MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289688000 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v11n1p6

Educational Attainment Post-Pandemic: An Examination of Growth Mindset Language and Strategies in Graduate Students

2022· article· en· W4289688000 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
George Hanshaw, Todd Pheifer, Roxanne Helm-Stevens

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetPsychologyLocus of controlSyllabusPedagogyMedical educationMathematics educationSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines growth mindset, an evidence-based strategy posited by Carol Dweck (2007), within the framework of a classroom at a private, faith-based university. In a post-pandemic time where many students and people have felt adverse effects on their ability to adapt, this research studies the impact of mindset language and strategies on a student’s internal locus of control. The specific question the researchers posited was, does growth mindset language and strategies within a graduate-level class affect a student’s internal locus of control?Participants in this study were Master of Business Management students taking an online employee development course at Azusa Pacific University. The online course was modified to use growth mindset language and strategies. Changes in language focused on effort, starting with the syllabus and project instructions and continuing throughout the course. For example, language used in the weekly overviews focused on effort and explaining why effort was important.Survey results indicated that the graduate students did not report an increase in their level of growth mindset or locus of control. This is hypothetically due to the high level of growth mindset and internal locus of control already felt by the participants. This moves the focus for graduate students from mindset to the environment they are learning in, including the level of psychological safety felt by the students in the classroom.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness and Management ResearchSame topicGrit, Self-Efficacy, and MotivationFrench-language works237,207