青少年的成长型思维可以有效培养吗？——基于一所农村学校为期三年的干预追踪调查

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2025.04.006

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

培养成长型思维是国际经济合作和发展组织提升青少年核心素养的重要策略。然而，近年来的一些实证研究削弱甚至否定了该干预策略的正向推动作用，且该领域在东亚文化情境中缺乏本土化的干预实验证据。针对成长型思维理论的干预有效性质疑以及文化适应性争议，本研究对通用的成长型思维培养方案进行本土化改良，于2021～2024年在长三角地区的一所农村小学开展为期三年的随机干预实验与追踪调查，并采用倍差法来评估干预效果。研究发现，本土化的成长型思维培养方案显著提高了农村学生的成长型思维水平，并具有长期效应；干预对年龄越小或初始思维水平越低的学生效应越大；课程所带来的成长型思维的提升有效地改善了学生的学习行为，包括抑制消极学习动机、弱化能力型归因、提高过程型同伴反馈以及强化努力型归因。基于本研究的结果，学校、家庭和社会应当通力合作，共创成长型教育文化环境，强化成长型育人理念，尽早且持续地对处境不利学生进行成长型思维的培养，通过心理资本培育实现学业差距弥合与教育公平推进。

关键词: 成长型思维, 青少年, 干预追踪, 学习行为

Abstract:

Cultivating growth mindset is an important strategy for the International Economic Cooperation and Development Organization to enhance the core competencies of adolescents. However, recent empirical studies have weakened or even reversed the positive driving force of growth mindset cultivation, and there is a lack of empirical evidence from East Asia. Addressing the debate of effectiveness of growth mindset intervention and its cross-cultural applicability, this study designed and implemented culturally adapted growth mindset intervention program to a randomized trial and three-year follow-up study at a rural primary school in the Yangtze River Delta region from 2021 to 2024, and used the Difference in Difference method to evaluate the intervention effect. The study found that the intervention program significantly improved the growth mindset level of rural students and had a long-term effect. The effect was more significant for younger students or those with lower initial mindset levels. Besides, the growth mindset enhancement brought about by the intervention effectively improved the students’ learning behavior, including suppressing negative learning motivation, weakening ability-based attribution, improving process-based peer feedback, and strengthening effort-based attribution. Accordingly, schools, families, and society should collaborate closely to jointly create a growth-oriented educational environment, strengthen growing educational principles, equip disadvantaged students with growth mindset as early and as sustained as possible, and bridge academic gaps while promoting educational equity through the development of psychological capital.

Key words: growth mindset, adolescents, intervention and follow-up, learning behavior

张军凤, 云如先. 青少年的成长型思维可以有效培养吗？——基于一所农村学校为期三年的干预追踪调查[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2025, 43(4): 53-69.

Junfeng Zhang, Ruxian Yun. Can Growth Mindset be Effectively Cultivated in adolescents? A three-year Intervention and Follow-up Study Based on a Rural School in China[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educationa, 2025, 43(4): 53-69.

图/表 12

表 1

图 1

表 2

表 3

表 4

表 5

图 2

图 3

图 4

表 6

表 7

表 8

参考文献

	陈纯槿. (2022). 成长型思维能有效提升青少年学业素养吗?. 华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版), 61 (05), 167- 177.
	陈友华, 苗国. (2021). 升学锦标赛、教育内卷化与学区分层. 江苏行政学院学报, (3), 55- 63.
	刁春婷, 周文倩, 黄臻. (2020). 小学生成长型思维模式与学业成绩、生活满意度的关系: 学业自我效能感的中介作用. 心理与行为研究, 18 (04), 524- 529.
	董连春, 闫娜, 孙佳. (2021). 思维模式、学业成绩与问题提出能力的关系研究—以乌鲁木齐市小学生为例. 民族教育研究, 32 (01), 12- 20.
	费孝通. (2008). 乡土中国. 北京: 人民出版社.
	李瑾. (2015). 文化溯源: 东方与西方的学习理念. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
	李抗, 汪凤炎. (2019). 探寻中国人的多重互依自我: 理论、挑战与整合. 心理科学, 42 (01), 245- 250.
	李亚丹. (2019). 情感影响创造性思维的认知神经机制. 北京: 科学出版社.
	宋一锐, 叶彩霞, 王磊. (2022). 新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情期间亲子关系与初三学生自杀意念: 成长型思维的中介效应与久坐时间的调节效应. 中国健康心理学杂志, 30 (06), 801- 807.
	田相娟, 曹衍淼, 张文新. (2020). 母亲消极教养、同伴侵害与FKBP5基因对青少年抑郁的影响. 心理学报, 52 (12), 1407- 1420.
	习近平. (2022). 高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜为全面建设社会主义现代化国家而团结奋斗. 北京: 人民出版社.
	许烺光. (1989). 美国人与中国人: 两种生活方式比较. 北京: 华夏出版社.
	张建卫, 滑卫军, 郑文峰, 付萌萌. (2022). 成长型心智模式何以激发研究生学术激情——基于社会认知理论的视角. 中国高教研究, 12, 59- 65.
	张一波, 张卫, 朱键军, 喻承甫, 陈圆圆, 卢镇辉. (2017). 社区暴力暴露与初中生外化问题行为的关系: 一个有调节的中介模型. 心理发展与教育, 33 (2), 228- 239.
	Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 248- 287.
	Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52 (1), 1- 26.
	Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78 (1), 246- 263.
	Brewer, M. B., & Chen, Y. R. (2007). Where (Who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism. Psychological Review, 114 (1), 133- 151.
	Büchele, N., Keller, L., Zeller, A. C., Schrietter, F., Treiber, J., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Odenwald, M. (2020). The effects of pre-intervention mindset induction on a brief intervention to increase risk perception and reduce alcohol use among university students: A pilot randomized controlled trial. PLoS ONE, 15 (9), e0238833.
	Burgoyne, A. P., Hambrick, D. Z., & Macnamara, B. N. (2020). How firm are the foundations of mind-set theory? The claims appear stronger than the evidence. Psychological Science, 31 (3), 258- 267.
	Burnette, J. L., Hoyt, C. L., Russell, V. M., Lawson, B., Dweck, C. S., & Finkel, E. A. (2020). Growth mind-set intervention improves interest but not academic performance in the field of computer science. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11 (1), 107- 116.
	Campbell, J. R. (1996). Developing cross-national instruments: Using cross-national methods and procedures. International Journal of Educational Research, 21 (7), 675- 684.
	Campbell, J. R., Cho, S., & Tirri, K. (2018). Mathematics and science Olympiad studies: the outcomes of Olympiads and contributing factors to talent development of Olympians. International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 5 (1), 49- 60.
	Claro, S., Paunesku, D., & Dweck C. S. (2016). Growth mindset tempers the effects of poverty on academic achievement, PNAS, 113(31), 8664-8668.
	Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (4), 227- 268.
	Dou, K., Lin, X. Q., & Wang, Y. J. (2020). Negative parenting and risk-taking behaviors in Chinese adolescents: Testing a sequential mediation model in a three-wave longitudinal study. Children and Youth Services Review, 119, 105631.
	Dweck, C. S. & Yeager, D. S. (2019). Mindsets: A view from two eras. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14 (3), 48- 496.
	Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random.
	Dweck, C. S. (2017). Mindset: Changing the Way You Think to Fulfil Your Potential. London: Hachette UK.
	Fink, A., Cahill, M. J., McDaniel, M. A., Hoffman, A., & Frey, R. F. (2018). Improving general chemistry performance through a growth mindset intervention: Selective effects on underrepresented minorities. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 783- 806.
	Gunderson, E. A., Sarah, J. G., Carissa, R., Dweck, C. S., Goldin-Meadow, S., & Levine, S. C. (2013). Parent praise to 1-to 3-year-olds predicts children’s motivational frameworks 5 years later. Child Development, 84 (5), 1526- 1541.
	Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (3rd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.
	James, K. M., Woody, M. L., Feurer, C., Kudinova, A. Y., & Gibb, B. E. (2017). Disrupted physiological reactivity among children with a history of suicidal ideation: Moderation by parental expressed emotion-criticism. Biological Psychology, 130, 22- 29.
	King, R. B., & Trinidad., J. E. (2021). Growth mindset predicts achievement only among rich students: Examining the interplay between mindset and socioeconomic status. Social Psychology of Education, 24, 635- 652.
	Li, Y., & Bates, T. C. (2019). You can’t change your basic ability, but you work at things, and that’s how we get hard things done: Testing the role of growth mindset on response to setbacks, educational attainment, and cognitive ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148 (9), 1640- 1655.
	Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98 (2), 224- 253.
	O’Connor, A. J. Nemeth, C. J., & Akutsu, S. (2013). Consequences of beliefs about the malleability of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 25 (2), 155- 162.
	OECD. (2021). Sky's the Limit: Growth Mindset, Students, and Schools in PISA. Paris: OECD Publishing.
	Paunesku, D., Walton, G. M., Romero, C., Smith, E. N., Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2015). Mind-set interventions are a scalable treatment for academic underachievement. Psychological Science, 26 (6), 784- 793.
	Rissanen, I., Kuusisto, E., Tuominen, M., & Tirri, K. (2019). In search of a growth mindset pedagogy: A case study of one teacher’s classroom practices in a Finnish elementary school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 204- 213.
	Rege, M., Hanselman, P., Solli, I., Dweck, C. S., Ludvigsen, S. R., & Bettinger, E. P. et al. (2021). How can we inspire nations of learners? An investigation of growth mindset and challenge-seeking in two countries. American Psychologist, 76 (5), 755- 767.
	Schleider, J., & Weisz, J. (2018). A single-session growth mindset intervention for adolescent anxiety and depression: 9-Month outcomes of a randomized trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 59 (2), 160- 170.
	Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J. Z., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two meta-analyses. Psychological Science, 29 (4), 549- 571.
	The American Psychological Association. (2023). Kids’ mental health is crisis: Here’s what psychologists are doing to help. Monitor in Psychology, 54 (1), 63.
	Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92 (4), 548- 573.
	Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2020). What can be learned from growth mindset controversies? American Psychologist, 75(9), 1269—1284.
	Yeager, D. S., Bryan, C. J., Gross, J. J., Murray, J. S., Krettek Cobb, D., H. F Santos, P., Gravelding, H., Johnson, M., & Jamieson, J. P. (2022). A synergistic mindsets intervention protects adolescents from stress. Nature, 607 (7919), 512- 520.
	Yeager, D. S., Hanselman, P., Walton, G. M., Murray, J. S., Crosnoe, R., Muller, C., & Paunesku, D. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573 (7774), 364- 369.
	Yeager, D. S., Lee, H. Y., & Jamieson, J. P. (2016). How to improve adolescent stress responses: Insights from integrating implicit theories of personality and biopsychosocial models. Psychological Science, 27, 1078- 1091.
	Yeager, D. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2013). An implicit theories of personality intervention reduces adolescent aggression in response to victimization and exclusion. Child Development, 84 (3), 970- 988.
	Zhang, J. (2022). What characterises an effective mindset intervention in enhancing students’ learning? A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 14 (7), 3811.
	Zhang, J., Kuusisto, E., & Tirri, K. (2019). How do students’ mindsets in learning reflect their cultural values and predict academic achievement? International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(5), 111—126.
	Zhang, J., Kuusisto, E., Nokelainen, P., & Tirri, K. (2020). Peer feedback reflects the mindset and academic motivation of learners. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1701- 1710.
	Zhang, J., Kuusisto, E., & Tirri, K. (2017). How teachers’ and students’ mindsets in learning have studied: Research findings on mindset and academic achievement. Psychology, 8, 1363- 1377.
	Zhang, J., Cai, M., Li, D., & Lv, L. (2024). Think different, behave alike? Situations boost or compromise the correspondence between mindset and pedagogy for teachers in upper-secondary education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 53 (03), 101573.

编辑推荐 0

Metrics

阅读次数

全文

HTML			PDF

最新录用	在线预览	正式出版	最新录用	在线预览	正式出版
0	0	9	0	0	51

来源	本网站	其他网站

次数	42	18
比例	70%	30%

摘要

最新录用	在线预览	正式出版

0	0	85

来源	本网站	其他网站

次数	41	44
比例	48%	52%

	实验组	控制组	年级总班级数
学校	四年级三班四年级四班	四年级一班四年级二班	四
学校	六年级一班六年级三班	六年级二班六年级四班	四

课程	主题	内容	形式
干预课程一	中华努力文化背景下认识并初步培养成长型思维	1.脑科学知识 2.智力和人格可塑性	游戏、讲解、讨论
		1.“我命由我不由天” 2.“天道酬情”“勤能补拙”	视频观看、讲解、讨论
		1.关注过程 2.走出舒适区 3.给自己积极的语言暗示 4.建立成长文件夹	视频观看、讲解、讨论、写信
干预课程二	元认知策略视角下深入培养成长型思维	1.制定SMART计划 2.设立“学习型”目标	游戏、视频观看、讲解、讨论
干预课程三	完善综合评价视域下运用成长型思维	1.鼓励同伴 2.剖析并评价自我	讲解、讨论、写信

变量	Mean	SD	Min	Max	N
成长型思维
T1	−0.35	1.04	−3.80	1.19	294
T2	0.13	0.97	−3.05	1.19	285
T3	0.03	0.95	−2.94	1.19	292
T4	0.09	0.98	−2.96	1.19	294
T5	0.11	0.92	−3.16	1.19	148
T6	0.12	1.06	−3.80	1.19	146
T1的学习行为
积极学习动机	−0.20	0.99	−3.85	1.70	292
消极学习动机	0.02	1.04	−1.60	3.71	293
过程型反馈	−0.19	1.06	−2.89	1.30	292
个人型反馈	0.03	0.99	−2.46	1.98	291
能力型归因	0.10	1.06	−2.69	2.46	291
努力型归因	−0.08	1.05	−4.63	1.18	292
T4的学习行为
积极学习动机	0.15	1.05	−3.38	1.70	294
消极学习动机	0.16	1.10	−0.85	3.71	294
过程型反馈	0.09	0.98	−2.89	1.30	294
个人型反馈	−0.04	1.01	−2.05	1.98	294
能力型归因	0.09	1.05	−1.21	2.46	294
努力型归因	0.00	0.97	−3.00	1.18	294
T1期时的控制变量情况
性别	0.51	0.50	0	1	294
是否是城乡户口	0.18	0.38	0	1	248
是否是本地户口	0.69	0.46	0	1	249
父母是否是国家机关事业单位员工	0.03	0.18	0	1	290
父母最高受教育年限	11.55	2.77	0	19	276

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
	成长型思维
D	−0.052	0.046	0.063	0.040
	(0.121)	(0.144)	(0.155)	(0.156)
T	0.125	0.125	0.108	0.114
	(0.117)	(0.114)	(0.127)	(0.126)
T*D	0.629^***	0.629^***	0.625^***	0.612^***
	(0.163)	(0.161)	(0.173)	(0.173)
六年级		0.240^**	0.283^**	0.286^**
		(0.122)	(0.140)	(0.140)
二班		0.552^***	0.631^***	0.659^***
		(0.158)	(0.188)	(0.184)
三班		0.110	0.155	0.133
		(0.159)	(0.173)	(0.174)
四班		−0.084	0.006	0.008
		(0.122)	(0.141)	(0.142)
性别			0.364^***	0.338^***
			(0.086)	(0.086)
城市户口			−0.176	−0.202^*
			(0.116)	(0.118)
本地户口			0.004	−0.026
			(0.093)	(0.100)
父母为国家机关事业单位员工				0.262
				(0.231)
父母最高受教育年限				0.018
				(0.016)
年级+班级固定效应	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
常数项	−0.324^***	−0.539^***	−0.759^***	−0.927^***
	(0.079)	(0.132)	(0.174)	(0.235)
样本量	588	588	496	492
拟合优度	0.086	0.116	0.159	0.165

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
	成长型思维
D	0.040	0.038	0.035	0.039
	(0.159)	(0.160)	(0.160)	(0.154)
T	0.114	0.114	0.114	0.114
	(0.125)	(0.125)	(0.125)	(0.126)
T*D	0.672^***	0.616^***	0.871^*	0.894^***
	(0.197)	(0.175)	(0.457)	(0.209)
干预效应*男性	−0.128
	(0.198)
干预效应*父母为国家机关事业单位员工		−0.088
		(0.507)
干预效应*父母最高受教育年限			−0.022
			(0.035)
干预效应*六年级				−0.561^**
				(0.235)
控制变量	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
年级+班级固定效应	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
常数项	−0.933^***	−0.928^***	−0.987^***	−0.927^***
	(0.230)	(0.230)	(0.250)	(0.234)
样本量	492	492	492	492
拟合优度	0.169	0.168	0.168	0.178