overlooked by research reviews and meta-analyses that do not examine domain-specific effects. The purpose of this paper is to compile and synthesise quantitative and qualitative research on interventions in mathematics classrooms that aim to change or foster teachers' and/or students' beliefs/mindset in primary and secondary schools and the reported impacts of these interventions (16 studies). The interventions in these studies were identified and sorted based on their targets (teacher-focused or student-focused), content (implicit theories of intelligence (ITI) intervention for general domains or in mathematics domain), and delivery mode (technology-based or in-contact). The results suggested most of the considered studies were quantitative and used student-focused interventions. Moreover, when ITI interventions were conducted specifically in the mathematics domain, positive results were reported, regardless of the intervention target or content or mode of delivery, whereas general ITI interventions yielded mixed results. Future studies should therefore consider the impacts of domain-specific effects and intervention targets when designing mindset interventions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48125,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Research Review\",\"volume\":\"40 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100554\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Research Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000477\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000477","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的研究表明,心态是学生学业成绩的有力预测因素,学生可能对自己学业能力的可塑性或稳定性抱有自我信念。在数学教育领域,人们普遍相信“数学大脑”——作为你所做或不拥有的东西。研究表明,与其他学术领域的成就相比,教师和学生更有可能认为数学成就是天生的能力。学校中大多数与成长心态相关的研究都是一般性的;然而,鉴于人们普遍坚信数学能力的内在性,不考察特定领域影响的研究综述和荟萃分析可能忽略了思维干预在数学领域可能产生的特质影响。本文的目的是汇编和综合关于数学课堂干预措施的定量和定性研究,这些干预措施旨在改变或培养中小学教师和/或学生的信仰/心态,以及这些干预措施的报告影响(16项研究)。这些研究中的干预措施是根据其目标(以教师为中心或以学生为中心)、内容(一般领域或数学领域的智力内隐理论干预)和提供模式(基于技术或接触)来确定和排序的。研究结果表明,大多数经过考虑的研究都是定量的,并使用了以学生为中心的干预措施。此外,当ITI干预专门在数学领域进行时,无论干预目标、内容或实施方式如何,都会报告积极的结果,而一般ITI干预的结果喜忧参半。因此,未来的研究在设计心态干预时应考虑特定领域影响和干预目标的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A systematic review of mindset interventions in mathematics classrooms: What works and what does not?

A growing body of research has suggested that mindset is one powerful predictor of students' academic achievement and that students are likely to hold self-beliefs about the malleability or stability of their academic abilities. In the domain of mathematics education, a belief in ‘math brain’ – as something you do or do not possess – is widely prevalent. Studies have shown that teachers and students are more likely to consider achievement in mathematics than achievement in other academic domains to be due to inborn ability. Most growth mindset-related research in schools is domain-general; however, given the prevalence of strong beliefs about the innateness of mathematical ability, possible idiosyncratic effects of mindset interventions in the mathematics domain may have been overlooked by research reviews and meta-analyses that do not examine domain-specific effects. The purpose of this paper is to compile and synthesise quantitative and qualitative research on interventions in mathematics classrooms that aim to change or foster teachers' and/or students' beliefs/mindset in primary and secondary schools and the reported impacts of these interventions (16 studies). The interventions in these studies were identified and sorted based on their targets (teacher-focused or student-focused), content (implicit theories of intelligence (ITI) intervention for general domains or in mathematics domain), and delivery mode (technology-based or in-contact). The results suggested most of the considered studies were quantitative and used student-focused interventions. Moreover, when ITI interventions were conducted specifically in the mathematics domain, positive results were reported, regardless of the intervention target or content or mode of delivery, whereas general ITI interventions yielded mixed results. Future studies should therefore consider the impacts of domain-specific effects and intervention targets when designing mindset interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Research Review
Educational Research Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
19.40
自引率
0.90%
发文量
53
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Educational Research Review is an international journal catering to researchers and diverse agencies keen on reviewing studies and theoretical papers in education at any level. The journal welcomes high-quality articles that address educational research problems through a review approach, encompassing thematic or methodological reviews and meta-analyses. With an inclusive scope, the journal does not limit itself to any specific age range and invites articles across various settings where learning and education take place, such as schools, corporate training, and both formal and informal educational environments.
期刊最新文献
A meta-analysis of the correlation between teacher self-efficacy and teacher resilience: Concerted growth and contextual variance Unveiling the competencies at the core of lifelong learning: A systematic literature review A systematic review on how educators teach AI in K-12 education Translating neuroscience to early childhood education: A scoping review of neuroscience-based professional learning for early childhood educators What is next in mobile-assisted reading? Insights from a decade of eye tracking research into cognitive processes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1