Identifying supportive student factors for mindset interventions: A two-model machine learning approach

AI-generated keywords: Growth Mindset Machine Learning Student Factors Academic Outcomes Minoritized Students

AI-generated Key Points

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • Researchers used machine learning to predict the effectiveness of growth mindset interventions in a nationwide experiment with over 10,000 students.
  • The study found that prior academic achievement, blocked navigations, self-reported reasons for learning, and race/ethnicity were the most important predictors in the model for predicting intervention effectiveness.
  • The intervention was most effective for students with prior low academic achievement.
  • Blocked navigations predicted an intervention effect as low as 0.185 GPA points less than the mean.
  • Some minoritized students were predicted to benefit less or not at all from the intervention.
  • Individual student characteristics should be considered when implementing growth mindset interventions, and more targeted approaches may be necessary for certain groups of students to optimize their academic outcomes during high school transitions.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Nigel Bosch

28 pages, 4 figures, 3 tables

Abstract: Growth mindset interventions foster students' beliefs that their abilities can grow through effort and appropriate strategies. However, not every student benefits from such interventions - yet research identifying which student factors support growth mindset interventions is sparse. In this study, we utilized machine learning methods to predict growth mindset effectiveness in a nationwide experiment in the U.S. with over 10,000 students. These methods enable analysis of arbitrarily-complex interactions between combinations of student-level predictor variables and intervention outcome, defined as the improvement in grade point average (GPA) during the transition to high school. We utilized two separate machine learning models: one to control for complex relationships between 51 student-level predictors and GPA, and one to predict the change in GPA due to the intervention. We analyzed the trained models to discover which features influenced model predictions most, finding that prior academic achievement, blocked navigations (attempting to navigate through the intervention software too quickly), self-reported reasons for learning, and race/ethnicity were the most important predictors in the model for predicting intervention effectiveness. As in previous research, we found that the intervention was most effective for students with prior low academic achievement. Unique to this study, we found that blocked navigations predicted an intervention effect as low as 0.185 GPA points (on a 0-4 scale) less than the mean. This was a notable negative prediction given that the mean intervention effect in our sample was just 0.026 GPA points, though few students (4.4%) experienced a substantial number of blocked navigation events. We also found that some minoritized students were predicted to benefit less (or even not at all) from the intervention.

Submitted to arXiv on 29 Sep. 2019

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 1909.13304v3

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

In a nationwide experiment in the U.S. with over 10,000 students, researchers utilized machine learning methods to predict the effectiveness of growth mindset interventions. These interventions aim to foster students' beliefs that their abilities can grow through effort and appropriate strategies. However, not every student benefits from such interventions, and research identifying which student factors support growth mindset interventions is sparse. The study used two separate machine learning models: one to control for complex relationships between 51 student-level predictors and grade point average (GPA), and another to predict the change in GPA due to the intervention. The trained models were analyzed to discover which features influenced model predictions most. The findings revealed that prior academic achievement, blocked navigations (attempting to navigate through the intervention software too quickly), self-reported reasons for learning, and race/ethnicity were the most important predictors in the model for predicting intervention effectiveness. As in previous research, it was found that the intervention was most effective for students with prior low academic achievement. Unique to this study was the discovery that blocked navigations predicted an intervention effect as low as 0.185 GPA points (on a 0-4 scale) less than the mean. This was a notable negative prediction given that few students (4.4%) experienced a substantial number of blocked navigation events. Furthermore, some minoritized students were predicted to benefit less or even not at all from the intervention. These findings highlight the importance of considering individual student characteristics when implementing growth mindset interventions and suggest that more targeted approaches may be necessary for certain groups of students in order to optimize their academic outcomes during high school transitions. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into which student factors are supportive of growth mindset interventions and how they can be optimized for maximum effectiveness in improving academic performance during high school transitions.
Created on 05 Jun. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 1

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.