The Influence Of Learners’ Mindset On The Effectiveness Of A Teaching Method

ABSTRACT

This paper sought to investigate and describes learners’ mindsets and their influence on teaching method. The researcher focused on Dweck’s mindsets theories and Illeris’ social learning theory to understand learners’ mindsets and their relations to teaching method. A qualitative research method was employed, and data was collected from few selected Senior High School in Ho Municipality of Volta Region, Ghana. An in-depth interview of 100 learners was conducted. The interview covers a range of questions relating to mindsets and teaching method. A discursive analysis was used to analyze learners’ interviews. The findings of the study reveal that high achievers in learning demonstrate growth mindsets within the three dimensions of learning, and low achievers demonstrate fixed mindsets within the cognitive and emotional dimensions as well as growth mindset within the social dimension. It is therefore concluded that mindsets are socially constructed and have an influence on the learners’ achievements which further influence the teaching method. Based on this finding, for effective learning, there is a strong need for interventions to support learners’ development of growth mindsets, particularly within the cognitive and emotional dimensions of learning. This can be achieved by adopting a teaching method to suit with the growth mindset of learners.

Keywords:

Learning, Fixed Mindsets, Growth Mindset, Cognitive Dimension, Emotional Dimension, Social Dimension.

INTRODUCTION

As a result of constant changes in the educational curricula used by the Ghana Education Service due to many educational reforms since 1982, teaching methods continue to change in line with these educational reforms (Barnes, 2009). Although with this curricula changes, learners’ performance and its learning has been consistently low. This calls for a change in teaching method that will conform to students’ or Learners’ mindset (2002). Therefore, there is the need to adopt appropriate teaching methods which are informed by the learners’ mindset in order to provide either equal education opportunities or the proper educational environment for learners including the appropriate teaching method. This influences the mindsets learners hold and their achievements in classrooms. Mudaly (2018), asserts that several studies have been carried out on learners’ poor performance in any teaching method perceived to be influenced by learners’ mindset. It was reported that learners perform well based on their growth mindsets and it has influenced the teaching method adopted by teachers throughout Ghana. In subjects like mathematics and science, for example, educators have put in a lot of efforts into recognizing the primary problems combating the learning of mathematics and science in schools involving diverse teaching methods. These efforts include the emergence of many research and development initiatives in various subjects across Ghana. There has been diverse study correlating learners’ mindset with teaching method to improve the academic achievement of learners (Adolphus, 2011; Sibiya & Mudaly, 2018). Locally, nationally, and internationally, there is substantial evidence of learners’ declining participation in mathematics and its learning. In a lot of societies, learners are increasingly opting out of mathematics learning (Cann, 2009; Murray, 2011; Leder& Taylor, 2010). Based on this, Attard (2011), asserts that a lot of learners do not enjoy or see the importance of mathematics and its learning as just a few persons willingly continue to learn it. This is a clear manifestation of learners’ mindset in the study of mathematics and other related subjects. It goes a long way for the teacher to adopt a teaching method which will help to erase this type of mindset from the learners.

The table 1 below shows the response of interviewees on growth and fixed mindsets on high and low achievers:

60 interviewees out of the 100 respondents hold the view that high achievers demonstrate growth mindset. This represents 60 percent of all the respondents sampled, 40 out of the 100 respondents representing 40 percent hold a contrary view. Also 80 out of the 100 respondents representing 80 percent hold the view that low achievers demonstrate fixed mindset while the remaining 20 representing 20 percent disagree.

Mindsets and Illeris’ Social Learning Theory

An important factor that is always perceived to have an outstanding impact on the learners’ attributes and dispositions, such as race, gender, attitudes, beliefs, perceptions and motivation concerning their mindset and its influence on teaching method is the implicit theories of mindsets of intelligence and abilities. Many researchers have presented the idea that learners’ implicit theories or mindsets of intelligence and abilities influence learners’ achievement and decisions in learning and subsequently the teaching method (Van Aalderen-Smeets & Walma Van Der Molen, 2018; Mercer & Ryan, 2010; Blackwell, Trzesniewski, &Dweck, 2007). It is not surprising that learners’ mindsets have gained traction in educational contexts as learners’ mindsets are critical in education. Learners’ mindsets are important for an in-depth understanding of differences in learners’ performance in the classrooms, as well as for forecasting long-term differences in learners’ achievement in learning (Anthony &Walshaw, 2009; Bishop, 2012; Mercer & Ryan, 2010; Moore, 2018; Shively & Ryan, 2013; Zhang, Kuusisto, &Tirri, 2017). This paper, therefore, proposes a starting place for talking differently about mathematics and science teaching and learning in Senior High Schools. The notion of learners’ mindsets is used as a metaphoric lens through which to reinterpret learning, and as a practical basis for understanding learners’ mathematics and science cognition, emotion and social being, and as a means to bringing into dialogue some of the ways of thinking about supporting and sustaining effective participation in mathematics and science teaching and learning method at Senior High schools in Ghana.

Attention on learners’ mindsets gives an insight into a means of understanding, unpacking and addressing the learners’ emotional responses, their self-positioning with respect to other learners, as well as the surrounding discourses of the subject. Dweck’s mindsets theories talks about people’s qualities, as well as what and the ways they learn. These are premised on two unique kinds of mindsets namely growth mindset which believes that intelligence and smartness can be learned. This implies that people have the ability to change their central personalities, have the capacity to learn and grow. The second is fixed mindset which believes that people’s intelligence and talents are fixed, and their destiny is to avoid challenges and failure in life (Dweck, 2013). This will influence the type of teaching method that the educator will adopt to improve the learning outcome.

Illeris’ social learning theory is principally premised uniquely on the three learning processes which are basically classified into the external and internal learning processes such that it encompasses the learning field entirely which are external learning process which involves the external interaction process between learners and their social, cultural or material environment, which is the social process or dimension. Secondly, the internal learning process that is the internal psychological processes of acquisition and elaboration are the cognitive and the emotional processes or dimensions. Illeris postulates that learning takes place on different levels such as cognitive level, emotional level and social level. All these levels are influenced by social context and support of the environment kind of practice that impact it (Illeris, 2009). This is where the type of teaching method to be adopted comes into play.

This article draws on Illeris’ social learning theory (SLT) as a theoretical lens to explore the influence of mindsets in the teaching method adopted by teachers at Senior High Schools in Ghana and particularly Ho Municipality of Volta Region. The researcher used three dimensions such as cognitive, emotional and social dimensions of Illeris’ social learning theory (ISLT) to compile the article. Within this context, Bernstein’s notion of a strongly framed and strongly classified subject (SFSCS) was encompassed and Dweck’s mindsets theories (MSTs) that involved distinction between the fixed mindset and growth mindset. Generally, these enable the researcher to understand the influence of mindset within the cognitive, emotional, and social frame of a learner in the context of influencing the teaching method.

Social Learning Theory (SLT)

It is important to indicate that there are various types of learning theories (LTs) that help to explain how we learn. Every learning theory (LT) emphasizes different aspects of learning, and each is useful for different purposes. This paper is situated within the social learning theory as it covers the three schemas of LTs such as behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. A social learning theory (SLT) is found suitable in this work because it takes social interactions into consideration. A learner can learn from anybody like his/her teachers, parents, and peers. SLT is pertinent to the actions we take every day and in our policies, including the technical, organizational, and educational systems which have been designed (Badyal & Singh, 2017; Illeris, 2007).

The concept of learning and teaching method needs to be understood comprehensively. Therefore, there is a need to revise traditional learning theories. It must be emphasized that the actual learning theory is about how learning takes place and functions in various situations and not about how it can be streamlined as an industrial production process, just simply because learning is entirely human and in no way an industrial matter (Illeris, 2015). Based on this perspective, Illeris’ social learning theory (ISLT) is seen as a comprehensive learning theory and is most suitable for this study. ISLT is selected because it embraces the learning field entirely and it (ISLT) is presented based on the fundamental assumptions that learning involves three different processes which are classified into two unique processes, namely acquisition process where the internal psychological process of acquisition and elaboration of the acquisition such as the cognitive and emotional occurs inside the learner and interaction between the individual learner and his/her environment. That is the external interaction process between a learner and his/her social and cultural or material environment which include the social which occurs outside the learner (Illeris, 2009, 2015).

There are two unique processes from the three dimensions of social learning. They include the content dimension involving understanding, knowledge, and skills and the incentive dimension such as motivation, emotion and volition. These two dimensions have to do with the individual acquisition process. The social and society dimension which has to do with acquisition through interactions such as action, communication and cooperation. It is the interaction process between the individual (learner) and his/her environment. It is worth noting that without the consideration of the three dimensions of social learning, there is no learning process that can be understood completely (Illeris,2015; Strauch& Alomar, 2014). As such, Illeris’ three dimensions of social learning are briefly discussed. With this, a teaching method that is influenced by mindset can be adopted using the following dimensions:

Cognitive Dimension

The cognitive dimension relates to the learning content. It is referred to as the knowledge that develops a learner’s understanding and ability or the knowledge and understanding of oneself including one’s strengths and weaknesses (Illeris, 2015). This implies that the cognitive dimension or the learning content subjectively influences the learners’ own mindsets which subsequently influence the teaching method. Additionally, the cognitive dimension is often subjectively influenced by the learners and the individual’s emotional and motivational value ascribed to it so the emotional and motivational engagement is always influenced by the learning content which affects the choice of the teaching method (Illeris, 2015). The cognitive dimension may trigger the learners’ mindset positively or negatively with/without the enthusiasm and persistence to learn. This because some learners sometimes feel determined/frustrated, excited/bored, and courageous/anxious during teaching and learning which are all socially related. These imply that the cognitive dimension is related to the learners’ mindsets since it has an impact on the mindsets they hold.

Emotional Dimension

The emotional dimension entails mental energy or volition, feelings, and motivations. It is about the volition, feelings, and motivation in the learning process. In this sense, this dimension could be referred to as the incentive dimension of learning. The content of learning is a function of the energy produced by the incentive received. The incentive drives the energy and motivates a learner for the acquisition of learning content, while interesting and pertinent learning content motivates a learner in the learning process. The main function of the emotional dimension is for the learner to attain mental balance, and at the same time builds a personal sensibility (Illeris, 2015). The emotional dimension within mathematics and science learning is that there is so little choice. This makes the teachers and learners feel more helpless. Consequently, it is equally evident that this dimension of social learning is connected to learners’ mindsets, whether fixed or growth mindsets as it influences the volition, feelings, and motivations of the learner about a teaching method and vice versa in the learning process. All these influence the learners’ mindsets either positively or negatively. The positive emotions relate to the learners’ growth mindset while the negative emotions relate to the learners’ fixed mindset. These are equally influenced by the cognitive aspect as well, which are all socially constructed.

Social Dimension

The social dimension involves the interaction process since there are always other persons who are involved directly or indirectly, and it is connected to society. This is external interaction, such as participation, communication, and cooperation. This provides a learner’s integration into communities, as well as society, and consequently develops the learner’s sociability (Illeris, 2015). The learner’s interactions with the community have an impact on the mindset he/she holds. As such, it is evident that this dimension is linked to other people’s mindsets including fixed mindset and growth mindset. The mindsets of the learner’s teachers, parents, and peers concerning the learners’ mindset influence the teaching method. It is worth noting that the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions are always connected. Based on this, it is crucial to note that learning reflects the social and societal situations whereby a learner will be able to interact. The three dimensions, therefore, provide a comprehensive lens to explore learners’ mindsets and their influence on teaching method.

The Concept of Learning and Mindsets

There is widespread disagreement among researchers on the definition of the concept of learning. In the traditional conception, learning was viewed as the acquisition of a syllabus or curriculum (Strauch& Alomar, 2014). Ertmer and Newby (2013) view learning as an enduring change in behavior, or in the capacity to behave in a given fashion, which results from practice or other forms of experience. Illeris (2015) views learning in its broad sense as a very complex process which encompasses both biologically founded psychological and societally founded social elements which follow different sets of logic and work together in a complex interaction” (Illeris, 2015).

Socialization into the Knowledge of a Strongly Framed and Strongly Classified Subject like mathematics and science subjects

According to Bernstein (1973), boundaries are about classification. Therefore, If the classification is strong, then the boundaries are strong. Within boundaries, maintenance is strong when something is strongly framed, the boundaries around the knowledge are not porous but strong. One cannot break outside of this. If one needs to understand the subjects such as mathematics and science., There is the needs to understand it within the boundaries (Bernstein, 1975, 1973b). Framing refers to relations within boundaries. Strong framing entails reduced options. Frame is correlated with control and refers to the degree of control a teacher and learner possess over the selection, organization, pacing, and timing of the knowledge transmitted and received in the pedagogical relationship which influences the teaching method (Bernstein, 1973b: p. 50; Bernstein, 1973a: p. 88; Bernstein, 1975: p. 88). Therefore, strong framing is referred to as a limited degree of options between teachers and learners. Strong classification means strong boundaries where boundaries are explicit, and categories are separated from each other. Classification is correlated with power. There is no control that either the teachers or learners have over the content of a strongly framed and strongly classified subject. One can only teach or learn it in a specific way using a particular and more suitable teaching method (Bernstein, 1973b, 1973a).

Ensuing from the above, mathematics and science subjects are strongly framed and strongly classified subject (SFSCS) as its learning and knowledge are strongly framed, strongly classified, abstract, and formulaic. Furthermore, the teachers’ and learners’ participation in relation to SFSCS is restricted so both the teachers and learners of it (SFSCS) do not have much power and control or say over an SFSCS, as well as its knowledge and what is required. These influence people’s mindsets concerning the subject and its learning. It is as well critical to note that a learner gets socialized into strongly framed and strongly classified knowledge of subjects such as mathematics and science. Based on this, the researcher looks at learners’ mindsets in an SFSCS and the way the mindsets are perceived and experienced within a social learning context to complement and help to explain them, as it is in the analysis of this paper.

Learners’ Dispositions and Their Influence on Learning and teaching method

Mindsets are principally focused on dispositions. Learners’ achievements in the learning process of SFSCS are ascribed to various dispositions of the learners which include beliefs, attitudes, and abilities. Based on this, this section reviewed studies on the influence of learners’ dispositions on the learning of SFSCS, such as attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions toward the learning of SFSCS, as well as confidence and competence of learners in the learning of SFSCS. Low and high achievements of learners in SFSCS are attributed primarily to the learners’ attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions which are features of learners’ mindsets as well. It is worthy of note to emphasize here that mindsets are about dispositions which implies that mindsets are about attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions. Therefore, this study focuses primarily on the three learners’ dispositions, such as attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions, as well as the influence the dispositions have on learners’ achievements in SFSCS and its learning. The studies: Heyd-Metzuyanim (2013), Tshabalala and Ncube (2013), as well as Mbugua, Kibet, Muthaa, and Nkonke (2012) reveal various reasons for learners’ poor achievement in SFSCS and its learning and how it influences teaching method. According to Maliki, Ngban and Ibu (2009), there is good learners’ achievement in SFSCS learning and that if a learner has a positive attitude towards SFSCS and its learning, this will reflect in his/her performance in the subject and goes further to influence teaching method. In addition, Boaler, William and Zevenbergen (2000) assert the influence learners’ perceptions have on their achievement in SFSCS learning. The three attributes such as attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions are briefly discussed below.

Learners’ Attitudes towards Learning

Mindsets are about attitudes. According to Tshabalala and Ncube (2013), high failure rates in SFSCS and its learning can be attributed to learners’ mindsets such as the absence of learners’ interest, willingness, determination, and learners’ anxiety toward SFSCS and their learning of SFSCS which later influence teaching method. The high failure rates are a consequence of the learners’ negative attitudes toward SFSCS and its learning (Uwerhiavwe, 2014). Learners’ attitudes toward SFSCS and its learning have huge impacts on their achievement in the learning of SFSCS. Maliki et al. (2009) assert that attitude predicts behaviour. Therefore, it can be inferred that the perceived difficulty of SFSCS and its learning by some learners is because of their negative attitude towards SFSCS and its learning. This is evident in a learner who holds a fixed mindset. If a learner has a negative attitude towards SFSCS and its learning, then this will reflect negatively on his/her performance on the subject (Maliki et al., 2009). This will warrant for a change in teaching method to improve performance. For example, a negative attitude towards SFSCS and its learning relates to the learner’s mindset particularly fixed mindset. This is a pointer to the notion that mindsets are about attitudes. In this light, mindsets influence learners’ attitudes towards SFSCS and its learning as well as teaching method to be adopted to improve teaching and learning outcome (Dweck, 2013c; Vermeer, 2012). A positive attitude towards SFSCS and its learning relates to the learner’s mindset as well. This is a pointer to the standpoint that mindsets are about attitudes and it influences teaching method geared towards improving performance of learners.

Learners’ Beliefs about Learning and its influence on teaching method

Mindsets are about beliefs as previously indicated. Some learners have a strong belief that SFSCS and its learning are naturally difficult, a daunting task and that SFSCS is meant for intelligent and talented learners which implies that learners who hold a fixed mindset are most likely not to perform well in class (Ali, Bhagawati, & Sarmah, 2014; Tshabalala & Ncube, 2013; Uwerhiavwe, 2014). There is the influence of positive beliefs of learners or growth mindset on SFSCS and their learning of SFSCS. Uwerhiavwe (2014) asserts that most learners have the belief that when interest and determination are present, SFSCS and its learning become easy, enjoyable, and interesting. In this paper, the researcher explored learners’ beliefs as a crucial disposition that influences their achievement in SFSCS and its learning as such influences teaching method. As mentioned above, learners’ mindsets whether fixed and growth mindsets are products of the learners’ beliefs which influence teaching method (Dweck, 2013c). These mindsets are influenced by the learners’ experiences as consequential from the impacts of their learning in the learning process and vice versa (Illeris, 2015).

Learners’ Perceptions about Learning

Mindsets are about perceptions. In a qualitative study, Boaler, William, and Zevenbergen (2000) show that, despite being relatively successful in SFSCS and its learning, many learners claimed to dislike SFSCS and its learning—some with real intensity. This is as well evident in a learner who has developed a fixed mindset regarding the subject and its learning. Boaler et al. (2000) attribute the dislike of SFSCS and its learning not only because the routine and practical nature of learning SFSCS prevent the learners access to understand SFSCS—although that was important, but also because the learners’ perceptions toward SFSCS and its learning as being complex, abstract, technical and practical, conflicted with the learners’ notions of self, and who they intended to become. Most learners related their rejection of SFSCS and its learning based on their beliefs on their personalities and how they perceived themselves in SFSCS and its learning mindsets specifically a fixed mindset. The learners’ responses suggest that procedural presentations of SFSCS make SFSCS and it learning less enjoyable or prevent an understanding of SFSCS for some of the learners. On the contrary, some learners enjoyed SFSCS and its learning, although very few of the learners who liked SFSCS and its learning, identified with SFSCS; and their reasons for liking SFSCS and its learning were mainly related to their perceptions of being good at it or because it would lead to a desired further phase of education or employment mindsets and specifically, a growth mindset (Boaler et al., 2000). Based on this, the researcher explored the aspects of learners’ claim to dislike SFSCS and its learning despite their being relatively successful in SFSCS and its learning.

Based on the preceding discussions, mindsets entail constructed dispositions and they influence teaching method. Although, the understanding is that while having in-depth knowledge of mindsets as about beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions, there is the need to understand that these are not only internal but are influenced by external relations with other people and in context. Therefore, mindset is all socially influenced and constructed as it is opposed to something innate, something that is biological, or something that is given in a predetermined way. Simply, mindsets are social constructions in relation to other people and in context. For a learner to have a positive attitude towards learning is a consequence of the way he/she is socialized, the kind of background he/she comes from, the amount of support that has been given to him/her or support given by his/her teachers, peers plus parents or family members, the experiences he/she has had in the SFSCS classroom, and whether he/she has passed or failed examinations or simply whether he/she is a high or low achiever in the subject. All these contribute to a positive or negative mindset of the learner. A learner’s mindset is not something personal. Therefore, in this paper, the researcher explored mindsets and their influences on the learning of mathematics and science subjects.

Problem Statement

Acquisition is a keyword that is often used in most definitions of the concept of learning, specifically, in traditional definitions (Illeris, 2009). In Illeris’ (2015) words, learning can no longer be conceived of as merely the acquisition of a syllabus or curriculum (Illeris, 2003: p. 397; Illeris, 2007; Schunk, 2012; Strauch& Alomar, 2014). Change in behaviour or the capacity to behave in a certain way is influenced by the mindsets people hold concerning what is being learned, and is more evident in strongly framed and strongly classified subjects like mathematics and science subjects. Mindsets are beliefs concerning people’s intelligence and abilities (Dweck, 2013a, 2013b; Yeager &Dweck, 2012). This influences the teaching method. The teacher and learners have little or no power and control on the knowledge transmitted and received respectively (Bernstein, 1975). All learners have developed a mindset. The two mindsets that can develop in learners are the negative mindset which leads to failure. This is the fixed mindset and the positive mindset which leads to success. This is the growth mindset (Bernecker & Job, 2019; Boaler, 2016; Tirri & Kujala, 2016; Yeager & Dweck, 2012). However, it is imperative to note that there is a possibility for a learner to have both a fixed mindset and a growth mindset. That is, to have a fixed mindset in one domain and a growth mindset in another domain (Mercer & Ryan, 2010). Therefore, it would be an oversimplification to conceive the assumption that a learner’s mindset forms a simple dichotomy, that is either a fixed mindset or a growth mindset. Yong (2017) argues that a learner’s mindset can be different by a domain of knowledge. In other words, a learner’s self-perception as a learner of mathematics or any science subject is high and he/she has a growth mindset concerning the learning of SFSCS. However, the learner’s self-perception as a learner of English language may be low and he/she has a fixed mindset about learning the subject. Therefore, the researcher has chosen to focus on learners’ intelligence and abilities in the mathematics and science subject’s context which form the domain of learning in this paper.

Aim of the study

The following are the main objective of the study:

Main objective

1. The main objective is to Find out the influence of learners’ mindset within the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions in adopting a teaching method.

Minor objectives:

The minor objectives are to:

2. Find out the most dominant dimension of learning that has more influence on teaching method.
3. Find out how growth mindset influences the teaching method more than the fixed mindset

Two theoretical perspectives that frame this study were reviewed before proceeding to outline some of the learners’ dispositions and attributes that may influence teaching method especially the teaching of mathematics and science at Senior High Schools in Ho Municipality of Volta Region. Different perspectives on learning and more specifically of mathematics and science learning and how learners’ mindset influences the teaching method adopted which Bernstein describes as strongly framed and strongly classified were considered. Based on the interview which was focused on two theoretical perspectives, an attempt was made to show a link between learner mindsets and teaching method.

The importance of the study

The study is indispensable to both academics, educationists and students in choosing the best teaching method for learners who have growth or fixed mindset for their academic improvement. Teacher trainers and classroom teachers will make use of the findings to advance the frontiers of teaching and learning. Ghana Education Service will also make use of the outcome of this study in designing education curriculum that will take care of both low and high achievers.

Methodology

This paper adopted a qualitative research method situated within an interpretive approach It makes sense of phenomena and interprets the phenomena in terms of the meaning people bring to them. It is particularly useful for inductive approaches to generate novel insights into phenomena that are difficult to be measured quantitatively, as well as to study educational settings and processes, which usually involve direct interaction with the participants (Cohen, Monion, & Morrison, 2007; Creswell, 2012). This is based on the grounded theory. The qualitative approach was used to enable the researcher to gain an in-depth understanding of the complex social processes of mindsets and their influence on teaching and learning. Specifically, a case study research design was used and the Ho Municipality was used as a case study for this research. Case study creates opportunities to explore and seek specifically for reasons, for clarification, for asking questions, as well as prompting learners to give explanations for actions and choices they display towards teaching and learning, as well as their constructed mindsets. The development of a learner’s mindset in the study of subjects like mathematics and science subjects is social in nature. Learner’s mindset is regarded as a phenomenon that is socially developed and can be researched using a survey design (Cohen et al., 2007; Wenger, 1998). Suter (2012) asserts that many description-oriented research questions in education can be answered by an intensive study of a single person, single group, or similar unit, such as a classroom or school district. Based on this, a case study is descriptive, interpretive, enlightening and gives an in-depth understanding of viewpoints, as well as being suitable and fitting for the goals of this paper.

Sampling methods and sampling size

Purposive sampling was used to select 100 learners from selected Senior High school in Ho Municipality of Volta Region. The researcher made the choice of these schools for exploration based on its convenience and the fact that the schools were mixed school with gender and tribal balance. Tribe, gender and academic achievement were the main criteria that were used in the sampling of the participants. For the level of achievement, teachers assisted the researcher in categorizing the learners as low and high achievers based on their experiences in teaching the learners and the records of their performance in class. In the school, there were more female than male learners. Therefore, the researcher randomly selected 60 (60%) female and 40 (40%) male learners within those that satisfied the stated criteria with 50 of them as low achievers and 50 as high achievers. The 100 learners provided sufficient information for this paper.

Table 1: Gender of respondents

Source: Researcher's Field work, 2024.

Based on referential statistical analysis, the chart in figure 1.1 is used to give an in-depth illustration of the gender of respondents.

Sources of data

Data was collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews (Fontana & Frey, 2000). Semi-structured interviews were used because it gives access to the facts of the paper’s participants and allows them to tell their stories about vital experiences that are useful to the paper. The ways in which these experiences influenced the learners’ mindsets and their implications for the choice of teaching method were thoroughly explored through the semi-structured interviews using interview guides. The interview is an integral part and one of the valuable methods of data collection. The interview focuses on the influence of mindsets on learning. Prior to the interviews, the researcher ascertained the availability of the 100 learners and confirmed if they were interested, motivated and willing to be interviewed at school. Permission was sought from the relevant authorities before the interview session and minors were excluded from the interview session. The interview was documented and audio-recorded the discussions in the interviews with the learners with informed consent.

Table 2: Influence of learners mindset frequency (f) percentage (%)

Source. Researchers Field work, 2024.

Based on the data obtained from table 2 on the influence of learners’ mindset, 40 respondents representing 40 percent opined that learners mindset is influenced by the cognitive while 35 representing 35 percent hold the view that learners mindset is influenced by emotion. The remaining 25 representing 25 percent assert that social dimension influence learners mindset.

Therefore, the dominant dimension of learning is the cognitive dimension. As high achievers demonstrate growth mindset, it suggests that teachers should try as much as possible to growth mindset in their teaching methods for their students.

Based on the data on table 2 obtained from the researchers field work,

Analysis of data

Qualitative data analysis does not have a single or specific way of approach. Therefore, data were analyzed based on how they suitably fit the aims of the paper (Creswell, 2012). In this paper, the theoretical fields are Dweck’s mindsets theory and Illeris’ social learning theory, while the empirical fields are data collected from learners’ responses. In this paper, the qualitative data analysis entailed making sense of transcripts derived from the learners’ audio-recorded interviews by identifying and looking for codes that align with the themes to answer our research questions (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010). One of the goals of this analysis is to uncover emerging themes, patterns, concepts, insights and understandings of collected data (Patton, 2002).

Reliability of data

In order to develop an analytical framework for this paper, the researcher used the inductive process to make the analysis of the data explicit, coherent and to substantiate claims with stronger evidence. When translating the raw data into readable form, all the audio-recorded interviews were fully transcribed. An iterative process in data coding was conducted through exhaustive reading and re-reading of the transcripts. The generated data were initially coded on a line-by-line basis often refers to as open coding (Mercer & Ryan, 2010). Thereafter, the researcher employed axial coding for further classification of the data. Dweck’s theory of mindsets and Illeris’ social learning theory provided the theoretical bases for the coding of the data. This enabled a complete identification of relevant codes reflecting the participants’ mindsets which developed in relation to the learning of subjects like mathematics and science subjects as well as developing a teaching method. Therefore, all the coded data were analyzed in terms of the three dimensions of Illeris’ social learning theory and the two kinds of mindsets such as growth and fixed mindsets of Dweck’s mindsets theory as the themes and relationships.

Sample size determination

This was calculated using Yamane’s formula thus: n = 1/N+1)²

where n = sample size

Population size

e = margin of error

The sample was obtained purposively using informed consent from the school authorities.

Research Instruments

The instrument used to collect the data was interview guide to enable the researcher to remain focused during the interview session. The questions in the interview guide are both open and close ended questions. There was no interpreter to avoid distortion of information. The language of the interview was English language. This was possible because all the learners were highly proficient in English language.

Ethical Issues

There was no gender discrimination and minors were not included in the study. Those who were interviewed voluntarily gave their consents before the interview session. There was confidentiality on the information provided by respondents and such data were used only for academic purpose.

Findings

The findings of the 100 learners are presented according to two broad categories: low achievers and high achievers. Thereafter, one case of each category is presented as a typical illustrative example across the data set.

Low Achievers’ Learners and High Achievers

The low achievers are 50 and findings among them are based on the 3 research questions:

Research Question 1

What is the influence of learners’ mindsets within the cognitive, emotional and social dimension in adopting a teaching method?

40(66.67%) of the low achievers believe that fixed mindset influenced their academic performance and teaching method should be tailored towards fixed mindset in improving their academic performance while 20(33.33%) disagreed and believe that whether they study or not, talent that is in built in them will definitely determine their academic performance.

The reverse was the case with high achievers who believe that growth mindset where learners study constantly and the teachers working as supervisors only to the students.

Research Question 2

What is the most dominant dimension of learning that has more influence in teaching method?

90 (90%) of respondents agreed that growth mindset is the dominant dimension of learning in most schools where students are allowed to study and interact in groups to share ideas. the teacher only serves as a supervisor. The remaining 10 (10%) say that the fixed mindset was the more dominant dimension of learning.

Research Question 3

How does growth mindset influence the teaching method more than the fixed mindset?

98 (98%) of respondents who are both high and low achievers agree that since the growth mindset brings about more interactions among most students, it is the best teaching method where the teacher only acts as a facilitator and supervisor. It also helps the students to unearth their creativity and share ideas among themselves. The remaining 2 (2%) disagree and prefer the fixed mindset where students depend on what they call their inborn talents.

Summary of findings

In light of the analysis of findings based on the 100 learners, the researcher noted a pattern of mindsets in relation to learners’ teaching method. It was observed that a more classical case of high achievers being associated with a growth mindset. It is somehow a complex pattern is noted in the case of low achievers who show a classic case of a low achiever with a fixed mindset across. This indicates that learners who are high achieving do have a better sense of themselves, cognitively. They also feel more emotionally confident, and they also utilize the social support that may be needed. In light of the analysis of findings based on the ten learners and ensuing from the three dimensions (cognitive, emotional and social) are central as they connect each other. However, the learners view the social dimension as the most important in the learning process of an SFSCS. More so, the learners who are high achievers are balanced and none of them views the cognitive dimension in fixed ways; and the learners who are low achievers lack on cognitive and emotional levels (dimensions) more and view the social level, therefore, as important. Furthermore, the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions seem to be responsible for influencing the learners’ learning leading to achievements or performances in the learning process. There is an influence of mindset on their achievement which is located in the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions of the learning process.

Finally, based on the analysis of findings given the ten learners, the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions seem to be responsible for influencing the learners’ learning leading to their achievements in the subject. It is crucial to note at this point that achievement does not infer that all the dimensions must be positive at all times in the learning process. Some dimensions may seem to constrain learning, yet a learner still performs well, and some dimensions may seem to afford learning, yet a learner still performs poorly. As such, there is an influence of mindset on the learners’ achievement which is located in the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions of the learning process.

Conclusion

In this study, the researcher found that learners’ mindset has various consequences on their learning, such as the growth mindset has influences on learning as it affords learning and leads to success in learning, and the fixed mindset equally has influences on learning as it tends to constrain learning and fundamentally leads to failure in learning (Dweck, 2006, 2007; Tirri & Kujala, 2016). In this sense, interventions that teach learners with a fixed mindset can improve the learners’ achievement with time suggesting the fundamental role of these mindsets in enhancing the learners’ motivation plus their achievement” in learning. More so, interventions represent a powerful means of transmitting a growth mindset to learners who have constructed a fixed mindset. Interventions teach a fixed mindset by transmitting the ways learners’ intelligence and abilities can grow stronger over time by taking on hard tasks and persisting in learning (Haimovitz & Dweck, 2017). An intervention can shape learners with a fixed mindset perception of their abilities and influence their motivation and achievements in learning.

The researcher found that high achievement is possible if the cognitive and the social are dealt with concurrently and positively. Therefore, if learners on the cognitive level with growth mindsets are considered, and emotionally with a growth mindset, as well as socially with a growth mindset and they all work concurrently. This is what high achievers’ profiles show and then high achievement can be attained. However, there is the need to work with the cognitive, emotional and social all together all the time and keep in mind that in each dimension there are many variables. Therefore, the cognitive is made up of a lot of things, the emotional is made up of a lot of things, and the social is made up of a lot of things, and that is complex. If we can get those interplays within the different dimensions to work concurrently in a balanced way, then high achievement can be achieved. Mindsets are socially constructed, but they interplay between the cognitive, emotional and social, and they emerge out of all of those. Simply put, mindsets are never only social, and that is why they emerge out of the cognitive, emotional and social levels; hence, mindsets are socially constructed. That is because mindsets are fluid and dynamic as well, as well as change all the time, and that means, as well as the reason why people do not fit neatly into a growth mindset or fixed mindset.

Social learning theories and mindsets theories should be viewed together to avoid mindsets being viewed as and leading to innates assumptions about learning possibilities. That is, if we work with social learning theories, as well as see mindsets theories in relation to social learning theories and they are viewed together, then one of the effects that it can have been to prevent people from seeing mindsets as innate. In other words, if you work with social learning theories and mindsets theories together, it will help to move away from innates assumptions. More so, if you work with social learning theories together with mindsets theories, then you will see that learning is complex and dynamic, it is about an interplay between internal and external forces, and they operate on all three dimensions and all of these things are dynamic, as well as affect the constructing of mindsets.

In line with the above, the researcher concludes with the following answers to the first research question, mindsets play a crucial role by influencing the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions of learning, which in turn, have an impact on the learners’ achievements in an SFSCS like mathematics in the learning process and regarding the second question, the social dimension has more influence on learning as it is extremely substantial in influencing learners’ achievements in the learning process.

Authors

Thomas Nipielim Tindan, Department of Science Education. C. K. Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences. Navrongo Ghana.

Francis Malir Kagben, Department of Science Education. C. K. Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences. Navrongo Ghana.

REFERENCES

Abdulhamid, L., &Venkat, H. (2018). Primary Mathematics Teachers’ Responses to Students’

Offers: An “Elaboration” Framework. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 51, 80-94.

Adolphus, T. (2011). Problems of Teaching and Learning of Geometry in Secondary Schools in

Rivers State, Nigeria. International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 1, 143-152.

Bhagawati, S., &Sarmah, J. (2014). Performance of Geometry among the Secondary School

Students of Bhurbandha CD Block of Morigaon District, Assam, India. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development, 3, 73-77.

Anthony, G., & Walshaw, M. (2009). Effective Pedagogy in Mathematics. UNESCO and

International Bureau of Education, Educational Practices Series 19, GonnetImprimeur.

Attard, C. (2011). “My Favourite Subject Is Mathematics. For Some Reason No-One Really

Agrees with Me”: Student Perspectives of Mathematics Teaching and Learning in the Upper Primary Classroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 23, 363-377.

Badyal, D. K., & Singh, T. (2017). Learning Theories: The Basics to Learn in Medical Education.

International Journal of Applied and Basic Medical Research, 7, S1-S3.

https://doi.org/10.4103/ijabmr.IJABMR_385_17

Bansilal, S., Webb, L., & James, A. (2015). Teacher Training for Mathematical Literacy: A Case

Study Taking the Past into the Future. South African Journal of Education, 35, 1-10.

Barnes, H. E. (2009). Pre-Service Teachers’ Mathematics Profiles and the Influence Thereof on

Their Instructional Behavior. PhD Thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria.

Bernecker, K., & Job, V. (2019). Mindset Theory. In K. Sassenberg, & M. L. W. Vliek (Eds.),

Social Psychology in Action (pp. 179-191). Springer.

Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, Codes and Control Volume 3: Towards a Theory of Educational

Transmissions. Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Bishop, J. P. (2012). “She’s Always Been the Smart One. I’ve Always Been the Dumb One”:

Identities in the Mathematics Classroom. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43, 34-74.

https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.43.1.0034

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, 246-263.

Boaler, J. (2013). Ability and Mathematics: The Mindset Revolution That Is Reshaping

Education. Forum, 55, 143-152.

https://doi.org/10.2304/forum.2013.55.1.143

Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical Mindsets: Unleashing Students’ Potential through Creative

Math, Inspiring Messages, and Innovative Teaching (1st ed.). PB Printing.

Cann, R. (2009). Girls’ Participation in Post-16 Mathematics: A View from Pupils in Wales.

Gender and Education, 21, 651-669.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education (6th ed.).

Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203029053

Creswell, J. (2012). Educational Research. Pearson.

Darragh, L. (2013). Constructing Confidence and Identities of Belonging in Mathematics at the

Transition to Secondary School. Research in Mathematics Education, 15, 215-229.

Department of Basic Education (2014). National Senior Certificate Examination School Subject

Report. Department of Basic Education, South Africa.

Dweck, C. S. (2013). Teaching a Growth Mindset’ at Young Minds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXhbtCcmsyQ

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing

Critical Features from an Instructional Design Perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26, 43-71.

Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2000). The Interview: From Structured Questions to Negotiated Text.

In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 645-672). Sage.

Haimovitz, K., &Dweck, C. S. (2017). The Origins of Children’s Growth and Fixed Mindsets: New Research and a New Proposal. Child Development, 88, 1849-1859.

Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (2013). The Co-Construction of Learning Difficulties in Mathematics-

Teacher-Student Interactions and Their Role in the Development of a Disabled Mathematical Identity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 341-368.

Illeris, K. (2015). The Development of a Comprehensive and Coherent Theory of Learning.

European Journal of Education, 50, 29-40.

Jansen, J. (1999). A Very Noisy OBE: The Implementation of OBE in Grade 1 Classrooms. In J.

Jansen, & P. Christie (Eds.). Changing Curriculum: Studies on Outcomes-Based Education in South Africa (pp. 203-218). Juta.

Leder, G. C., & Taylor, P. J. (2010). Are Raelene, Marjorie, and Betty Still in the Race?

Australian Mathematics Teacher, 66, 17-24.

Maliki, A. E., Ngban, A. N., &Ibu, J. E. (2009). Analysis of Students’ Performance in Junior

Secondary School Mathematics Examination in Bayelsa State of Nigeria. Studies on Home and Community Science, 3, 131-134.

Martin, D. B. (2006). Mathematics Learning and Participation as Racialized Forms of

Experience: African American Parents Speak on the Struggle for Mathematics Literacy. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8, 197-229.

Mbugua, Z. K., Kibet, K., Muthaa, G. M., & Nkonke, G. R. (2012). Factors Contributing to

Students’ Poor Performance in Mathematics at Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education in Kenya: A Case of Baringo County, Kenya. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2, 87-91.

McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry.

Pearson Education.

Mercer, S., & Ryan, S. (2010). A Mindset for EFL: Learners’ Beliefs about the Role of Natural

Talent. ELT Journal, 64, 436-444.

Moore, M. (2018). Mindset and Mathematics in an All-Girls Secondary School. PhD Thesis,

Charles Sturt University.

Murray, S. (2011). Secondary Students’ Descriptions of “Good” Mathematics Teachers.

Australian Mathematics Teacher, 67, 14-20.

Nasir, N. S., & Hand, V. M. (2006). Exploring Socio-Cultural Perspectives on Race, Culture, and

Learning. Review of Educational Research, 76, 449-475. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076004449

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Sage.

Reyes, L. H., &Stanic, G. M. A. (1998). Race, Sex, Socioeconomic Status, and Mathematics.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19, 26-43.

Schratz, M. (2006). Leading and Learning: Odd Couple’ or Powerful Match? Leading and

Managing, 12, 40-53.

Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning Theories—An Educational Perspective (6th ed.). Pearson.

Shively, R. L., & Ryan, C. S. (2013). Longitudinal Changes in College Math Students’ Implicit

Theories of Intelligence. Social Psychology of Education, 16, 241-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-012-9208-0

Sibiya, M. R., & Mudaly, V. (2018). The Effects of the Geoboard on Learner Understanding of

Geometry Theorems. International Journal of Sciences and Research, 74, 90-98. https://doi.org/10.21506/j.ponte.2018.11.8

Strauch, C. C., & Alomar, M. J. (2014). Critical Analysis of Learning Theories and Ideologies

and Their Impact on Learning: “Review Article”. The Online Journal of Counseling and Education, 3, 62-77.

Suter, W. N. (2012). Introduction to Educational Research: A Critical Thinking Approach. Sage.

https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384443

Tirri, K., &Kujala, T. (2016). Students’ Mindsets for Learning and Their Neural Underpinnings. Psychology, 7, 1231-1239.

https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2016.79125

Tshabalala, T., &Ncube, A. C. (2013). Causes of Poor Performance of Ordinary Level Pupils in

Mathematics in Rural Secondary Schools in Nkayi District: Learner’s Attributions. Nova Journal

of Medical and Biological Sciences, 1, 4-14.

Uwerhiavwe, A. A. (2014). The Impact of Teacher Development and Student Preparation in

Mathematics Education in Senior Secondary Schools in Delta State, Nigeria: A Collective Case Study. Master’s Dissertation, Memorial University of Newfoundland.

Van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., &Walma Van Der Molen, J. H. (2018). Modeling the Relation

between Students’ Implicit Beliefs about Their Abilities and Their Educational STEM Choices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28, 1- 27.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9387-7

Vermeer, A. (2012). 15 Benefits of the Growth Mindset. https://alexvermeer.com/15-benefits-

growth-mindset

Weber, E. (2008). Educational Change in South Africa: Reflections on Local Realities, Practices,

and Reforms. Sense Publishers.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge

University Press.

Wenger, E. (2009). A Social Theory of Learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.). Contemporary Theories of

Learning (pp. 209-218). Routledge.

Yeager, D. S., &Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets That Promote Resilience: When Students

Believe That Personal Characteristics Can Be Developed. Educational Psychologist, 47, 302-314.

Yong, D. (2017). Growth Mindset and Learning about Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.

Zhang, J., Kuusisto, E., &Tirri, K. (2017). How Teachers’ and Students’ Mindsets in Learning

Have Been Studied: Research Findings on Mindset and Academic Achievement. Psychology, 8, 1363-1377.