skip to main content


Title: Growing Mindsets: Debugging by Design to Promote Students’ Growth Mindset Practices in Computer Science Class.
Mindsets play an important role in persevering in computer science: while some learners perceive bugs as opportunities for learning, others become frustrated with failure and see it as a challenge to their abilities. Yet few studies and interventions take into account the motivational and emotional aspects of debugging and how learning environments can actively promote growth mindsets. In this paper, we discuss growth mindset practices that students exhibited in “Debugging by Design,” an intervention created to empower students in debugging—by designing e-textiles projects with bugs for their peers to solve. Drawing on observations of four student groups in a high school classroom over a period of eight hours, we examine the practices students exhibited that demonstrate the development of growth mindset, and the contexts where these practices emerged. We discuss how our design-focused, practice-first approach may be particularly well suited for promoting growth mindset in domains such as computer science.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1742140
NSF-PAR ID:
10309425
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Editor(s):
de Vries, E.; Hod, Y.; Ahn, J.
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of the Learning Sciences - ICLS 2021
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Undergraduate programs in computer science (CS) face high dropout rates, and many students struggle while learning to program. Studies show that perceived programming ability is a significant factor in students' decision to major in CS. Fortunately, psychology research shows that promoting the growth mindset, or the belief that intelligence grows with effort, can improve student persistence and performance. However, mindset interventions have been less successful in CS than in other domains. We conducted a small-scale interview study to explore how CS students talk about their intelligence, mindsets, and programming behaviors. We found that students' mindsets rarely aligned with definitions in the literature; some present mindsets that combine fixed and growth attributes, while others behave in ways that do not align with their mindsets. We also found that students frequently evaluate their self-efficacy by appraising their programming intelligence, using surprising criteria like typing speed and ease of debugging to measure ability. We conducted a survey study with 103 students to explore these self-assessment criteria further, and found that students use varying and conflicting criteria to evaluate intelligence in CS. We believe the criteria that students choose may interact with mindsets and impact their motivation and approach to programming, which could help explain the limited success of mindset interventions in CS. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Background

    Students may exhibit growth mindsets, where intelligence is seen as malleable and failures prompt more effort and new approaches, or fixed mindsets, where intelligence is seen as immutable and failures indicate lack of intelligence. One's mindset in general may be different from that for a particular domain such as engineering. Having a growth mindset predicts more positive learning outcomes.

    Purpose

    We described the general and engineering mindsets of students in fifth‐grade U.S. classrooms (ages 10 and 11) who received engineering instruction. We explored how general mindsets may predict engineering learning outcomes and how engineering mindsets may be predicted by general mindset and other variables.

    Design/Method

    We collected General Mindset (GM) and Engineering Mindset (EM) surveys from 2,086 fifth graders. We analyzed and correlated their GM and EM scores and survey item responses. Using hierarchical linear modeling, we measured the contribution of GM to models predicting EM and engineering learning outcomes and identified factors that predicted EM.

    Results

    Almost three quarters of students who submitted EM surveys agreed with a growth mindset. Students with higher GM scores had higher engineering postassessment scores. Those who had a higher socioeconomic status did not receive special education services, experienced more whole‐class discussion and activity, or had a higher GM score were more likely to have a more growth‐minded EM score.

    Conclusions

    Engineering education should help students see that they can grow in their capacities to engineer. Instructional interventions may positively impact mindset, which could be particularly important for some students. Engineering design may encourage an especially growth‐minded approach to failure experiences.

     
    more » « less
  3. Students (like all people) have elements of both growth and fixed mindsets. We studied shifts in both types of student mindsets over three one-semester courses. We found no significant change in students’ growth mindset at the beginning of the semester compared to the end of the semester. However, students’ fixed mindsets showed a statistically significant increase from the beginning of the semester to the end of the semester. Two multilevel models were used to understand why students’ fixed mindsets may have increased 1) personal sourcesmastery goal, performance goal, and internal recognition, and 2) situational sourcesclassroom goal orientations and external recognition. Students’ endorsement of a performance goal orientation, which focuses on demonstrating competence and managing others’ perception of their abilities, increased their fixed mindset views at the end of the semester. In the model focused on situational sources, we found that students’ fixed mindset increased when they perceived their classroom environment endorsed a performance-approach goal structure and by receiving external recognition. When comparing both models, students’ fixed mindset increase was largely explained by classroom environmental sources. Specifically, students’ fixed mindsets increased when they perceived that their classroom environment valued a demonstration of competence (i.e., classroom performance-approach). Being recognized as an engineer by peers and instructors also increased students’ fixed views of their abilities. Conversely, one situational source was found to decrease students’ fixed mindset views, i.e., a classroom environment that promotes mastery goals. Our study points to an apparent and crucial role engineering classroom environments have in promoting certain mindsets. The study concludes with one pedagogical strategy that may help mitigate the inadvertent promotion of a fixed mindset, e.g., a mastery learning pedagogical intervention. 
    more » « less
  4. Gresalfi, M. ; Horn, I. (Ed.)
    The design of most learning environments focuses on supporting students in making, constructing, and putting together projects on and off the screen, with much less attention paid to the many issues—problems, bugs, or traps—that students invariably encounter along the way. In this symposium, we present different theoretical and disciplinary perspectives on understanding how learners engage in debugging applications on and off screen, examine learners’ mindsets about debugging from middle school to college students and teachers, and present pedagogical approaches that promote strategies for debugging problems, even having learners themselves design problems for others. We contend that learning to identify and fix problems—debug, troubleshoot, or get unstuck—in completing projects provides a productive space in which to explore multiple theoretical perspectives that can contribute to our understanding of learning and teaching critical strategies for dealing with challenges in learning activities and environments. 
    more » « less
  5. A growth-mindset intervention teaches the belief that intellectual abilities can be developed. Where does the intervention work best? Prior research examined school-level moderators using data from the National Study of Learning Mindsets (NSLM), which delivered a short growth-mindset intervention during the first year of high school. In the present research, we used data from the NSLM to examine moderation by teachers’ mindsets and answer a new question: Can students independently implement their growth mindsets in virtually any classroom culture, or must students’ growth mindsets be supported by their teacher’s own growth mindsets (i.e., the mindset-plus-supportive-context hypothesis)? The present analysis (9,167 student records matched with 223 math teachers) supported the latter hypothesis. This result stood up to potentially confounding teacher factors and to a conservative Bayesian analysis. Thus, sustaining growth-mindset effects may require contextual supports that allow the proffered beliefs to take root and flourish.

     
    more » « less