EXPLORING THE CORRELATION BETWEEN TEACHERS’ MINDSET AND JUDGMENT ACCURACY TO REVEAL THE CUES BEHIND TEACHERS’ EXPECTATIONS by M. Brady Webb A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in Curriculum and Instruction Boise State University May 2015 © 2015 M. Brady Webb ALL RIGHTS RESERVED BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COLLEGE DEFENSE COMMITTEE AND FINAL READING APPROVALS of the dissertation submitted by M. Brady Webb Dissertation Title: Exploring the Correlation Between Teachers’ Mindset and Judgment Accuracy to Reveal the Cues Behind Teachers’ Expectations Date of Final Oral Examination: 28 April 2015 The following individuals read and discussed the dissertation submitted by student M. Brady Webb, and they evaluated her presentation and response to questions during the final oral examination. They found that the student passed the final oral examination. Jonathan Brendefur, Ph.D. Chair, Supervisory Committee Keith W. Thiede, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee Michele Carney, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee Jennifer L. Snow, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee The final reading approval of the dissertation was granted by Jonathan Brendefur, Ph.D., Chair of the Supervisory Committee. The dissertation was approved for the Graduate College by John R. Pelton, Ph.D., Dean of the Graduate College. DEDICATION I dedicate this to my husband for your unwavering support, encouragement, positive attitude, and patience. You are the epitome of a growth mindset. I also dedicate this to my children, Mae and Gus, who are the ultimate reason behind why I love being in education and why education should be the best it can be. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the amazing people who guided and influenced me along the way to making this doctoral goal a reality. I would not be writing this page without you. To my committee members, I sincerely appreciate your invaluable contributions to and feedback on my dissertation. Your different perspectives contributed to a much richer dissertation, as well as conversations! Dr. Brendefur, thank you. As my advisor and chair, you knew how and when to push me, and you added so much depth to my knowledge as a student and educator. Your help revising and improving my work allowed me to see things I otherwise would not have. It was you who suggested pursuing certain lines of inquiry that resulted in the greatest breakthroughs in my understanding. Your overall part in my doctoral journey is enormous. It’s no wonder I came to this program after taking MTI with you and Dr. Carney! It has all come full circle. Thank you. Dr. Thiede, thank you for being on the other end of the phone a few years ago when I first inquired about Boise State’s doctoral program. Little did I know that when my children were carrying on in the background and you commented “wow, you have a lot going on. Come get your doctorate!” that I would be writing this now! You helped me see quantitatively amidst my more qualitative-oriented mainframe, by bringing these two worlds together and culminating in this dissertation. Dr. Snow, you have always been a role model and source of inspiration because of your commitment to excellence in the classroom, and your advocacy of doctoral students. Your passion for qualitative work is v contagious, and I channeled you when I excitedly and tirelessly dove into my interview transcripts that lie at the heart of this dissertation. Dr. Carney, you have always been the voice of reason and taught me the importance of knowing one’s strengths. Your questions and wise insight give me a richer understanding of the topic at hand. Thank you for always being there for support and clarification. You ask the best questions! I would also like to express my sincerest gratitude for the other Boise State professors (in addition to my committee members I had as professors!) that I learned from and with. You made my doctoral experience richer and of higher quality. Being in your classes truly shaped me and this dissertation. Thank you Dr. Johnson, Dr. Peralta, Dr. Dismuke, Dr. Rodriguez, and vicariously Dr. Gabbard! And to Dr. Stewart, I will forever be in awe of your patience and kindness. My doctoral career was drastically improved because of working with you. You embody collaboration, respect, mentoring, and professionalism. I sincerely thank you. I’ve heard it said that the doctoral program doesn’t have a cohort, per say. But to that I say you’re wrong because my cohort was with me every step of the way. Angie, your brilliance, humor, and consistency kept me above water; and you pulled me out when I fell through the ice! Thank you so much. To Lenny, Petya, Liesl, Kelli, Belma, Scott, and Ann—our meetings, emails, texts, and bursts of inspiration will forever be the anchor points. To Tatia, Mike, Brad, Jan, I thank you for your friendships, sharp wit, creative minds, and inspiring conversations. So to my cohort, I say I am forever grateful for you. Most of all I want to thank my family. You have altered and sacrificed so much for me. Thank you for your bottomless patience, support, flexibility, and belief in me vi throughout this entire doctoral journey and dissertation endeavor. The copious hours spent away from you culminate here in this dissertation. Making you proud kept (and will always keep) me going. Mae and Gus, thank you for being so brave and understanding during this journey. I hope seeing your mom on her doctoral path serves as a positive role model rather than a reason for therapy! Craig, you kept our team strong and our children so grounded. You truly did every thing to make this happen. Thank you for being SuperDad! Without you, I don’t know how I would have finished my doctorate, let alone stay upright and forge ahead. Thank you so much for being my compass. You are everything to me. vii ABSTRACT Teaching is about constantly evaluating one’s students to best situate them for learning and future progress. Based on such evaluations, the academic expectations teachers hold for their students influence their instructional practice and are mediators of student achievement. Forming accurate expectations of students’ ability and accurate predictions of performance is instrumental to effectively improving instruction and advancing student learning. Therefore, when teachers form inaccurate expectations of student academic performance, students can suffer academically and personally. When teachers’ judgments of student learning are based on accurate information reflecting students and their learning, students can benefit academically and personally. Yet, little research exists that specifically examines teachers’ mindsets, and its influence on the cues teachers use to judge student learning. The research questions for this study are: Is there a relationship between a teacher’s judgment accuracy and mindset? What are the cues that fixed and growth mindset teachers use to make their judgment of students’ learning and academic performance? Does the teacher’s mindset influence this cue- usage? The purpose of this study is two-fold: the first quantitative study examines the correlation between teachers’ mindset (growth or fixed) and their ability to accurately judge students’ academic performance; the second qualitative study explores the cues that teachers with a fixed or a growth mindset use to judge their students’ learning and academic performance. The accuracy (or inaccuracy) of teachers’ judgment may shed viii light on connections between teachers’ mindset and expectations, and how well teachers actually know their students, leading to practical implications in teacher education, teaching, and teacher-student interactions. Keywords: teacher expectations, growth mindset, fixed mindset, judgment accuracy ix TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ......................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... v ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................... viii LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................. xvi LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. xvii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ................................................................ 1 Background of the Problem .......................................................................................... 1 Problem Statement ........................................................................................................ 4 Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................... 5 Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 6 Nature of the Study ....................................................................................................... 7 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................. 9 Expectancy Effect Theory ............................................................................... 10 Expectancy Mediation Theory ........................................................................ 12 Expectancy Confirmation Theory ................................................................... 15 Implicit Theories ............................................................................................. 17 Definition of Terms..................................................................................................... 17 Assumptions and Limitations ..................................................................................... 18 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................ 19 x
Description: