C Matthew BonhamgregoryCUIN 7301 summer 2014

Capstone Draft 2

Introduction

It is important for our students to develop and for teachers to promote the positive

personality traits of grit, tenacity, and perseverance as these traits can predict the future

successes of our students (Farrington et al., 2012). Grit is the ability to stick to a task even when

faced with challenges (Snipes et al., 2012). Tenacity is being able to work efficiently and smartly

for an extended amount of time (Dweck et al., 2011). Grit and tenacity work harmoniously to

determine a student’s level of academic perseverance (Farrington et al., 2012).

“Academic perseverance refers to a student’s tendency to complete school assignments in a timely and thorough manner, to the best of one’s ability, despite distractions, obstacles, or level of challenge…To persevere academically requires that students stay focused on a goal despite obstacles (grit or persistence) and forego distractions or temptations to prioritize higher pursuits over lower pleasures (delayed gratification, self-discipline, self-control).” (Farrington et al., 2012)

It is easy to glean from the aforementioned definitions why these are desirable traits. It is

important to note that these traits are non-cognitive (Farrington et al., 2012). Grit and tenacity

are often discussed as being innate personality traits (Farrington et al., 2012). One can possess

the traits without having a high cognitive ability (Battle, 1965). If grit and tenacity are innate

and those traits correlate with the ability to persevere, the conclusion can be drawn that

perseverance cannot be taught. If that supposition becomes ingrained in those teaching the

students, the task to change perceptions become nearly insurmountable. Research indicates

that there are circumstances in the environment that positively influence personality traits,

1

even those found to be innate. (Farrington et al., 2012). Therefore, it is critical that

interventions are implemented in our schools that deliberately promote grit, tenacity, and

perseverance (Snipes et al., 2012). An assertion of a further claim can be made to the

importance of intervention in the middle grades. As students move through middle school,

they are often met with teacher-dominated environments and the given work requires lower-

level cognitive skills (Eccles, Lord, & Midgley, 1991). Conversely, this a time in their lives where

students show greater autonomy from the teacher and begin to think with more complexity

(Farrington et al., 2012).

Grit, tenacity, and perseverance can also be viewed as mindsets. As such, there seems

to be the ability to intervene and change mindsets (Snipes et al., 2012). While grit and tenacity

maybe innate, evidence suggests that their promotion does positively affecting the school

setting — even if it is only temporary and does not carry over outside of school (Farrington et

al., 2012). The focus then should be on the academic mindsets of grit, tenacity and

perseverance, centering on “student attitudes, beliefs, and dispositions [that] affect the quality,

duration, and intensity with which students engage in critical academic behaviors” (Snipes et

al., 2012).

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Technology (OET) recognizes

the importance of these character traits in a board sense but acknowledges the issue has not

been addressed formally in schools. This lack of discussion maybe the reason that research

follows on two diverging paths. One path looks at the traits of grit, tenacity, and perseverance

as the desirable traits we want students to possess (Farrington et al., 2012). The other path

notes these traits as desirable while providing tasks and student surveys in order to analyze

2

their levels of grit, tenacity, and perseverance (Lufi & Cohen, 1987; Snipes et al., 2012; OET,

2013). This presents a problematic gap in research; even if one desired to teach grit, tenacity,

and perseverance the method to do so is lacking. This gap in research was noted by the OET.

They reported, “[t]here is a need to develop empirically based models of pathways for

developing grit, tenacity, and perseverance over time, in different contexts, and for different

types of goals and challenges. Such work would inform the development of learning trajectories

and selecting age-appropriate and context-appropriate interventions”.

Review of Literature

Until the mid-2000s, it was typical for the term grit to be used interchangeably with

persistence. However, recent studies and noted researchers have separated persistence from

grit stating it as long-term grit (Dweck et al., 2011; Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly,

2007). A student will show grittiness, or persistence, if they value the work in which they are

engaging. A common misconception is that intelligence dictates success. However, studies

have shown that effort and beliefs about ability are more indicative of a student successes

(Farrinton, 2012). Several early studies found that there was a low correlation between

intelligence and task persistence (e.g., Nelson, 1931; Ryans, 1939; Thorton, 1941; Kremer, 1942;

Rethingshafter, 1942). Wanting to investigate validate these earlier findings, the Fels Research

Institute commissioned a study to investigate why some students were willing to persist

through a difficult task while others were not (Battle, 1965). Explanations for persistence were

specified. Students holding absolute attainment values will do well in mathematics regardless

of how important it is to do well in other subjects. Students who possess relative attainment

values, feel that other subjects take equal or greater precedent. Therefore, this person spends

3

less time in mathematics because it is more important to them to do well other subjects.

Students who possess neither expect to be successful if they persist at a problem regardless of

difficulty.

Battle’s study revealed four relationships correlating levels of expectancy and goal levels with

their effect on persistence and minimal goal set forth.

1. Goals are moderately set to their ability. The goals matched their ability and they

displayed academic aspirations and persistence.

2. Goals are set higher than their ability. These students gave up quickly and felt there was

little chance to meet their goal.

3. Goals are set lower than their ability. These students felt that it is important to obtain

success. They set lower goals as a defense mechanism thereby preventing any

questioning about their ability. They students lied or underestimated their actual

ability. Students displaying these attributes persisted on tasks longer, even after their

minimal goal had been meet and the fear of failure has eased.

4. Goals are set lower than their ability and are uninterested in challenges. These students

did not feel that doing well is important and was satisfied with meeting minimal goals.

It is important to note that a student of any ability can meet this description.

Classroom culture influences a student desire to persist. If the culture is such that

minimal goals and effort are accepted, than a student is more likely to give up on a task in a

relatively short amount of time. However, it is possible that a student will continue to persist

on a task, even if not naturally inclined to, if influenced to do so by the culture of the classroom

4

in order to gain social acceptability (Battle, 1965). A student’s expectation of how well they will

do, per goal setting, is an important factor in determining persistence (OET, 2013). Additionally,

classroom culture can positively influence persistence (Farrington, 2012).

It is of the upmost importance that educators build a classroom culture in which the

student feels successful and want to take ownership in their own growth. A Student who has a

pattern of failures shows a decrease in persistence over time (Starnes & Zinser, 1983).

Consistent failures over time result in the student expending less and less effort trying to solve

any problem given to them. Eventually, their effort is minimal and the student develops a

learned helplessness because they feel that any future effort will result in failures. When the

student does not exhibit effort, they protect themselves from failure by using their lack of effort

as the reason they failed. Starnes and Zinser suggested that this occurs to ensure that the

student’s ego remains intact and that their failure will be perceived by others as a lack of effort

rather than ability. A study of 30 college students sought to clarify their hypothesis. The

students were given sets of puzzles to solve that ranged in difficulty. Initially, all students were

given an easy puzzle to solve. Next, students were separated into three groups and given

another puzzle. The first group was told that the puzzle would be very difficult to solve, the

second group was told that it would be easy, and the third group was not given any

instructions. Results yielded that students who were told that the puzzle was more difficult

were more persistent than the students who were not given any directions and more persistent

than those that were told the puzzle was easy. The findings are consistent with an earlier study

(Frankel & Snyder, 1978) that showed students are more persistent with tasks they perceive to

be more challenging thus affirming their egotism hypothesis.

5

Students who do not feel threatened by a situation are more likely to attempt to

persevere through the task when the risk of failure or questions about their ability are

removed. If a student believes a problem is hard and does not feel pressured to solve it, or feel

like their ability will be questioned, they are likely to persist for a longer amount of time, giving

rise to a correlation between intrinsic motivation, difficult problems, and potential for success

(Starnes & Zinser, 1983).

Older studies focused on observable traits of its subjects mainly through physical tasks.

One piece of research that was missing from these studies was that of the student mindset. A

proper scale for measuring persistence in children was developed in 1987 (Lufi & Cohen, 1987).

Until then, studies of persistence were limited to observations. Lufi and Cohen’s questionnaire

was an important development in the study of persistence as it provided insight into the

student’s mindset and normalized measurements for future studies. Their questionnaire found

that persistence correlates positively to achievements in life such as obtaining educational or

career goals and it can be measured through physical or mental endurance tasks. Additionally,

females and males students, while showing different interests, showed relatively the same level

of persistence.

Understanding how students’ persistence affects their education is relevant information

for the teacher to keep in mind while planning and executing lessons (Clark & Clark, 2003).

Students who persist are more likely to believe in their ability, are less anxious, attempt to find

solutions, and are unlikely to blame others (Lufi & Cohen, 1987).

The belief that persistence and esteem are connected gave way to studies seeking to

validate correlations between positive thinking and cognitive ability. Leeson, Ciarrochi, and

6

Heaven (2008) examined high school students over the course of three years. The scope of

their focus was on three lower-order personality traits: self-esteem, attributional style, and

hope. The aforementioned positive personality traits were selected by the authors for their

malleability characteristics. The results showed that predictions can be made based on the

student’s attitude, or positive thinking. Specifically, the personality trait “hope” served as the

strongest predictor for academic success over the course of the study. This finding was

significant as it suggested that students of all intelligences who think negatively need

interventions to increase their level of positive thinking in order to increase their academic

performance (Leeson et al., 2008; Snipes, Fancsali, & Stoker, 2012).

One way students build self-esteem in the classroom is by experiencing meaningful

learning through challenging tasks (OET, 2013; Snipes et al., 2012; Sullivan, 2011). The

Encouraging Persistence Maintaining Challenge (EPMC) Project in Australia worked with

teachers in Melbourne to increase student persistence in mathematics (Clarke, Cheeseman, &

Sullivan, 2014). They accomplished this by focusing on educating teachers how to encourage

student persistence through challenging tasks. The coordinators of the project defined

persistence as the ability of students to concentrate, apply themselves, believe that they can

succeed, and make an effort to learn. The research explored specific persistence strategies

teachers implemented during the planning phase of a lesson as well as the lesson itself.

Among their suggestions, the EPMC stated that teacher modeling, task relevancy,

adequate time for completion, students summarizing and sharing strategies, teacher feedback

during lessons, and classroom cultures encouraging risk taking as notable strategies teachers

used that led to an increase in persistence. While good planning is imperative, the

7

adjustments a teacher makes during a task dictates considerable differences in the level of

persistence shown by the students. (Clarke et al., 2014).

The U.S. Department of Education states that a lack of cohesion exists regarding best

practice research methods and educational interventions regarding grit, tenacity, and

perseverance. They noted the many desirable outcomes these traits yield, however,

acknowledged that there has been insufficient research regarding any potential negative effects

resulting from the promotion of these traits. Students existing school in the 21st century will

come upon a demanding world full of complex challenges. It is imperative that schools prepare

them for life after school through strategic interventions (OET, 2013). Student Academic

Mindsets Interventions: A Review of the Current Landscapes, noted that, “A great deal needs to

be codified, pilot tested, and refined in order to develop practical interventions with maximum

potential” (2012). Based on previous research concerning student interventions, Snipes,

Fancsali, & Stoker (2012), developed a “theory of action” intervention plan that shows the

relationships between student’s learning and academic outcomes, learning strategies, academic

behaviors, and academic mindsets. The scope of this plan is to focus on providing an

intervention that is integrated into classroom culture, pedagogy, and mathematics curriculum.

Methods

Research Study

The goal of this study is to determine if implementation of an intervention model, in a

classroom setting, will increase student academic perseverance and positively increase

students’ attitudes towards mathematics.

8

Students will see examples of perseverance, learn about having a growth mindset, engage in

relevant performance tasks, and be part of a classroom culture that praises perseverance and

effort. The perseverance intervention will be an integrated Five Point Perseverance Model.

The model was developed using common themes found in literature on grit, tenacity, and

perseverance.

1. Fundamentals: Classroom Culture (Farrington et al., 2012, Snipes et al., 2012 & OET,

2013)

a. Teacher and students speak in a positive, encouraging manner

b. The students clearly know what is expected of them at all times during the

learning process

c. Understand that failures along the way are temporary setbacks and are part of

the learning process

d. Teacher and students have high expectations for all learners in the environment

e. Being able to successfully deal with adversity and disappointments in life does

lead to successes

2. Function: Praising students for their efforts or strategy rather than talent (Dweck, 2011)

a. Teach students about having a growth mindset

b. Teach students about brain function - malleability and response to learning

c. Learning is an active activity rather than passive activity

3. Action: Students actualize that performance improves with perseverance

a. Students set goals, work to achieve them, and reflect upon them (Goodwin &

Miller, 2013)

9

b. Students reflect on effort given during task-based problems (Lufi & Dubi, 1987)

c. Teacher provides frequent feedback of effort and growth performance (Witter,

2013)

d. Provide examples (ideally short videos) of perseverance of people who were able

to achieve with perseverance (Snipes et al., 2012)

4. Social: Build a community (Snipes et al., 2012).

a. Present Five 45 minute classroom lesson introducing students to Student Success

Skills to develop “healthy habits, caring relationships, and encouraging classroom

communities”

b. Write letters to another grade-level or distant classroom mentoring them on

effort, perseverance

c. Create media promoting grit and perseverance

5. Performance: Persevering in academics

a. Students have the skill set to participate in (but more importantly, want to

participate in) challenging but achievable tasks (Clarke, B., & Clarke D, 2003)

b. The work that is presented is relevant to the student and has authenticity

(Martinie, 2006)

c. As much as possible within the scope of the curriculum, students have choice in

how to display a required skill or concept (Tulis & Fulmer, 2013)

10

(visual model –work in progress)

11

Research Setting

Elementary School, PK-5

481 Students

53% Hispanic, 39% White, 4% Two or more race, 2% Black

Title One

Suburban

Research Participants

5th Grade Students

Approximately 75 students divided among three periods

Data

Engagement vs. Disaffection with Learning Student-report — after tasks (Skinner,

Kindermann & Furrer, 2009)

Student’s Achievement-Relevant Actions in the Classroom — pre and post study

(Welborn, 1991)

Persistence Scale for Children —pre and post study (Lufi & Cohen, 1987)

Performance Tasks — five problems from same concept…each problem increases in

difficulty (http://www.insidemathematics.org/problems-of-the-month)

Attitudes Toward Mathematics Inventory — pre and post study (Tapia, 1996)

Video record performance tasks that show students being persistent for later review

12

Data Analysis (pending)

Analyzing growth from the start of the study to the end – increased persistence (time

willing to spend on work, feelings about math, increased discourse using academic

language, and increased problem-solving strategies).

Discussion (Pending data analysis)

13

References

Battle, E. S. (1965). Motivational determinants of academic task persistence. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 2(2), 209-218. doi:10.1037/h0022442

Clarke, D., & Clarke, B. (2003). Encouraging perseverance in elementary mathematics: a tale of

two problems. Teaching Children in Mathematics, 10(4), 204-209.

Clarke, D., Roche, A., Cheeseman, J., & Sullivan, P. (2014). Encouraging students to persist when

working on challenging tasks: some insights from teachers. Australian Mathematics

Teacher, 70(1), 3-11.

Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and

Passion for Long-Term Goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087-

1101. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087

Duckworth, A. L. (2009). TEDxBlue - Angela Lee Duckworth, Ph.D - 10/18/09 [Video file].

Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaeFnxSfSC4

Dweck, C., Walton, G., & Cohen, G. (2011). Academic tenacity: Mindset and skills that promote

long-term learning. Retrieved from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation website:

http://collegeready.gatesfoundation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NP6zIG3zddI

%3d&portalid=0

Eccles, J. S., Lord, S., & Midgley, C. (1991). What Are We Doing to Early Adolescents? The Impact

of Educational Contexts on Early Adolescents. American Journal of Education.

doi:10.1086/443996

Farrington, C. A. (2012). Teaching adolescents to become learners: The role of noncognitive

factors in shaping school performance: a critical literature review. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago, Consortium on Chicago School Research.

14

Goodwin, B., & Miller, K. (2013). Grit plus talent equals student success. Resilience and

Learning, 71(1), 74-76.

Leeson, P., Ciarrochi, J., & Heaven, P. C. (2008). Cognitive ability, personality, and academic

performance in adolescence. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(7), 630-635.

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.006

Lufi, D., & Cohen, A. (1987). A Scale for Measuring Persistence in Children. Journal of

Personality Assessment, 51(2), 178-185. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5102_2

Martinie, S. (2006). Some Students Do Not Like Mathematics. Mathematics Teaching in the

Middle School, 11(6), 274.

Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A Motivational Perspective on

Engagement and Disaffection: Conceptualization and Assessment of Children's

Behavioral and Emotional Participation in Academic Activities in the Classroom.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525.

doi:10.1177/0013164408323233

Snipes, J., Fancsali, C., & Stoker, G. (2012). Student academic mindset interventions: A review of

the current landscape. Impaq International, LLC.

Starnes, D. M., & Zinser, O. (1983). The Effect of Problem Difficulty, Locus of Control, and Sex on

Task Persistence. Journal of General Psychology, 108, 249-255.

doi:10.1080/00221309.1983.9711498

Sullivan, P. (2011). Asking Students Harder Questions. Australian Primary Mathematics

Classroom, 16(4), 17-18.

Tapia, M. (1996). Attitudes Toward Mathematics Inventory (ATMI). Retrieved from

http://www.pearweb.org/atis/tools/48

15

Tulis, M., & Fulmer, S. (2013). Students' motivational and emotional experiences and their

relationship to persistence during academic challenge in mathematics and reading.

Learning & Individual Differences, 27, 35-46. Retrieved from DOI:

10.1016/j.lindif.2013.06.003

U.S. Department of Education., & Office of Educational Technology [OET]. (2013). Promoting

grit, tenacity, and perseverance? Critical factors for success in the 21st Century (draft).

Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Engaged and disaffected action: The conceptualization and

measurement of motivation in the academic domain (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). University of Rochester, New York.

Witter, M. (2013). I can climb the mountain. Educational Leadership, 71, 61-64.

16