Mindset in the Margins: Instructor Beliefs as Predictors of Practice, Messaging, and Student Outcomes

Abstract

Instructors play an important role beyond teaching course material in the classroom, they are central to shaping students’ experiences. One way that instructors influence students’ motivation and engagement stems from their own beliefs about students’ intellectual abilities. Mindset beliefs refer to whether intellectual abilities can be developed over time (growth) or are innate (fixed). Universality beliefs refer to whether everyone (universal) or only some people (nonuniversal) have the potential to reach the highest level of success. Brilliance beliefs refer to whether an innate talent is required for success in a given field. These beliefs have all been previously tied to student performance, motivation, and engagement. Instructors and students from STEM fields were surveyed across both studies. In Study 1, I investigated whether these beliefs predicted instructor self-efficacy, behaviours, and messaging to students (n=28). Additionally, I examined whether beliefs differed by discipline or demographics. In Study 2, I examined whether instructor and student reports of instructor beliefs and behaviours aligned, and whether one was more significant in predicting student outcomes (n=140). Overall, the findings demonstrated that growth mindset and universal beliefs are positively associated with instructor self-efficacy and teaching practices that communicate these beliefs to students. Though instructor beliefs are important in predicting select student outcomes, it is students’ perceptions of instructor beliefs that are stronger and more consistent in predicting student motivation overall. This suggests that while instructor beliefs are important, the key to enhancing student experiences may be to ensure that these beliefs are clearly communicated to students. This is particularly important in STEM classrooms where students generally perceive the courses to be more difficult and cite negative classroom experiences and diminished motivation as reasons for leaving STEM. However, further research is needed to explore how institutional efforts can be designed to drive student motivation and engagement.