be high levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (1956; for example, knowledge and comprehension levels) and others at low levels (for example, application, analysis, synthesis, or evaluation), pleased to have a framework that seems well suited to the various locations of students on the ability spectrum. A fixed mindset also disposes these teachers to like labels that name which problems hinder some students and which advantages propel others.
By contrast, teachers with growth mindsets begin with the premise that most students can learn most things if they exert the effort necessary. They also accept the related premise that the teacher’s role is to elicit the effort and join with the student in doing whatever it takes to succeed. They teach up—that is, they design and create work to stretch a student, and then partner with the student to ensure he or she has the support and scaffolding necessary to master what initially seems out of reach. Teachers with growth mindsets want to see students in a variety of classroom groupings—students functioning in an array of contexts that yield insight about what works for them. These teachers have little use for labels but rather seek understanding of what to do tomorrow to help students move to the next step in learning. They neither accept excuses about why a student can’t learn or hasn’t completed work nor buy into the notion that advanced learners should receive high grades for work that was too easy for them. They are proponents of a staunch work ethic for everyone—themselves included.
Teachers, of course, signal students with their conclusions about the likelihood of their success. It is not surprising to hear students who know they are seen as not smart come to see themselves as not smart, and students who know they are seen as smart come to see themselves that way as well. Of greater significance, however, is that the not-smart students attribute their lack of success to factors beyond their control, making statements such as, “Nobody in my family is good at mathematics” or “I just don’t have any talent as a singer.” Often, students who hold such beliefs give up in the face of difficulty because they believe the ability to do the work is simply not in them.
Ironically, when teachers put a premium on being smart rather than on working hard, highly able students suffer as well. They conclude that smartness is something they are born with. When they encounter work they cannot easily accomplish, it seems to indicate that they are not smart after all because smart people do not have to work hard, and this task requires serious work. Often, then, such students will reject the challenge. In fact, bright students with a fixed mindset often select easier tasks in a class, opt to take easier classes, reject feedback on their work as negative judgment, and work for grades rather than for the sake of learning because it is the grade that signals success and smartness.
In contrast, students working with teachers who insist everyone can succeed if he or she works hard enough (and the effort, not genetics, is worthy of celebration) come to believe they can have an impact on their own success. They develop a sense of self-efficacy as learners and are more likely than their fixed-mindset peers to learn for the sake of learning, persist in the face of difficulty, and see feedback as a mechanism for continued improvement. Students who have previously neither seen themselves as capable and successful nor been seen that way begin to work harder, thus contributing to their own success and a more efficacious self-image (Dweck, 2006). Students who have always seen themselves as smart, and, therefore, as people who should not have to work hard, begin to understand the reality that growth and comfort cannot coexist and the nearly universal hallmark of great contributors to society is that they worked harder than their peers.
Figure 2.4 describes the learning environments that result from different combinations of student and teacher mindsets. Clearly, developing a growth mindset is important for both teacher and student success and essential for an effectively differentiated classroom.
Figure 2.4: Possible combinations of fixed and growth mindsets.
Fixed and Growth Mindsets and Differentiation
There is ample evidence that people can and do change their mindsets (Dweck, 2006). Teachers in differentiated classrooms need to be particularly cognizant of their beliefs about where ability comes from and what it means to be smart. At the very least, they should strive to develop a growth mindset. This book’s model of differentiation advocates a teaching approach difficult to implement effectively with a fixed mindset. Some principles of the model follow. Think about how a teacher with a fixed mindset versus one with a growth mindset would respond to the implementation of each of these principles.
• Student openness to the risk of learning begins when a teacher connects with each student and indicates a belief in that student’s value and potential.
• The teacher builds community, beginning with modeling his or her respect for the possibilities of each class member.
• Each student must have consistent responsibilities for the successful operation of the class.
• Students learn to work with increasing independence and self-awareness as learners.
• Students are partners in the belief that every student in the class can and will succeed with the most essential content.
• Fairness is making sure all students get the support they need to succeed.
• Success is, at least in part, determined by student growth, which means students compete against themselves rather than against one another.
• The teacher teaches up—that is, he or she establishes high expectations and differentiates to support all students in achieving high-level goals.
• The teacher uses flexible grouping practices to place each student in various contexts so students see themselves in different settings and have a wide range of opportunities to succeed.
• All students work with respectful tasks—that is, tasks are differentiated in response to individual students’ needs, but all tasks are equally interesting, appealing, important, and dependent on high levels of reasoning.
A teacher with a growth mindset is well positioned to say to students, through actions and words, “I’m so glad you’re here. I’m excited to learn about each one of you because I’m convinced all of you can succeed at a higher level than you had ever thought possible. My job is to work with you to establish a classroom that makes it possible for everyone to succeed. I’m going to ask a great deal of you and also of myself as we work together, because it is your effort and my effort on your behalf that will result in your success. I need your insights about yourself, about one another, and about our class. We will be stronger for the presence of each of you in our classroom.” A teacher with a fixed mindset will find such thoughts much less natural and intuitive.
Likewise, students who have a teacher with a growth mindset will receive consistent signals as well as direct guidance and purposeful actions that will lead them to see the connections between their effort and success at a high level. However, students of a teacher with a fixed mindset will probably find the signals and connections far less clear.
Exercise 2.1 (page 39) offers some questions to help teachers think about their own mindsets and the implications of their responses for differentiation. As the chapter continues, it will be helpful to think about links between teacher mindset and the kind of learning environment that can maximize each learner’s growth and success in an inevitably academically diverse classroom.
Classroom Environments and Differentiation
Learning
