Mind your mindset. An empirical study of mindset in secondary vocational education and training

ABSTRACT

Mindset plays a pivotal role in academic achievement. In particular, a growth mindset is related to academic success. This study explored the role of mindset in Secondary Vocational Education and Training (VET). Participants were 1005 VET students attending eight different vocational programmes on three qualification levels in the rural southwest of the Netherlands. They filled out an online questionnaire that was combined with the school administration system for demographical information and school results. Results showed that 13.9% of the participants had a fixed mindset, 47.3% a growth mindset, and 38.8% a mixed mindset. Our findings indicate that VET students’ mean mindset does not substantially differ from the mindset of students in other forms of education. However, the majority of VET students does not have a growth mindset and mindset and academic achievement seem to be unrelated.

KEYWORDS:

• Vocational education
• Mindset
• implicit theories
• Intelligence
• Incremental

Introduction

Over the years many studies have demonstrated the importance of mindset while solving challenging tasks (e.g. Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007; Burnette et al. 2012; Dweck 2006; Dweck, Chiu, and Hong 1995; Dweck and Leggett 1988; Paunesku et al. 2015). That is, the mindset will influence whether and how a student will face a new and challenging task. According to Dweck (2006) mindset comes in two forms, a growth and a fixed mindset. Students with a growth mindset, or an incremental theory of intelligence, believe that intelligence is malleable and can be developed by learning. They adapt learning goals and have a mastery-oriented response to setbacks. Students with a fixed mindset or an entity theory of intelligence, believe that intelligence is something you possess and cannot be changed. They adopt performance goals and often have a helpless response towards setbacks (Dweck and Leggett 1988).

Mindset develops from prior experiences with people in the environment where they grew up, such as parents and siblings, peers or teachers at school (Dweck 2006; Good, Rattan, and Dweck 2012; Pomerantz and Kempner 2013). However, it is generally uncorrelated with prior education (Dweck, Chiu, and Hong 1995), Big Five personality factors, and intelligence (Spinath et al. 2003). Students with a growth mindset attach more value to learning than appearing smart, they like to work harder, and see setbacks as a challenge to cope with. Students with a fixed mindset prefer to look smart, work as little as possible and tend to stop when faced setbacks (Dweck and Leggett 1988)

Adopting a growth or a fixed mindset can have important consequences as it predicts students’ academic performance over time (Blackwell et al. 2007). This is particularly evident when students face challenging tasks, like difficult programmes (Davis et al. 2011; Mueller and Dweck 1998), difficult transitions such as going from elementary school to high school (Blackwell et al., 2007; Yeager et al. 2016), and in situations of underperformance of individuals who belong to negatively stereotyped groups (De Castella and Byrne 2015).

On the other hand, adopting a growth mindset leads to greater achievement and success. For instance, teaching the malleability of intelligence to seventh and eighth graders led to higher grades in mathematics (Blackwell et al., 2007), higher grade point average GPA of undergraduate college students (Aronson, Fried, and Good 2002), and led to an increase in GPA of underperforming high school students (Paunesku et al. 2015).

Despite the large number of studies on mindset (Blackwell et al. 2007; Burnette et al. 2012; Dweck, Chiu, and Hong 1995; Paunesku et al. 2015), to the best of our knowledge, none of these focussed on secondary vocational education and training (VET), which is the largest form of secondary education in most countries of the world. Vocational education is mostly populated by students who are more likely to have experienced problems in their academic development. These experiences might have led to the development of a fixed mindset (Davis et al. 2011; Rattan, Good, and Dweck 2012). The aim of our research was therefore to investigate the prominence of a fixed mindset in vocational education.

A global average of 46% of upper secondary students are enrolled in a vocational programme (OECD 2015). Because VET is the main supplier of people to the labour market, it is often seen as the foundation of the economy and the backbone of society. Traditionally VET-students learned a profession or craft they continued to work in during their entire professional career. Nowadays, to cope with fast-changing technology and social changes VET focusses more on improving skills and competencies, and students are more broadly trained so they can be more flexibly employed in the labour market (Greiff, Niepel, and Wüstenberg 2015).

In this study, we explored incremental theories of intelligence in Dutch senior VET where 67% of upper secondary students are enrolled in a vocational programme (OECD, 2015). In the Dutch selective school system, two tracks can be identified after primary education. The best-performing students are admitted to the general education track, while the lower performing students have to attend the vocational education track, where they learn a craft or a trade. The vocational education track consists of primary vocational education and VET (1–4 years, age 16 years and older, 4 different levels). The VET programmes are classified in four qualification levels: Qualification level 1, assistant training; Qualification level 2, basic vocational education; Qualification level 3, professional training; Qualification level 4, middle-management training. Although Dutch VET schools “are well-resourced and perform well” (OECD 2016, 39), there is still room for improvement, particularly concerning student motivation (OECD 2016). Improved motivation is in general associated with an incremental theory of intelligence or a growth mindset (Dweck and Leggett 1988).

When entering VET most students may have had many failure experiences in prior education (e.g. they have been told that they are underachievers or that they are not smart enough to get admitted to high school). This will most likely influence their mindset and lead to a fixed mindset (Aronson, Fried, and Good 2002; Good, Rattan, and Dweck 2012). Therefore, we hypothesise that the majority of students in VET do not have a growth mindset (Hypothesis 1).

During their vocational education, the level of instruction is more in line with their capacities. This could influence the mindset of VET students in two ways. First, as the level of education is more in line with the students’ capacities, it will lead to more successes and better achievements in school, which can stimulate a growth mindset (Yeager and Dweck 2012). Second, the peers and teachers at school will provide more positive experiences, which can help to promote a growth mindset (Dweck 2006). Therefore, we hypothesise that a fixed mindset will decrease over years of training in VET (Hypothesis 2).

In the vocational education, in addition to a diploma from primary vocational education, some programmes require that future students meet additional admission requirements that are tested in a selection procedure. It is to be expected that students with a growth mindset will be more willing to go through this selection procedure and will invest more effort in it (Dweck 2006). Therefore, we hypothesise that vocational programmes with additional admission requirements, compared to those programmes that do not, will have more students with a growth mindset than with a fixed mindset (Hypothesis 3).

Furthermore, the effect of mindset on academic performance will be stronger on challenging tasks, because the role of mindset becomes more important when the task becomes more complicated (Dweck 2006; Paunesku et al. 2015). When a student succeeds in adopting a growth mindset, it is likely to lead to a higher academic performance (Paunesku et al. 2015; Yeager and Dweck 2012). We hypothesise that students with a growth mindset will have higher academic outcomes, especially on tasks that students are experiencing as difficult (Hypothesis 4).

In sum, the present study investigates whether findings from previous studies can be extrapolated to VET. According to Burnette et al. (2012) who stated that mindset is generally uncorrelated with (prior) education and intelligence, we assume, based on the arguments mentioned above, that the results of prior research are not necessarily similar in VET. We will measure students’ the students using an online questionnaire that was linked with the VET administration system to connect it to demographical information, programme information and grades. We examined the relationship between mindset and study year, admission requirements, vocational programmes, and between mindset and academic achievement.

Method

Participants

Participants were 1005 students (501 males, M_age = 20.11 years, SD = 6.81) attending eight different vocational programmes (healthcare assistant, n = 108; laboratory technician, n = 58; mariner, n = 48; media designer, n = 31; military trainee, n = 43; personal healthcare assistant, n = 171; IT worker, n = 194; sports coach, n = 352) from qualification levels 2, 3 and 4 from a VET institute with five schools for Adult and Secondary Vocational Education (VET) in the rural Southwest of the Netherlands.

The four vocational programmes in our study with a selection procedure with additional admission requirements are the mariner programme where students get a maritime health check, the media designer programme where students have to prepare a portfolio presentation to demonstrate their skills, the military trainee programme where the students get a medical examination, and the sport coach programme where the students must pass an athletic skills test and a psychological assessment. All participants gave informed consent.

Materials and procedure

Dweck’s (2000) implicit theories of intelligence scale for children (age 10 and older) was used. The original 6-items English questionnaire was translated into Dutch using the forward-backward translation method (Epstein, Santo, & Guillemin 2015). The questionnaire contains items rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 6 (Strongly Agree). The scale consists of six items: three entity theory statements (e.g. “You have a certain amount of intelligence, and you really can’t do much to change it”), and three incremental theory statements (e.g. “You can always greatly change how intelligent you are”; Dweck, 2000). The entity theory items are reversed scored and a mean score is calculated for the six items, with a low score (1) representing agreement with an entity theory, and a high score (6) agreement with an incremental theory. Participants with a score of 3.0 or below are typified as having a fixed mindset and participants with a score of 4.0 or above a growth mindset. Using this criterion, researchers reported that, on average, about 15% of the participants’ scores between 3.0 and 4.0 and are typified as having a mixed mindset and the others are roughly evenly distributed between a fixed mindset a growth mindset (Dweck, Chiu, and Hong 1995). Several studies reported reliability and validity of the English scales. Blackwell et al. (2007) found an internal reliability of .78 for the implicit theory of intelligence scale. Test–retest reliability was .77 over a two-week period. Dweck, Chiu, and Hong (1995) found an internal reliability of .94 – .98 for the implicit theory of intelligence scale. The internal reliability in our Dutch six items scale is .74.

All students from the VET institute were invited by e-mail to fill out the online questionnaire at the beginning of the second 10-week term. Completing the questionnaire took approximately 10 minutes, the students were asked to return the questionnaire within two weeks. Ten gift vouchers could be won through a lottery among the students who returned the questionnaire. After one week a reminder was sent to the students. The questionnaire was linked to the VET administration system, so demographical information, programme information and grades from the first 10-week term were automatically linked to the participants. Permission was also obtained from students and the school administrators to use the data from the VET administration system.

Formative academic achievement is measured with study credits. One study credit represents about 40 hours of study. Due to structural differences in the vocational programmes, the number of obtained study credits may vary per programme. Therefore, we calculated the percentage obtained credits of the maximum credits that could be obtained. When a student is ahead of the scheduled programme, the percentage of obtained credits can be higher than 100%. Because the system of obtaining study credits can vary per programme, we also took the results for national language and mathematics are determined by a national test, as measures of academic achievement. All vocational programmes throughout the country are obliged to use these tests, so this is a good standard to compare different programmes. Students can take their national test for both national language and mathematics in the second half of their vocational programme, they are free to choose the moment when they think they are ready for it. So, at the time this study took place, from various programmes, 286 students (28.5%) took their exam for national language and 272 (27.1%) for mathematics.

Results

First, we calculated the mindset of all participants. 13.9% had a fixed mindset, 47.3% a growth mindset, and 38.8% a mixed mindset.

Analysing the fixed mindset of the students (see Table 1), taking all programmes together, excluding delayed students (n = 20), we found on average a decrease of fixed mindset from study year 1 to study year 2 and from study year 2 to study year 3. From study year 3 to study year 4, we found an increase of fixed mindset. These differences are however not statistically significant as determined by one-way ANOVA for the effect of study year on mean mindset, F(3,981) = 1.20, p = .31, η_p² < 0.01.

Table 1. Mindset in VET.

				Mindset in %
	n	M	SD	Fixed	Mixed	Growth
Students	1005	3.83	0.81	13.9	38.8	47.3
Study year
1	316	3.85	0.79	14.9	41.8	43.4
2	294	3.86	0.78	13.9	40.5	45.6
3	261	3.96	0.87	11.9	36.8	51.3
4	114	3.83	0.82	16.7	34.2	49.1
Admission requirements
No	531	3.92	0.82	12.8	38.0	49.2
Yes	474	3.83	0.81	15.2	39.7	45.1

Next, we divided the participants in the eight different vocational programmes and analysed the results from mindset and study year. There were no significant effects of study year on mindset in the eight different vocational programmes. Table 1 also shows differences between vocational programmes with and without additional admission requirements. Analyses showed a marginally significant difference between vocational programmes with and without additional admission requirements on mean mindset, F(1,983) = 3.20, p = .074, η_p² = <0.01. The effect of mindset on the standardised scores of study credits, F(2,312) = 2.16, p = .118, η_p² = 0.01, as the effect of mindset on the standardised scores of a national language, F(2,278) = 2.43, p = .090, η_p² = 0.02, and on the standardised scores of mathematics, F(2,276) = 2.19, p = .114, η_p² = 0.02, did not show significant differences.

We conducted a Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) to determine a statistically significant difference between mindset on academic achievement measured by the standardised scores of national language and mathematics. Using Wilks’s lambda there was no significant effect of mindset on the standardised results of national language and the mathematics, Λ = 0.98, F(4,452) = 0.95, p = .436, η_p² < 0.08.

Discussion

This study explored the mindset of students in VET and investigated whether findings from previous studies can be extrapolated to VET. We expected that at the start of their training most VET students would have developed a fixed mindset as a result of negative experiences during prior education. However, given that VET is more at the level of most students, they will get more positive experiences and will therefore gradually develop a growth mindset when they progress through the programme. Furthermore, it was expected that in more competitive programmes (i.e. with additional admission requirements), more students would have a growth mindset. To get admitted to these programmes students have to intensify their efforts and show persistence, characteristics that better fit with a growth mindset. Our last hypothesis was that students with a growth mindset will have higher academic outcomes, especially on challenging tasks.

The mean mindset score of students in VET is equal to that of most previous studies, but some studies found lower means (e.g. Dweck, Chiu, and Hong 1995) and some showed a higher mean (e.g. Blackwell et al., 2007; Donohoe, Topping, and Hannah 2012; Tempelaar et al. 2014). Although we used the same criterion as in prior research (Dweck, Chiu, and Hong 1995), we found far more students with a mixed mindset and much less students with a fixed mindset. On one hand, the small number of students with a fixed mindset is line with the OECD (2016) report, which typifies the Dutch school system as a system with a strong VET and with a low proportion of poor performers. On the other hand, the same reports denote the lack of motivation among Dutch students, which is more in line with students with a fixed mindset. Further research is necessary to clarify this issue. Overall, we conclude that mindset is not substantially different in VET compared to other levels of education.

We found no significant differences in mindset related to study year (Hypothesis 2). We expected an increase of growth mindset caused by the positive experiences of the students in VET (Dweck 2006), because the level of the programme is more in line with the capacities of the students. A possible explanation can be the increasing difficulty of the programme over the years, which provides not necessarily more positive experiences. Or, as mentioned above, is the lack of motivation (OECD 2016) more persistent, which cannot be eliminated by the positive experiences of the student in the vocational programme (Dweck 2006)?

Mindset did not differ between vocational programmes with or without additional admission requirements. This result is not in line with our third hypothesis and is not in line with findings from a comparison between general and selective schools (Ahmavaara and Houston 2007): Students attending selective schools showed more of a growth mindset than students attending non-selective schools. However, the selective schools in their research are more based on intelligence and academic aspirations, while the selective system in our study is more based on physical or artistic skills. The VET students in our research have to pass for a certain test or task, which students can experience as praise on ability. Dweck (2006) has shown that praise on ability is one of the factors that promote a fixed mindset. So, maybe this has a stronger effect on students’ mindset than the willingness to work hard to get admitted to the programme.

In line with a study by Paunesku et al. (2015) we assumed that students with a growth mindset will have higher grades, but this relationship can mainly be seen during challenging tasks. However, we did not find a significant positive relationship between a growth mindset and standardised scores on national language, mathematics and study credits. A possible explanation might be that national language and mathematics tests and study credits are not sufficiently difficult enough for the VET students to find this relationship. Interestingly, Paunesku et al. (2015) used students’ GPA in core academic courses (i.e. math, English, science, and social studies), also found a similar pattern of results, albeit weaker.

The findings of our present study are partly in line with earlier research. First, our findings confirm that the theory of mindset (Dweck 2006), can indeed be extrapolated to VET, and that mindset is generally uncorrelated with the level of education (Burnette et al. 2012). However, it is important to note that more than half of the VET students, and hence in other forms of education as well, do not have a growth mindset, and consequently, there is still room for improvement. Second, in contrast to previous studies (Blackwell et al., 2007; Paunesku et al. 2015), the present study did not find a significant relationship between mindset and academic achievement in VET.

The present study has several limitations. The questionnaire was administered at one VET institute in a rural area of the Netherlands, although it can be largely characterised as a typical VET school, it has fewer minority groups and low incomes than VET schools in larger urban areas. And, as the OECD (2016) stated, the Dutch VET, in general, has fewer low performers compared to VET in other countries. This might have affected the results, so research on a larger scale such as Mindset Scholars Network (2015) is recommended.

Conclusions

In general, the effect of mindset on academic performance is considered to be most visible on challenging tasks and with students at risk. However, for the students who completed their exams on national language and mathematics, two challenging exams, we did not find a difference as a result of mindset. A finding that might be explained that these exams were less challenging than expected for our participants. There might be a similar explanation for academic achievement as measured by study credits. But the question remains why we do not find any relation between mindset and academic achievement.

Although, our findings showed no evidence for differences in mindset between students in secondary vocational education and other levels of education, further research is required to gain a more complete understanding of mindset in VET. That is, more than half of the students in VET do not have a growth mindset, but, compared with findings from prior research, we found only a small number of students with a fixed mindset. Thus, an important question that arises from this study how it this can be explained. The absence of a relation between mindset and academic achievement is a second question that needs to be further investigated. This question is important because it will help us to resolve the issue of whether or not it is essential to promote a growth mindset in VET.

Consent to participate

All participants gave informed consent and for underage participants parents gave informed consent. Permission was obtained from both students and school administrators to use the data from the school administration system.

Consent for publication

All participants were given full anonymity; no data relating to individual participants are included in the paper.

Ethics approval

At the time of research, our University did not have an ethical committee for research. The research has been conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the American Psychological Association (APA) and the Code of Conduct for Academic Practice 2004 (pdf) of the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU). The utmost care was taken by the researchers to make ensure this. The anonymity and well-being of the participants was respected at all times.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The authors declare that there was no funding received for this study.

Notes on contributors

Jaap Glerum

Jaap Glerum is Head of Department of Healthcare courses at Scalda, a school for Secondary and Vocational Education. He is a PhD candidate at Roosevelt Center for Excellence in Education (RCEE), University College Roosevelt (UCR), Utrecht University (UU).

Sofie M. M. Loyens

Sofie M. M. Loyens is director of the Roosevelt Center for Excellence in Education (RCEE) and full Professor of Excellence in Education in the departments of Social Sciences and Academic Core at University College Roosevelt (UCR), Utrecht University (UU). Her chair of Excellence in Education is the first (and only) of its kind in the Netherlands.

Remy M. J. P. Rikers

Remy M. J. P. Rikers is director of the Roosevelt Center for Excellence in Education (RCEE), full Professor of Learning and Instruction in the departments of Social Sciences and Academic Core at University College Roosevelt (UCR), Utrecht University (UU), and full professor of Educational Psychology at the Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR).