The Psychology of Self-Belief: The Impacts of Fixed Mindsets on High School Students Academic Performance

Introduction

High school students beliefs and attitudes towards their academic abilities can significantly influence their performance. Self-efficacy, or belief in one's ability to succeed in specific situations, is a crucial psychological trait that can predict academic success (Bandura, 1977). Students who perceive their abilities as fixed and don't believe they can improve their grades often find themselves stuck in a cycle of poor academic performance.

Fixed vs. Growth Mindset

A "fixed mindset" is the belief that our abilities, such as intelligence and talents, are innate and unchangeable traits. In contrast, a "growth mindset" is the idea that our abilities can be developed and improved with dedication, effort, and practice. Dweck (2006) noted that those who believe their abilities are static and unchangeable are said to have a 'fixed mindset.' They view failure as a reflection of their inherent capacities and tend to avoid challenges for fear of not succeeding. These individuals often put a lot of effort into appearing smart or talented and are likely to give up easily when faced with obstacles.

Conversely, those with a 'growth mindset' believe their abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work. They see failure not as evidence of unintelligence but as a springboard for growth and stretching their existing abilities. They are more likely to embrace challenges, persist in the face of setbacks, see effort as the path to mastery, learn from criticism, and find lessons and inspiration in the success of others.

Dweck's work has been corroborated and expanded by numerous other studies. For instance, Yeager and Dweck (2012) found that teaching students a growth mindset increased their school performance and motivation. Similarly, research by Paunesku et al. (2015) found that students exposed to growth mindset interventions were more likely to seek challenges and persist when they encountered difficulties. Moreover, Dweck's theories have also been applied in the business world. Related, Heslin et al. (2006) found that managers trained to adopt a growth mindset were more likely to notice an improvement in their employees' performance.

Dweck's concepts have also influenced the field of sports psychology. For example, O'Rourke et al. (2017) found that athletes with a growth mindset were more likely to recover from sports injuries more quickly and were more likely to view their injuries as challenges to overcome rather than as insurmountable obstacles. Students with a fixed mindset may view their academic challenges as proof of their inherent incapability, often leading to a decline in motivation and effort, resulting in lower grades. They may also shy away from challenges, fearing that failure may reflect their intelligence (Dweck, 2000).

Students with a fixed mindset often view intelligence as a static trait that can't be developed, which can result in avoidance of challenges, decreased motivation, and lower academic performance. A fixed mindset can lead to a fear of failure, as these individuals often interpret failure as a reflection of their inherent capabilities (Dweck, 2000). They tend to avoid situations where they may fail because they see failure as a threat to their self-image (Haimovitz & Dweck, 2017). This avoidance of challenges and fear of failure can result in limited learning opportunities and decreased academic performance (Dweck, 2000).

Blackwell et al. (2007) asserted that students who believed intelligence is fixed showed a decline in grades over two years, which was mediated by their belief that school is hard. This study demonstrated that a fixed mindset could lead to a downward academic trajectory. Moreover, Romero et al. (2014) found that students with a fixed mindset were more likely to be negatively impacted by stress, which could lead to lower grades. On the other hand, the students with a growth mindset were more resilient under high-stress conditions, and their grades were less likely to decline. Furthermore, Yeager and Dweck (2012) found that adopting a fixed mindset could decrease motivation and effort, two critical factors for academic success. They also noted that students with a fixed mindset are more likely to cheat or give up when facing academic difficulties, further highlighting the detrimental effects of a fixed mindset on academic performance.

Impacts on Motivation and Effort

Students' beliefs about their academic abilities significantly influence their motivation, effort, and overall academic performance. This stems from the psychological construct known as self-efficacy, which is the belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute the actions required to manage prospective situations. As Pajares (2003) suggested, students' self-efficacy beliefs can be robust predictors of academic outcomes. These beliefs impact students' choices, goals, emotional reactions, and perseverance. Students with high self-efficacy are more likely to take on challenging tasks, set higher goals, and persist through difficulties, contributing to better academic performance. Similarly, Bandura (1993) highlighted that self-efficacy beliefs could influence students' motivation and learning. Bandura found that students with high self-efficacy beliefs for learning or mastering a subject were more likely to persist on challenging tasks and were more resilient to failure, thereby leading to higher academic achievement.

When students lack belief in their abilities, their motivation to study and exert effort can diminish, triggering self-defeating behaviors and poorer academic outcomes. Lower self-efficacy beliefs can lead students to avoid challenging tasks, give up quickly, and experience stress and depression, negatively affecting academic achievement (Zimmerman et al., 1992). Moreover, Caprara et al. (2008) confirmed that students' self-efficacy beliefs in their academic capabilities could predict their school grades across different subjects over time. As a result, interventions aimed at increasing students' self-efficacy could enhance opportunities for increased academic performance.

Impacts on Stress and Anxiety

The influence of student's beliefs in their academic abilities, or self-efficacy, on their psychological well-being, is well documented in psychological literature. Bandura (1997) argued that students with low self-efficacy often experience higher stress levels and are more susceptible to anxiety. These students also tend to have lower self-esteem, which can further exacerbate their stress and anxiety levels. In Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory, low self-efficacy is linked with higher stress because individuals who doubt their capabilities view many aspects of their environment as threatening or challenging (Bandura, 1997). They may see academic tasks as beyond their capabilities, resulting in heightened stress and anxiety.

Additional research supports the findings that students struggle with stress and anxiety when they doubt their capabilities. Chemers et al. (2001) found that college students who perceived their academic tasks as unmanageable and beyond their capabilities experienced higher levels of stress, leading to a detrimental impact on their academic performance. This sense of helplessness often results in increased anxiety and subsequently impairs their ability to perform well academically. Moreover, Pajares (2002) found that low self-efficacy could lead to 'maladaptive perfectionism,' where students set unrealistically high standards for themselves and view any failure to meet these standards as catastrophic. This type of perfectionism was found to increase anxiety, and stress, and decrease academic performance. Additionally, Margolis and McCabe (2006) found that low self-efficacy in students was linked with academic procrastination, associated with increased stress and poorer academic outcomes. This tendency to delay tasks further adds to the student's stress and decreases their ability to perform academically.

The Power of Intervention

Cultivating a growth mindset and enhancing academic self-efficacy have become significant focus areas for educators and psychologists, given the potential to positively impact student achievement. Blackwell et al. (2007) demonstrated that an intervention to shift students from a fixed mindset to a growth mindset could improve mathematics grades. Further, students who learned about the malleability of intelligence were more likely to show an increase in their motivation to learn, which subsequently improved academic performance. Additionally, an online growth-mindset intervention could improve students' academic performance (Paunesku et al., 2015). The students exposed to this intervention showed increased engagement in school, particularly those at risk of dropping out, highlighting the potential benefits of promoting a growth mindset in an educational context. Similarly, Good et al. (2003) found that teaching a growth mindset to minority students led to an increase in their college GPAs. This demonstrates that a growth mindset intervention can reduce achievement gaps and improve academic outcomes for historically underserved students.

Interventions aimed at enhancing self-efficacy have also proven to be beneficial. Schunk and Hanson (1985) conducted a study where students were taught to attribute their successes and failures to the amount of effort they put in rather than their innate abilities. This increased their math performance and problem-solving skills, indicating a growth in their self-efficacy beliefs. These studies underscore the potential of interventions that foster a growth mindset and enhance self-efficacy to significantly improve academic outcomes. Such interventions hold considerable promise for promoting academic success and equity in education.

Conclusion

The psychological differences between students who believe they can improve their academic performance (those with high self-efficacy and a growth mindset) and those who do not (low self-efficacy and a fixed mindset) have significant implications for educational practice. By promoting a growth mindset and academic self-efficacy, educators can potentially enhance students' motivation, reduce their stress and anxiety, and improve their academic outcomes. A large body of research supports the role of teachers in fostering a growth mindset and promoting academic self-efficacy. For example, Rattan et al. (2012) found that the feedback provided by teachers can influence students' mindsets. When teachers attributed students' failures to a lack of effort (implying that ability can be developed), students were more likely to develop a growth mindset. Additionally, Yeager et al. (2019) showed that a brief online growth mindset intervention could improve students' academic achievement and reduce disparities in achievement, further underscoring the potential of mindset interventions in education.

Moreover, interventions that enhance academic self-efficacy have also been shown to be effective. Usher and Pajares (2008) found that teachers can foster students' academic self-efficacy through four sources of self-efficacy: mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological states. In other words, by providing students with opportunities for success, modeling, positive feedback, and stress reduction techniques, teachers can help students develop stronger beliefs in their academic capabilities. Furthermore, Bandura (1997) suggested that self-efficacy beliefs could be improved by learning in a supportive and encouraging environment, which further reinforces the role of teachers and the educational environment in promoting academic self-efficacy. Finally, educators need to understand the psychological differences between students who believe they can improve their grades and those who do not. Educators can enhance academic performance and support students' mental health by fostering a growth mindset and promoting academic self-efficacy.

References

• Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
• Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246-263.
• Caprara, G. V., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Del Bove, G., Vecchio, G. M., Barbaranelli, C., & Bandura, A. (2008). Longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived self-efficacy for self-regulated learning in academic continuance and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 525-534.
• Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first-year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 55-64.
• Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House.
• Dweck, C. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
• Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents' standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Applied Developmental Psychology, 24(6), 645-662.
• Haimovitz, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2017). The origins of children's growth and fixed mindsets: New research and a new proposal. Child Development, 88(6), 1849-1859.
• Heslin, P. A., Vandewalle, D., & Latham, G. P. (2006). Keen to help? Managers' implicit person theories and their subsequent employee coaching. Personnel Psychology, 59(4), 871-902.
• Margolis, H., & McCabe, P. P. (2006). Improving self-efficacy and motivation: What to do, what to say. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(4), 218-227.
• O'Rourke, K. H., Carter, A., & Poolton, J. M. (2017). The effects of growth mindset training on the psychological factors related to the rehabilitation of sports injuries. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15(4), 378-393.
• Pajares, F. (2002). Gender and perceived self-efficacy in self-regulated learning. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 116-125.
• Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139-158.
• Paunesku, D., Walton, G. M., Romero, C., Smith, E. N., Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2015). Mindset interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science, 26(6), 784-793.
• Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). "It's ok — Not everyone can be good at math": Instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 731-737.
• Romero, C., Master, A., Paunesku, D., Dweck, C. S., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Academic and emotional functioning in middle school: The role of implicit theories. Emotion, 14(2), 227.
• Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2009). Self-efficacy theory. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 35-53). New York: Routledge.
• Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and future directions. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 751-796.
• Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302-314.
• Yeager, D. S., Hanselman, P., Walton, G. M., Murray, J. S., Crosnoe, R., Muller, C., Tipton, E., Schneider, B., Hulleman, C. S., Hinojosa, C. P., Paunesku, D., Romero, C., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Iachan, R., Buontempo, J., Yang, S. M., Carvalho, C. M., Hahn, P. R., Gopalan, M., Mhatre, P., Ferguson, R., Duckworth, A. L., & Dweck, C. S. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573(7774), 364-369.
• Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676.