Research Problem:Reinforcement of the Growth Mindset as a Means of Achieving Deeper Learning in the Classroom

  1. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-Regulated Learning: A New Concept Embraced by Researchers, Policy Makers, Educators, Teachers and Students. Learning and Instruction 7(2): 161-187.

This article spotlights an educational perspective referred to as self-regulated learning that postulates that students can be trained to control both cognitive and motivational challenges to acquiring knowledge. This is based on cognitive psychology research tenets. Since my project involves testing a way of increasing motivation for learning as a means to achieving deeper learning in an internationalized class, this article provides a source of background information on an approach that is being widely embraced in N. America to direct learning towards individual responsibility on the part of students. This, is meant to foster the type of learning self-sufficiency that is akin to “teaching a man to fish”.

  1. Pintrich, P.R. (1999). The Role of Motivation in Promoting and Sustaining Self-Regulated Learning. International Journal of Educational Research 31: 459-470.

Analysis of the relationship between specific motivational factors and self-regulated learning outcomes in traditional classrooms at the secondary and post-secondary level is undertaken. Self-efficacy (belief in one’s capacity to perform) and a goal orientation that centers on mastery of course material are shown to have especially high positive impacts on self-regulated learning and even on measurable performance on summative assessments. These factors are ones that I can seek to address in my selected research problem focusing on the reinforcement of a growth mindset (see reference 3) in order to achieve deeper learning. I learned of a published survey tool called the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (see reference 4), for measuring motivation and self-regulated classroom learning that I would like to consider as an effective assessment tool for my study.

  1. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York, Random House Inc.

This book is the source of an all-important outlinethat summarizes the differences between what are described as “fixed” and “growth” mindsets tying them to what can be expected of having one or the other, in terms of achievement levels. I feel that exposing students to this paradigm on day 1 and then reconnecting them with it several times over the course of the semester can improve their self-efficacy and steer them toward a mastery-oriented approach to performance (see reference 2). This in turn will, I believe, lend to an enhancement of their ability to engage in self-regulated learning wherein they achieve better learning-related cognition and metacognition and also foster improvements in their performance in team-oriented learning tasks like the capstone presentation in my internationalized non-majors biology class.

  1. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.

This reference provides a detailed breakdown of one of the major assessment tools that I plan to use called the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. It is a self-report tool that I propose to use at three junctures, at the start, at midterm and at the end of the semester. It organizes the questions in to categories for what they assess including factors like intrinsic and extrinsic goal orientation in addition to self-efficacy, and provides statistical analysis of all individual items. I have to admit that I don’t really understand the statistics very well but this is a tested tool and covers many aspects of learning. It delves in to learning strategies that revolve around cognitive and metacognitive processes as well as resource management.

5.Rowland, S.L. and Myatt, P.M. (2014, February). Getting started in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: A “how to” Guide for Science Academics. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education 42(1): 6-14.

Figure 1 in this article serves as an invaluable tool for the novice in orienting them as to how to go about planning to conduct a sound SoTL investigation. It has been very helpful to me in bringing to the fore the considerations I must have in mind as I tackle the design of my study; prepare to get IRB approval and iron out details of carrying it out so as to minimize unanticipated challenges. This article also provided the first indicator of the wisdom of speaking to the institutional IRB leader about the specifics of the chosen study to facilitate the IRB process and provided advance considerations like the need to establish key relationships with a variety of individuals to keep the research focused and ongoing like “publication” mentors and statisticians. Overall, this article is seminal to my ability to feel a sense of direction in trying to implement and eventually disseminate findings from my research problem.

  1. Hubball, H. and Clarke, A. (2010). Diverse Methodological Approaches and Considerations for SoTL in Higher Education. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Vol. 1: Iss. 1, Article 2. DOI:

To a novice and one coming from a STEM background, there is a tendency to stay within the confines of what is familiar when starting SoTL research. This paper, by performing a critical comparison of varying methodologies and considerations specific to SoTL in higher education, served to make me especially aware of this tendency and allowed me to gain keener insight on the type of methodology and its potential outcomes that I’m drawn toward. In this manner,it has better equipped me with the language needed to describe my approach. This paper does a good job of highlighting the importance of communities of SoTL practitioners which include not only experts and those on a similar level of experience, but also one’s own students. This is assisting in my growing appreciation of finding ways to educate students about what I’m doing and why, in order to achieve a more meaningful implementation of my problem. Finally, this paper concludes with the message that, of necessity, SoTL research must be subject to interpretation that is based on scrutiny of methodological rigor and yet at the same time yields to diverse perspectives and analyses. This is a point that I feel cannot be brought home enough to those trained to search for truths that are absolute.