• Compared to students with a growth mindset, students with a fixed mindset are more likely to give up when faced with academic challenges. Girls are more likely than boys to attribute academic failure to lack of ability (a fixed mindset), especially in mathematics (Lloyd, Walsh, & Yailagh, 2005).
• Despite performing as well as boys in math courses, girls doubt their ability to develop their
  math skills when faced with difficult material.This fixed mindset in female math students appears to contribute to the substantial gender gap in math scores that emerges during and after Middle School (Dweck, 2006). 

What the research literature tells about helping girls develop a “growth mindset”:

• Research interventions teaching students that ability can be developed through effort have been found to improve grades and test scores in mathematics (e.g., Blackwell,Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007).
• Girls who are helped to adopt a growth mindset – the belief that ability develops when students wrestle with difficult material – are less likely to view academic difficulty as evidence of lack of ability (Halpern et al., 2007).
• Girls who adopt a growth mindset persist when faced with difficult material and outperform
  students with a fixed mindset (Utman, 1997).

How CRG helps Laurel Middle School students develop a “growth mindset”: 

With curriculum-development support from CRG, students in the Laurel Middle School are taught grade-level appropriate neuroscience lessons about how the brain creates new neuronal connections when learning challenging material. By likening the brain to a muscle (e.g., “brains and muscles develop when challenged by difficult tasks”; “both muscles and brains require sustained effort in order to develop”) Middle School girls are taught that tackling difficult material makes their brains stronger and smarter. CRG also supports Middle School teachers as they remind struggling students that the mind strengthens with effort, and that on-going effort will make the work easier.

REFERENCES

Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H.,  & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit Theories of Intelligence Predict Achievement Across an Adolescent Transition: A Longitudinal Study and an Intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246-263.

Carr, M., Jessup, D. L. & Fuller, D. (1999).  Gender differences in first grade strategy use: Parent and teacher contributions.  Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 20-46.

Dweck, C. S. (2006).  Is math a gift?  Beliefs that put females at risk.  In S. J. Ceci and W. Williams (Eds.),  Why aren’t more women in science?  Top researchers debate the evidence.  Washington, DC:  American Psychological Association.

Halpern, D., Aronson, J, Reimer, N., Simpkins, S., Star, J., & Wentzel, K. (2007).   Encouraging Girls in Math and Science (NCER 2007-2003).  Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. 

Lloyd, J. E. V., Walsh, J.,  & Yailagh, M. S. (2005). Sex Differences in Performance Attributions, Self-Efficacy, and Achievement in Mathematics: If I'm So Smart, Why Don't I Know It? Canadian Journal of Education, 28(3), 384-408.

Utman, C. H. (1997). Performance effects of motivational state: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(2), 170-182.